Historical truth against turkish-azerbaijani falsifications in information warfare

Автор: указан в статье

HISTORICAL TRUTH AGAINST TURKISH-AZERBAIJANI FALSIFICATIONS IN INFORMATION WARFARE

Eduard L. Danielyan

More than five millennia-old ethno-spiritual, political and cultural roots of the Armenian statehood in the Armenian Highland are attested to by the archaeological and architectural monuments, petroglyphs, cuneiform, ancient and medieval written and other historic sources. Historical truth is the backbone and informational defensive shield of the national security of Armenia.

Turkey and its pan-Turkic project - artificially formed Azerbaijan use disinformation and manipulations in information warfare being unable to overcome the truths about the past and the present of Armenia (the Armenian Highland, the Armenian nation, Western Armenia, the Republic of Armenia, the Artsakh Republic, etc). Falsifications of the history and historical geography of Armenia constitute part of Turkish-Azerbaijani frantic and maniacal attempts to deny Armenians’ historic and legal hereditary rights to the western (W estern Armenia, Kilikian Armenia which underwent the Armenian Genocide devastation) and eastern (particularly liberated lands of Artsakh, and awaiting their liberation Northern Artsakh, Utik and Nakhijevan) parts of the Armenian Homeland. Turkish-Azerbaijani deceptive methods with a stillborn outcome are

& Doctor of History, Noravank Foundation consultant.

105

E.Daniefyan

<21st CENTURY», № 1 (15), 2014

crushed against the strongholds of Armenia’s history and the civilizational value system. Those engaged in deceptive information operations display aggressive fallaciousness, as is the case with the Turkish authorities who are scared1 of the recognition of the Armenian Genocide2, territorial reparations, the Armenian demand for the restoration of historical justice and the return of native lands3 [13, էջ 76-86; 14, էջ 475; 15; 10, pp. 12, 41].

Examining the formation of the concept of information warfare and the increasingly dominant role that deception4 is taking within its framework, W. Hutchinson noted: “The concept of information warfare began as a technology oriented tactic to gain information dominance by superior command and control... Information warfare in the Information Age is about controlling the ‘infosphere’. It includes perceptions and information flows at the tactical, operational and strategic level in times of peace, tension, and war. As such, it means controlling sources and the dissemination of information... By definition, information warfare is about using and protecting information... The defensive side of information warfare is concerned with the protection and integrity of

1 The Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide adopted by the U.N. General Assembly on December 9, 1948 is a very important international document the visions of which Turkish rulers view with horror.

2 The Turkish state genocidal policy and actions intensified in the late 19th c. (the massacres of more than 300.000 Armenians in Western Armenia and other areas occupied by the Ottoman Empire [1, pp, 83-98; 2]) and the early 20* c. (1909, Kilikia: 35.000 Armenians were massacred in and around Adana [3, էջ 81; 4, pp. 5-6]) culminating in the Armenian Genocide (more than 1,5 million Armenians were killed and eight hundred thousand deported) of 1915-1923 in Western Armenia, Kilikia, the Armenian-populated areas of Asia Minor, some regions of Eastern Armenia [5; 6; 7; 8; 9, p. 90; 10, pp. 24-25; 11, pp. 133-142; 12, с. 28, etc.].

3 Henry Theriault: The Global Reparations Movement and the Meaningful Resolution of the Armenian Genocide, http://www.armenianweekly.com/2010/05/06/reparations-2/; H. Theriault: Post-Denial Denial, http://www.armenianweekly.com/2012/04/30/theriault-post-denial-denial/, Harut Sassounian What’s next on Armenian Genocide? Beyond recognition, towards restitution, http://www.reporter.am/go/article/2013-05-28-what-s-next-on-armenian-genocide-beyond-recognition-towards-restitution

4 Analyzing the principles of deception for propaganda purposes Scot Macdonald noted: “The goal of the deceiver is to make an adversary perceive reality in a way that will help the deceiver by making the deceived do something the deceiver desires” [16, p. 83].

106

<21st CENTURY», № 1 (15), 2014

E. Danielyan

data, people within the systems”... [17, pp. 213, 220]. “The philosophical and political foundations of falsification of fundamental historical questions of the 20th century” were discussed at the meeting of the International Youth and Students for Social Equality (the Humboldt University, Berlin, 12 February 2014). Some special problems of general methodological significance were touched upon. For example, Sven Heymanns noted that “lies about politics and history have wide-ranging implications... The tools of the historian are access to the archives and the evaluation of sources, but not falsifications and lies”.1

Turkish propagandists have been busy with fabrication of “history” particularly since the 1930s - the Ataturk-sanctioned forgery (“Turkish History Thesis”)2 for non-existent “ancient Turkey” by misrepresenting archaeological materials and consequently complete distortion of ancient world history.

Methodologically approaching to the criteria of scientific studies, W. Weber noted: “Historical truth had to be defended as a basic principle of scientific research”.3 The “Turkish History Thesis” was criticized sharply by Armenian and foreign historians. Manvel Zulalyan demonstrated its complete bankruptcy in falsification of the history of ancient and medieval Armenia [19]. In western historiography the “Turkish History Thesis” was most fundamentally criticized by Clive Foss. Unmasking the pan-Turkic motives of Kemal’s fraud, Foss wrote: “This might seem to be manifest nonsense, especially as it was obvious that Chinese and Indians were not Turks... Ataturk’s accomplishments.

1 https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2014/02/12/babe-f12.html

2 It was a total fake, having a huge impact on the Turkish falsifications of history. Erik J. Zurcher critically presented the principles of Kemalism’s ideology as the backbone of formation of “the personality cult around Mustafa Kemal during and even more after his lifetime. it is still very much part of the official culture of Turkey”. At the same time Zurcher sharply criticized the Ataturk sanctioned “Turkish History Thesis” [18, pp. 190, 199-200].

3 https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2014/02/12/babe-f12.html

107

E.Daniefyan

<21st CENTURY», № 1 (15), 2014

owe much to the previous discredited regime, the Committee of Union and Progress, the “Young Turks” who ran the country from 1908 until the end of the First World War” [20, pp. 13, 16]. It is obvious that he meant the Young Turks’ genocidal crimes.

R. W. Smith, Eric Markusen, Robert Jay Lifton wrote: “From 1915 to 1917 the Young Turk regime in the Ottoman Empire carried out a systematic, premeditated, centrally-planned genocide against the Armenian people... Despite the vast amount of evidence that points to the historical reality of the Armenian genocide - eyewitness accounts, official archives, photographic evidence, the reports of diplomats, and the testimony of survivors - denial of the Armenian genocide by successive regimes in Turkey has gone on from 1915 to the present” [21, pp. 2-3]. In this regard Gregory Stanton noted: “Denial, the final stage of genocide is best overcome by public trials and truth commissions, followed by years of education about the facts of the genocide, particularly for the children of the group or nation that committed the crime.”.1

Especially since the 1980s in their efforts to enter the European Community, the Turkish authorities have been trying to change the extremely negative impression of the image of Turks2. Turgut Ozal during

1 Gregory Stanton. The 8 Stages of Genocide. This article was originally written in 1996 and was presented as the first Working Paper (GS 01) of the Yale Program in Genocide Studies in 1998. http://www.genocidewatch.org/images/8SlagesBriefingpaper.pdf “In 1997, The International Association of Genocide Scholars declared unanimously that the Turkish massacres of over one million Armenians was a crime of genocide” (G. Stanton, The Cost of Denial. - Genocide Watch. The International Alliance to End Genocide, http://www.genocidewatch.org/aboutus/thecostofdenial.html).

2 It will suffice to remember the lines by Victor Hugo (“Les Turcs ont passe la: tout est ruine et deuil”) [22, p. 476] and Mark Twain (“Abdul-Aziz, the representative of a people by nature and training filthy, brutish, ignorant, unprogressive, superstitious—and a government whose Three Graces are Tyranny, Rapacity, Blood”) [23, p. 75]. France, Great Britain and Russia asserted in their joint declaration, dated 24 May 1915, that “... in the presence of these new crimes of Turkey against humanity and civilization, the Allied Governments publicly inform the Sublime Porte that they will hold personally responsible for the said crimes all members of the Ottoman Government as well as those of its agents who are found to be involved in such massacres ...” [24, p. 35; 25, p. 16] Clive Foss noted: “The Europeans, however, traditionally took a dim view of the Turks, formerly seen as cruel and violent conquerors, &the Terrible Turk&, and more recently the &Sick Man of Europe&. The Turks themselves were confused about their identity...” [20, p. 11].

108

<21st CENTURY», № 1 (15), 2014

E. Danielyan

his premiership (1983–1989)1 became personally involved with publication of a politicized and falsified history book [28; 29]. Campaigning actively to bring Turkey into the European Community Ozal surprised the world with his pseudo-historical book, which, as S.Vryonis remarked, “was not initially intended to recover, reconstruct, and explain history, but rather it is agonistic and aims to persuade Europe to accede to Turkey’s political and economic goals and desires. The work is hardly documented, and in the few instances where there is rudimentary documentation of sorts, they are bizarre and can best be described as distorted. The lack of scholarly documentation harmonizes with the fact that the book, which carries the name of Mr.Turgut Ozal, then the prime minister of Turkey, is in effect a semi-official, state and party pronouncement on what the history of the Turks has been, is now, and will be in the future” [26, pp. 2-3].

Turkish falsifications of history have gained adherents among the centers and researchers cooperating with Turkey. For example, interpretations of archaeological materials are distorted by falsified toponymic terminology2 in some pseudo-scientific works, thus the historic heritages of Western Armenia and Asia Minor are ascribed to non-existent “ancient Turkey” [31; 32; 33, etc.]. The most overwhelming contradictions in abortive attempts of the Turkish falsifiers and their accomplices

1 In December 1986 the Turkish police arrested H. Potuglu. S. Vryionis noted: ”H. Potuglu, the publisher of the Turkish edition of the Encyclopaedia Bntannica, was arrested and charged in the courts as a propagandist who intended to destroy Turkish national sentiment. The prosecutor of the State Security asked for a penalty of between seven and one-half to fifteen years imprisonment. What was her crime? An entry in the English version of the Encyclopaedia Britan-nica carried a footnote that read: “During the Crusades the mountainous region of Cilicia was under the hegemony of the Armenian Cilician kingdom” [26, pp. 107-108]. In the late 1980s expressing the Turkish government’s policy of the denial of the Armenian Genocide and the avoidance of responsibility for it, Turgut Ozal stated that “modern Turkey was not responsible for the events of the Ottoman era” [27, pp. 46- 47].

2 E.g., “Eastern Anatolia” is wrongly used instead of Western Armenia, etc. It is noted that “maps like speeches and paintings, are authored collections of information and are also subject to distortions arising from ignorance, greed, ideology or malice” [30, p. 2].

109

E.Daniefyan

<21st CENTURY», № 1 (15), 2014

to “revise history” in accordance with their maniacal “visions” are determined by the fact that the ancestors of Turks, Seljuk and Oguz Turkic nomadic tribes1 from the trans-Altai and trans-Aral regions2 had violently invaded some territories of Western Asia (in the second half of the 11th century). Thus they had no relation to the native history and original toponyms of the western part of the Armenian Highland, Asia Minor, the left bank of the Kura River3, etc. Since their invasions and till the present, devastations, plunder and annihilation of Armenian historical monuments have been carried out in Western Armenia and Kilikia occupied by savage Turkic nomads and their descendants4. Recent evidence of continuation of the programmed annihilation of the Armenian historic heritage in Western Armenia are the turning of the Armenian Church of Surb Arakelots (Holy Apostles, 930-942 AD) [40, էջ 192] into a mosque5, the destruction of the historic Armenian houses in Mush (in Taron gavar) in 20136, and other anti-Armenian provocative actions, such as Turkey&s involvement in the attack on the Armenian-populated Kessab7. On March 21-22, 2014 the Turkey-supported armed gangs openly passed through

1 A. Palmer noted: “Originally the Turks were nomadic horsemen from Central Asia... ”. From the 14th century appeared “Osmanli” (corrupted into “Ottoman” in the languages of western Europe) dynasty [34, p. 2]. A. Toynbee wrote: “Their “eponym, ‘Osman, was the son of a certain Ertoghrul who had led into Anatolia (Asia Minor - E.D.) a nameless band of Turkish refugees: an insignificant fragment of the human wreckage... ” [35, p. 151].

2 Voltaire (1694-1778) noted: “If you have nothing to tell us, but that on the banks of the Oxus and Jaxartes, one barbarian has been succeeded by another barbarian, in what respect do you benefit the public?” [36, p. 70].

3 In ancient and medieval times the boundary between Great Armenia and proper Aluank (in Armenian sources) (“Albania” in antique sources) was along the Kura [37, V.12. 1, cf. 38, XI, 14. 4].

4 The destruction of Armenian historical monuments is continuation of the crime of genocide -genocide of culture or cultural genocide [39].

5 http://news.am/eng/news/136463.html

6 http://armenpress.am/eng/news/724842/historical-armenian-houses-of-mush-are-being-destroyed.html

7 From ancient times Armenians have lived in that region: it was within the Armenian Empire of Tigran II the Great (95-55 BC) and centuries later on the southern borders of the Armenian [the Princedom (1080-1197)] Kingdom (1198-1375) of Kilikia (Cilicia).

110

<21st CENTURY», № 1 (15), 2014

E. Danielyan

Turkish military barracks, crossed the Turkish-Syrian border, and attacked the town of Kessab1. Snipers targeted the civilian population and launched mortar attacks on Kessab and the surrounding villages in the Northwest of Syria. Aram I, the Catholicos of the Great House of Cilicia, responding to the Kessab tragedy, said: “The same genocide-committed Turkey uses the chance to strike on the Armenian people”.2 Some 700 Armenian families were evacuated by the local Armenian community leadership to neighboring Basit and Latakia [part of them found refuge in the Armenian Church of Surb Asdvadsadzin (St. Virgin)]. On March 23, the attacking groups took the remaining Armenian families hostage, desecrated the Kessab’s three Armenian churches, pillaging local residences and occupying the town and surrounding villages. On March 24 President of the Republic of Armenia Serzh Sargsyan, who was in Netherlands at the Hague Nuclear Security Summit, expressed deep concern over the events in Kessab. He reminded that during the first scourge in April 1909, when the Turkish armed detachments invaded Kessab, burnt and looted the houses, Armenians found refuge in Latakia. After returning to Kessab they reconstructed their houses. In 1915, “when the Kesab population also experienced migration and exiles of the Armenian Genocide, Armenians of Kessab were exiled in two directions: to Der Zor and to the south up to Jordan. Thousands died en route, the majority perished in the desert of Deir ez-Zor. The third deportation of Kessab Armenians today is a serious challenge to ethnic minority rights’ protection mechanisms of the 21st century. I think that everyone should realize that these parallels should sober all the sides... I have already instructed the diplo1 http://www.armenianweekly.com/2014/03/23/kessab-targeted-by-al-qaeda-front-groups-in-cross-border-attack-from-turkey/

http://civilnet.am/kesab-chronicle-historic-town-under-siege/

2 http://armenpress.am/eng/news/755470/syrian-tv-channels-respond-positively-to-armenian-government’s-position-on-kesab-events.html)

111

E.Daniefyan

<21st CENTURY», № 1 (15), 2014

matic missions at the UN Headquarters in New-York and Geneva to raise the issue of ensuring the security of the Armenians in Kessab and their safe return to their permanent places of residence at the structures dealing with human rights and ethnic minorities,” said President Serzh Sarg-syan1. On March 24 in a telephone conversation with the Catholicos of the Great House of Cilicia Aram I, the Catholicos of All Armenians Garegin II “expressed his concern about the recent events and condemned the terrorist actions of Turkey-supported extremists against the peaceful Armenian population of Kessab”.2

U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Robert Me-nendez was joined by Congressional Armenian Caucus Co-Chairs Frank Pallone and Michael Grimm, Armenian Genocide Resolution Lead Sponsors David Valadao and Adam Schiff and Representatives Brad Sherman, Jim Costa and James McGovern “in condemning the recent attacks against the historically Armenian city of Kessab, Syria, urging the State Department to investigate the incursion and take immediate action to safeguard the vulnerable population.”3 “We would like to thank Chairman Menendez and the many other Congressional defenders of human rights who have stepped forward to call the world’s urgent attention to the attacks against the predominantly Armenian population of Kessab,” said the Armenian National Committee of America Executive Director Aram Hamparian4. In a joint letter to President Obama, Representatives Pallone, Grimm, Valadao and Schiff noted: “When coupled with a mass exodus of the Armenian community, these events are far too reminiscent

1 http://www.president.am/en/press-release/item/2014/03/24/President-Serzh-Sargsyan-statement-Kesab-Syria-in-Hague/

2 http://www.aysor.am/en/news/2014/03/25/catholicos-qesab/

3 On March 27/28 it became known that the Turkish tanks and helicopters crossed the Turkish-Syrian border to support the attackers in the area of Kessab (http://armenpress.am/eng/ news/755776/militants-establish-control-over-kesabs-baghjaghas-armenian-village.html).

4 http://www.anca.org/press_releases/press_releases.php?prid=2356

112

<21st CENTURY», № 1 (15), 2014

E. Danielyan

of the early days of the Armenian Genocide, which took place nearly 100 years ago in Ottoman Turkey under the cover of World War I.”1

“During a daily briefing in Washington on March 28 U.S. Department of State deputy spokesperson Marie Harf said the United States is deeply troubled by recent fighting and violence that is endangering the Armenian community in Kessab, Syria, and has forced many to flee... The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Russia issued a statement strongly condemning the attacks on Kessab and the acts of terrorism and other crimes against civilians that it said were conducted with the artillery support, including the use of tank guns from the territory of Turkey.”2 Turkish falsifiers distort and eradicate Armenian geographical terms and toponyms, “plagiarize” concepts that have no relation to their nomadic predatory past (which is full of the blood of millions of innocent victims), thus putting into circulation a fake “concept” of the Turkish “historical-civilizational role” contrary to the evil role of Turks in the destruction of world civilization. Turgut Ozal absurdly and ignorantly wrote: “In looking at our history as insider of Anatolia, we can claim to have lived on this land since the beginning of the Anatolian civilizations, for both culturally and demographically the preceding civilization has each time been carried over, at least to a certain extent, into the succeed1 Members of Congress Condemn Kessab Attacks. 31/03/2014 http://hayernaysor.am/en/mdh-օրեևսդիրևերը-դատապարտել-եև-հարձա/ Commenting on blocking Twitter by the order of Erdogan and the Kessab tragic events, H.Sassounian noted: “What do these two seemingly unrelated events have in common? Erdogan himself indirectly answered this question, during a campaign rally on March 20: “We will wipe out Twitter. I don’t care at all what the international community says. Everyone will see the power of the Turkish Republic...”. Sassounian concluded his article with the following remark: “On the eve of the Genocide Centennial the Turkish government and its allies are directly or indirectly embarking on a new campaign of exterminating Armenians in Syria” (Harut Sassounian: What Should Armenians Learn from Prime Minister Erdogan? http://www.armenianweekly.com/2014/03/25/sassounian-what-should-armenians-learn-from-prime-minister-erdogan/).

2 http://www.armenianow.com/news/53125/armenia_kesab_syria_united_states_russia http://asbarez.com/121330/russia-condemns-attack-on-kessab/

113

E.Daniefyan

<21st CENTURY», № 1 (15), 2014

ing one. It was we, therefore, who brought about the Neolithic revolution...” [29, p. 346]. Turkey’s enormous ambitions obsessively expressed by Ozal are as follows: “European civilization was born in Anatolia, which is Turkish, and therefore Europe is morally obliged to acknowledge its Anatolian-Turkish origins and by extension to include Turkey, the cradle of Western Civilization, as a full member of the European Community”.1 Ozal, “teaching” the European Community “a lesson” of broad-mindedness, arrogantly continued: “No one in Western Europe can claim to be as Aegean as ourselves. To accept this fact, however, means that one first has to give up an ethnocentric perspective of history. A Europe capable of accepting Turkey as a full member of the Community will have risen above ethnocentrism. She will understand how illogical it is for a Europe not to include Anatolia, the cradle of civilization in the northern Mediterranean” [29, pp. 347, 356].

The idea of civilization is completely alien to Turkey. The evidence of that is the Armenian Genocide, destruction and ruins of historical-architectural monuments, cultural-educational centers and cities, towns and villages in Western Armenia, Kilikian Armenia and Armenian Mesopotamia in result of military campaigns, conquests and genocidal actions organized and realized by the Ottoman, the Young Turk, the Kemalist regimes and their successors. At the end of the 20th century R. D. Kaplan witnessed the complete destruction of the Armenian civilization in Western Armenia, where he traveled, reaching Tra-pezunt. He wrote that except for an occasional ruin “every trace of Armenian civilization has been erased.” [41, p. 318]2

1 This citation has been translated into English by Speros Vryonis [26, p. 4] from the French edition of Turgut Ozal’s book [28].

2 About reopening of the church of Surb Khach (the Holy Cross, built in 915-921) on Aghtamar Island in Lake Van” (http://www.armenianow.com/news/20176/aghtamar_reopens) R. Safrast-yan noted (21.12.09) that it was “a formal gesture”. Thousands of Armenian churches have been systematically destroyed and desecrated in Western Armenia and their destruction and desecration by the sanctions of Turkish authorities continues up to now.

114

<21st CENTURY», № 1 (15), 2014

E. Danielyan

An obvious case of the anti-civilizational hypocritical policy of Turkey1 in international affairs is the destruction of cultural-historical monuments also in the occupied northern part of Cyprus. “Lobby for Cyprus”2 published the following statement: “There is irony in the fact that while Istanbul basks in the limelight as Europe’s City of Culture for 2010, Turkey, an aspiring EU member, continues to vandalize and destroy Europe’s cultural and Christian heritage in Cyprus”.3

Prime Minister of Turkey Recep Tayyip Erdogan in his opening statement at the Second Forum of “The Alliance of Civilizations”4 (6.04.2009) in Istanbul (Constantinople), completely falsifying historical

1 In contrast to fraudulent attempts of Turkey to deny the Armenian Genocide, on 28 February 2002 “European Parliament condemned the Armenian Genocide in the Ottoman Turkey in 1915. The fifteen European Union member countries confirmed that Turkey followed a geno-cidal policy directed against the Armenian population early last century. The deputies of the European Parliament voted for the resolution passed earlier (1987) condemning the Armenian Genocide in Ottoman Turkey in 1915... The resolution’s new version contains a call on Turkey to lift the blockade against Armenia as well as to undertake other actual moves for joining the European Union” (http://www.panarmenian.net/eng/news/3954/).

2 It is a non-party-political human rights NGO based in the UK with the aim of reuniting Cyprus. It was formed in 1992 and since its inception has campaigned against the invasion, occupation, ethnic cleansing and destruction of the cultural heritage of 37 per cent of the Republic of Cyprus by Turkey (http://www.lobbyforcyprus.org/aboutus.aspx).

3 “It is well known that in 1974 Turkey carried out an illegal invasion of Cyprus, as a result of which virtually all Greek Cypriots in the north of the island were ethnically cleansed and driven out of their homes.. This Christian heritage, Europe’s heritage, has been systematically desecrated since 1974 ... Every attempt has been made to obliterate the rich Greek and Christian heritage of the northern areas of Cyprus. Even today, archeological sites are being bulldozed to make way for militaristic statues and monuments to bolster the existence of the illegal regime in the occupied area...” (http://www.lobbyforcyprus.org/statement.aspx?id=870). Adopting from Turkey the same “bulldozing method” of destruction of historic monuments, after innumerable assaults of the previous decades, ethnic purges against Armenians and total destruction of Armenian historic monuments in Nakhijevan, the surviving clusters of about ten thousand Armenian cross-stones (khachkars) in the Armenian Cemetery of Hin (Old) Jugha (in the ancient Armenian gavar Goghtan to the south-east of the Nakhijevan gavai) were destroyed by the sanctions of the criminal Azerbaijani authorities at the dawn of the 21st century [42].

4 The Alliance of Civilizations was established in 2005 by an initiative proposed by the President of the Government of Spain, Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero, and Erdogan, under the auspices of the United Nations (http://www.unesco.org/new/en/venice/culture/intercultural-dialogue/ alliance-of-civilizations/). There is an opposition to it (Brett D. Schaefer, The U. S. Should not Join the “Alliance of Civilizations”. - National Review Online. May 13, 2010. http:// www.humanrightsvoices.org/site/articles/?a=6506).

115

E.Daniefyan

<21st CENTURY», № 1 (15), 2014

facts said: “... let me state with great happiness that this land has been rather the home of peace, tolerance, a culture of coexistence, mutual compassion and respect. Istanbul is the most obvious example of this. Istanbul not only connects two continents, namely, Europe and Asia; Istanbul is not only located at the intersection of Asia, Europe and Africa; Istanbul has also its proper place in the world as a city which embraces and harmonizes cultures, civilizations, races, religions and languages in the melting pot of history. Istanbul1, named as the 2010 European Capital of Culture, continues to convey messages of compassion and tolerance throughout the world, as it has always done in history. The Hagia Sophia in Iznik2, House of the Virgin Mary in Izmir3, considered among the most holy places of Christianity, and the St. Nicholas Church in Antalya are but a few living examples of our 2,000-year culture of coexistence.”.4

Lies and falsifications in Erdogan’s speech demonstrably exemplified his goal: to use the podium of “the Alliance of Civilizations” for Turkish political purposes. Contrary to his lies, the fact is that after the battle of Manazkert (1071 AD) nomadic Turks’ conquests had disastrous consequences [44, S. 1010]. From the beginning of the conquest of Constantinople (1453) the city was drowned in blood by Turks. A monastic scribe in Crete wrote with horror about the capture of Constantinople by the Turks:

1 Erdogan did not mention the original medieval name of the city - Constantinople, which was violently changed to “Istanbul”: “Constantinople officially was renamed Istanbul in 1930” [43, p. 177].

2 And yet in October 2011 “the Hagia Sophia of Iznik was closed to the public for several days of construction work by the Directorate General of Foundations, a department of the prime minister’s office in Ankara which manages historical buildings around the country. The Hagia Sophia was reopened for service as a mosque” (Susanne Gusten. The Church That Politics Turned Into a Mosque http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/09/world/middleeast/the-church-that-politics-turned-into-a-mosque.html?pagewanted=all_r=0).

3 A Greek heritage site in Asia Minor, the House of Virgin Mary is in the ancient city of Ephesus, which is at a distance of 81 km from Smyrna (modern Izmir).

4 http://www.unaoc.org/images/erdogan%20forum%20speech%20(4).pdf

116

<21st CENTURY», № 1 (15), 2014

E. Danielyan

“There never has been and never will be a more dreadful happening” [34, p. 1]. Centuries later, on April 24, 1915 Constantinople was turned into a scene of total carnage: thousands of Armenian intellectuals (poets, musicians, publicists, editors, lawyers, doctors, deputies, community leaders, clergymen, teachers) were put under arrest by the Turkish government’s order and sent into exile and were horrifically slaughtered; there were also many Armenians tortured and killed in the streets of the city [45].

Erdogan’s lie about Istanbul bursts like a soap bubble. Contrary to his delirious declaration that Istanbul continuously conveys “messages of compassion and tolerance throughout the world, as it has always done in history”, it became known as the genocidal city. Anti-Armenian actions continuously have been taking place there up to the present, as it is noted: “The funeral of 84-year-old Marissa Kuchuk, who was brutally murdered in her apartment in Istanbul, was held on Jan. 5, 2013 amid fears that violent acts against the country’s Christian minorities will continue to be swept under the rug... In recent years there have been several attacks against Armenians in Turkey. Earlier in December (2012), another Armenian woman was brutally attacked and robbed. Months earlier, an Armenian woman was called an infidel and attacked in a cab by the driver himself.”1

There was no “2,000-year culture of coexistence” of Turks with indigenous Christians (as Erdogan tried to assure in his speech), because there were no Turks in those times. Much later, starting with the nomadic Turkic invasions, the periods of devastations, plunder and massacres followed one after another, culminating in the genocidal acts. Er1 Ayse Gunaysu. Funeral of Murdered Armenian Woman in Istanbul Evokes Memories of Earlier Cover-Ups http://www.armemanweekly.com/2013/01/06/funeraL-of-murdered-armeman-woman-in-istanbul-evokes-memories-of-earlier-cover-ups/ In January 2007 Armenian journalist Hrant Dink was murdered in Istanbul. “This was shortly after the premiere of the genocide documentary Screamers, in which he is interviewed about Turkish denial of the Armenian Genocide of 1915 and the case against him under Article 301” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hrant_Dink).

117

E.Daniefyan

<21st CENTURY», № 1 (15), 2014

dogan completely falsified historic facts in order to disguise Turkey’s genocidal crimes1. From the very beginning of their rule the Kemalist leaders, their accomplices and followers used the Ottoman and the Young Turk regimes’ genocidal experience of distortion of the history of Armenia2 and falsifications of the Armenian toponyms [51, pp. 159-179] to cover up the Armenian Genocide3.

Turkish and Azerbaijani falsifications in archaeology may be exemplified by the following spurious publication with a completely erroneous title: “Azerbaijan - Land between East and West. Transfer of knowledge and technology during the “First Globalization” of the VIIth - IVth millennium BC”. Without mentioning the name of Armenia its archaeological

1 A detailed analysis of genocidal crimes can be found in the book by Alex Alvarez, where some conclusions are based on the facts of the Armenian Genocide [46].

2 Turkish leaders and pseudo-historians are on very bad terms with historical facts. With regard to falsification of the history of Armenia by Esat Uras [47], Christopher Walker in his book-review unveiling the fallaciousness of Esat’s book, noted: “Uras shows no understanding of the history or even the reality of Armenia” [48, p. 166]. Uras denies the Armenian Genocide by falsifying the Armenian history and historical geography. The following forgery is an example of the false information fabrication by Uras: “At the outbreak of the War, there was very great tension between the Armenians and the Turks. During mobilization, Soviet-made guns were discovered in the possession of many Armenians... It was under these circumstances that the Armenian rebellion broke out in April 1915” [47, p. 884]. But it is the total absurd to write about “the rebellion” with “Soviet-made guns” in 1915, because there was no Soviet power in Russia before November 1917 [49, էջ 154, 256]. On the other hand, after the request-letter (April 26, 1920) of Mustafa Kemal (he offered to fight together allegedly “for the sake of all the oppressed against the world imperialism”) to Lenin [50, с. 147-148], the Soviet government criminally supplied the Turks with arms and gold, which launched the aggression in the autumn against the Republic of Armenia [9, p. 90].

3 Contrary to the Turkish authorities’ efforts, 21 countries and many international organizations and regional governments and parliaments have recognized the Armenian Genocide as the first genocide of the 20th century. Genocide Scholars Association Officially Recognized Ottoman Genocides Against Armenians, Assyrians, Greeks, and other Christians (http:// itwasgenocide.armenica.org/IAGS_1915_genocide_recognition.pdf). The State Duma of the Russian Federation particularly stated (April 14, 1995) that the Armenian Genocide was committed in the Armenians’ historic homeland territory of Western Armenia http://www.anca.org/ genocide_resource/recognition.php#Russian

118

«21st CENTURY», № 1 (15), 2014________________________________________________________E.Danielyan

Sttwu тчглтстагплг avrv tmtctdmv ^Tviw:>mr>rv

E.Daniefyan

<21st CENTURY», № 1 (15), 2014

sites1 have been falsely “located” in “Eastern Anatolia” and “Azerbaijan” by the Turkish and Azerbaijani falsifiers [52, pp. 8, 41, 52, 55, 64, 82, 88]. But, in reality, on the one hand, the term “Eastern Anatolia” has nothing to do with the territory of the Armenian Highland, which is to the east of Asia Minor2 (Anatolia) and, on the other hand, the name of “Azerbaijan”3 historically corresponds only to the Iranian province of Atropatene-Adarbaigan-Azerbaijan. According to Strabo, ancient Atropatene was located to the south-east of the Kingdom of Great Armenia [38, XI, 13, 1].

The pseudo-theorization of the “problem of conflicts” is another type of falsification. For example, Behlul Ozkan wrote: “One of the main barriers to reaching a peaceful solution in deep-rooted conflicts such as Palestine, Bosnia and Nagorno-Karabakh is that the involved parties do not want to compromise. The conflicting sides have constructed a narrative of the conflict by identifying the ‘other side’ as a ‘threat’ to its identity” [55, p. 584]4. Jumping from one biased “argument” to another, Ozkan started his analysis of “the conflict” from 19235, intentionally skip1 In reality archaeological sites of Mush, Van, Kharberd are in Western Armenia, and Nakhi-jevan, Shamkor/ Shamkhor (in Utik), Askeran region (in Artsakh) are in Eastern Armenia. The Turkish and Azerbaijani falsifiers used the Armenian toponyms’ distorted forms (Elazig, Nax5ivan, Shamkir).

2 “The Encyclopedia of World History: Ancient, Medieval and Modern”, Sixth edition, Boston, 2001, http://worldhistory.50webs.com/111.html; http://worldhistory.50webs.com/116.html

3 In the second half of 1918 this name was stolen from the Iranian north-western province of Azerbaijan and with Pan-Turkic purposes given to artificially formed “the Tartar Republic of Azerbaijan” (H. Nahapetyan, Publications in American Periodicals Concerning Nagorno-Karabakh in 1918-20, http://www.noravank.am/eng/articles/detail.php7ELEMENT_ ID=3534) or “Eastern-Caucasian Muslim Republic” [53, էջ 285], then it was applied to “Azerbaijan SSR” (again aiming to annex Iranian Azerbaijan) [54, с. 703, 775-776]. Thus, what is today “the Republic of Azerbaijan” has no historic-legal rights over the Armenian regions of Artsakh, Utik and Nakhijevan and their historical heritage.

4 But it is well known, that Nagorno-Karabakh is the modern name of the mountainous part of the Armenian region of Artsakh. In ancient and medieval times Artsakh was the 10th province of Great Armenia [56, էջ 110].

5 Falsely presenting territorial situation, Ozkan wrote: “There had been tensions and concerns especially among the Karabakh Armenians since 1923, when Soviet leadership created the Nagorno-Karabakh Autonomous Oblast within the territory of Azerbaijan” [55, p. 580]. But Art-sakh has never been “within the territory of Azerbaijan”, because artificially formed in the second half of 1918 “Azerbaijan” had nothing to do with millennia-old Armenia’s eastern territories - Artsakh, as well as Utik and Nakhijevan.

120

<21st CENTURY», № 1 (15), 2014

E. Danielyan

ping the fact of the forced and illegal decision of the Caucasian Bureau (1921)1. The native Armenian Artsakh population never accepted that unlawful decision and struggled for reunification with the Motherland2. The Artsakh Liberation war (1991-1994) resulted in the victory of Armenian freedom-fighters over aggressive Azerbaijan.

So it has not been “the contested territory” conflict as if sanctified by “ethnocracies utilizing religious myths”, as Ozkan tries to present, but the process of reestablishment of the natural and legal rights of the Armenians of Artsakh in their Homeland by legal actions and liberation struggle. Azerbaijan, as a defeated aggressor, has only one way out in the existing situation - it must sign the capitulation act and pull its troops out of occupied territories of Northern Artsakh as well as Utik and Nakhijevan.

Ozkan distorting facts, wrote: “Both sides of the conflict instru-mentalised history as it played an important role in strengthening the collective identity. Furthermore, history is manipulated to justify the

1 On July 5, 1921 the Caucasian Bureau of the CC of RCP-B made a completely unjust and an-nexionist decision to transfer Nagorno Karabakh (NK) (the mountainous part of Artsakh) to Soviet Azerbaijan. Even some of Mountainous Artsakh’s districts together with its lowland areas were cut off from it in 1923 when was formed the Autonomous Oblast of NK, which was renamed NKAO in 1936 [57, с. 13, 61; 58, pp. 19-20]. The leadership of Azerbaijan SSR systematically violated the rights and interests of the Armenians in NKAO and Nakhijevan [as a result of the unjust and illegal Soviet-Turkish treaties of Moscow (March 16) and Kars (October 13) signed in 1921] in social-economic, political, demographic and cultural spheres.

2 In 1988-1990 contrary to the legal self-determination demand of the Armenian population of NKAO, the Baku authorities committed genocidal actions in Sumgait, Gandzak (Kirovabad), Baku and other places and forced deportation of Armenians from there. On September 2, 1991 the Art-sakh Armenians proclaimed the NK Republic (the Artsakh Republic) and on December 10 declared Independence of the NKR by the referendum. The NKR Supreme Council (December 28) adopted (January 6, 1992) the Declaration of the State Independence. From December 1991 the Azerbaijan’s authorities and military launched large scale aggression against Artsakh, but were crucially defeated. Armenian liberating forces had been moving victoriously in the eastern direction to the natural historical border of Armenia along the Kura. Azerbaijan’s leadership was in panic. According to Russia’s top negotiator Vladimir Kazimirov: “In April-May 1994 Baku thought only how... to prevent Armenians from reaching the Kura River” (http://www.regnum.ru/news/fd -abroad/armenia/1345943.html). Armenian freedom-fighters liberated many territories of Artsakh, but Azerbaijani army regiments occupied Shahumyan region and Getashen sub-region in the north, and the eastern parts of Martakert and Martuni regions of the NKR. The ceasefire was signed in May 1994. Currently it is regularly violated by the defeated Azerbaijan’s snipers and raiding bands, which are decisively repulsed by Armenian border troops.

121

E.Daniefyan

<21st CENTURY», № 1 (15), 2014

claim of ‘we were on this territory first’ to exclude ‘the other’ from the constructed mythical space of home-land” [55, p. 584]1. But it is obvious that only the Azerbijani falsifiers and their Turkish supporter Ozkan are busy with manipulations. Despite Ozkan knows that “Azerbaijani”2 is an invented term, yet neglecting historical facts3, he threw into the scale, on the one hand, the truthful history of Armenia and, on the other hand, false history of non-existent “Azerbaijan”.4 Ozkan’s anti-scientific method is based on negation of the truthful history from the present1 Falsely interpreting historic data [without considering the real causes of the Armenian Genocide, territorial reparations (Western Armenia and Kilikian Armenia), as well as the selfdetermination of the Artsakh Armenians], Ozkan presented historical and present-day facts in a distorted form [55, p. 585], in line with the Turkish-Azerbaijani anti-Armenian propaganda.

2 He wrote: “When the Soviet Azerbaijan was established, the people of the republic were called Turks. During the Stalin era in 1937, this was changed to Azerbaijani, which included Kurds, Talishs and other ethnic groups...” [55, p. 588]. But “when the Soviet Azerbaijan was established” not all people “were called Turks” there. According to “the calculation of 1/I 1925” and “All Union Population Census of 1926”, “Turks”, Russians, Armenians (including AONK and Nakhijevan ASSR), Talishs, Lezgins, Tats, Kurds, Ukrainians, Jews, Germans and others were mentioned in Azerbaijan SSR (in TCSFSR) (Большая советская энциклопедия, т.1. - М., 1926, с. 641, Всесоюзная перепись населения 1926 г., т. XIV, ЗСФСР, Аз.ССР, М., 1929, с. 12, 72). In the Russian Imperial (the second half of 19th- the beginning of the 20th cc.) and then the Soviet official documents (until the 1930s) the alien Turkic elements in the Cis-Caspian region were called “Tatars”, “Caucasian Tatars”, “Turks”. The falsified term “Azerbaijani(s)” officially started to be used in the USSR since the end of the 1930s (Всесоюзная перепись населения 1939г. Основные итоги, М., 1992, с. 71).

3 From the standpoint of general methodological approaches to the field of scientific research, Imre Lakatos warned that for centuries “wisdom and intellectual integrity demanded that one must desist from unproven utterances and minimize, even in thought, the gap between speculation and established knowledge” [59, p. 8].

4 In the same way Ozkan distorted the truth about real causes of the Sumgait tragedy, and “concentrating attention” to “ethnic hatred”, “housing shortages” and “confiscating Armenians’ properties”, wrote: “Most analyses about the violence in Sumgait reflect it as a primordial ethnic hatred and revenge. However, severe housing shortages, in a city where the population increased four times in the last thirty years, played an important role in the killings of Armenians to confiscate their properties” (55, p. 578). But the real causes were connected with the right to self-determination of the Artsakh Armenians and the aggressive terroristic response of official Baku to it. As follows from the NKR MFA Statement (2013.02.27) on Sumgait massacre: “... Dozens of killed, hundreds of maimed and thousands of Armenians expelled from Sumgait (2729. 02. 1988) became the first victims of Azerbaijan’s policy of terror aimed at the Armenians of Karabakh who in the preceding week had officially declared their intention to exercise their right to self-determination. In spite of the peaceful and legitimate nature of those manifestations in Nagorno Karabakh, Azerbaijan from the very beginning rejected dialogue, resorted to the language of threats and intimidation and pursued policy of violent oppression of the free will of the people of Artsakh. ” (http://www.nkr.am/en/news/2013-02-27/502/).

122

<21st CENTURY», № 1 (15), 2014

E. Danielyan

day politicized position of Turkey and Azerbaijan coming from falsification of history. Thus misrepresenting historical facts, he wrote: “Armenian national discourse employed religious narratives like “the first Christian nation, and a chosen people” to justify the claims on territories that once belonged to ancient Armenia as a matter of divine truth” [55, p. 585]. Ozkan is ignorant of ancient and medieval Armenian and other historical sources, otherwise he would now that Armenia had been known in ancient world long before the proclamation of Christianity as the state religion (301 AD), as it follows from the 3rd - the first half of the 1st millennia BC cuneiform [Sumero-Akkadian1, Assyrian, Biainian (Ararat-Urartu) and Persian (520/519 BC)], ancient Greek and Latin, as well as medieval written sources.

Completely in line with Azerbaijan’s disinformation propaganda Ozkan placed aggressive (Azerbaijan) and defensive (Artsakh) sides on the same level, and presented Armenian liberated territories in a hostile and biased wording: “December 1991, full-scale war started between the two sides. Within three years, Armenian forces occupied the entire territory of Nagorno-Karabakh and the surrounding Azerbaijani districts... Today 14.5 percent of the Azerbaijani territory is still under Armenian occupation...” [55, pp. 577, 587]. But there has been no “Azerbaijani territory” out of Iranian Azerbaijan (ancient Atropatena to the south-east of Urmia Lake).

1 Wrongly considering Armenia as a country in the Caucasus, Ozkan wrote: “The outcome of ethnic conflicts is the formation of mono-ethnic countries in the Caucasus. Armenia has become one of the most mono-ethnic countries in the post-Soviet space” [55, p. 594]. But it is well-known that Armenia is in the Armenian Highland (to the south-east of the Black Sea and southwest of the Caucasus, east of Asia Minor, north of Mesopotamia and Iranian plateau. Armenia is a mono-ethnic country owing to the fact that Armenians are the indigenous nation of the Armenian Highland. In the 3rd millennium BC Armenia was mentioned in cuneiform inscriptions as Aratta, Armanum [60, с. 64; 61, с. 32; 74, pp. 62, 275; 75, pp. 59-83]. It’s interesting that in the same sources apricot is named armanu (cf. Lat. armeniaca) [62, p. 136; 63, pp. 105, 113, 116117], because its home-country is Armenia. Later an anthropological type was called Armenoid [64, pp. 228, 240-244; 65, с. 7; 66, с. 25]. The Republic of Armenia, along with the Republic of Artsakh continue to have largely mono-ethnic population.

123

E.Daniefyan

<21st CENTURY», № 1 (15), 2014

An artificial formation “Azerbaijan” has not got any legal right to challenge the historic and legal rights of the Artsakh Armenians – native inhabitants of the eastern regions of their Motherland – Armenia. Thus, Armenians have not occupied “14.5 percent” of the falsely called “Azerbaijani territory”. Armenians liberated eastern territories of their Motherland!

Turkish falsifiers try to obliterate historic memory, destroy and appropriate the Armenian historic heritage of Western Armenia, including Kilikia and Armenian Mesopotamia by falsifications and destruction of Armenian cultural monuments. They encroach1 also on “the Silk Road Integral program” initiated by UNESCO2.

Contrary to their efforts, the well-known civilizational contribution of Armenia to the history of the Silk Road is of special importance [67; 68; 69, с. 292-311]: the King of Kings of the Armenian Empire, Tigran the Great (95-55 BC) took under his protection the Silk Road’s branches in Western Asia carrying out civilizational activities3 [71, էջ 312]; centuries later the capital of the Armenian Bagratuni Kingdom (885 -1045 AD), Ani (from 961 AD) prospered as a political, cultural, commercial centre and the junction of great international trade routes [72], etc. In order for the Silk Road International programme to be really truthful, the historic-cultural heritage of Armenia must be presented in a holistic territorial coverage - the Armenian Highland (Great Armenia and Armenia Minor), Kilikia and Armenian Mesopotamia4.

1 http://www.allaboutturkey.com/silkroad.htm.

2 http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0015/001591/159189e.pdf etc.

3 Along with the newly-built capital Tigranakert and other cities in different parts of the Armenian Empire, Tigran the Great founded two more cities named after him in Artsakh and Utik (Eastern regions of Great Armenia) [70, էջ 125], on a branch of the Silk Road.

4 The holistic historical heritage of the Armenian people territorially includes Eastern and Western Armenia, Kilikia and Armenian (Northern) Mesopotamia, but at present only the territory of the Republic of Armenia has been presented in the sharply politicized international projects implying the Silk Road http://www.traceca-org.org/ru/traseka/istorija-traseka/; http://www.blackseasilkroad.com/; http://www.tacentral.com/bssrc/sites/armenia-AMAP-ASPB -bssrc-sites.pdf; http://www.tacentral.com/bssrc/maps/Armenia%20Route-high.jpg etc..

124

<21st CENTURY», Ш1 (15), 2014_______________________________E.Danielyan

THE SILK ROAD IN ANCIENT AND EARLY MEDIEVAL TIMES

E.Daniefyan

<21st CENTURY», № 1 (15), 2014

Turkey and Azerbaijan are absolutely unable to contend against Armenia in history, historical geography and civilizational contribution to the world treasury of culture, so they wage information warfare by means of disinformation and manipulations.

Turkish government wages information warfare1 against the memory of the Armenian Genocide martyrs and the legal rights of the survived Armenians and their generations living in the Armenian Diaspora and the Republic of Armenia. Turkey is escalating the wide dissemination of disinformation by means of blocking, degrading, falsifying or forging information. It is well known that, on the one hand, Turkey spends millions to cover up the Armenian Genocide2 [21, pp. 4-5], and, on the other hand, Azerbaijan is handing out millions of petrodollars for its propagandistic lies3.

Armenian Defense Minister, Seyran Ohanyan, pointing to the significance of the victory in Artsakh Liberation war against aggressive Azerbaijan, said that the “anti-Armenian campaign and distortions in

1 Contrary to Turkey’s provocative policy of genocide denial, the Armenian Genocide issue was put on the agenda of the UN Security Council on January 29, 2014 (Harut Sassounian, Armenia Challenges Turkey’s Genocide Denial at the UN Security Council, http://www.armradio.am/ en/2014/02/18/armenia-challenges-turkeys-genocide-denial-at-the-un-security-council/. “German Chancellor Angela Merkel scolded Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan over Turkey&s continued denial of the Armenian Genocide and urged the Turkish leader to “face its history“ (Feb 7, 2014, http://www.topix.com/forum/world/germany/T3ROP327SRTIU5Fn/ p6). “Erika Steinbach, a member of Angela Merkel’s Christian Democratic Union Party urged Turkey to apologize for the Armenian Genocide. The call came ahead of Erdogan’s visit to Germany, Bild reports. “I urge Erdogan to stop denying the genocide of Armenians and Assyrians by the Young Turk government of the Ottoman Empire 99 years ago,” adding that “it is high time for Turkey to apologize to the descendants of the victims of the first genocide of the 20th century. It is Erdogan’s duty to face the truth nearly 100 years after that terrible crime and ensure that the Turkish textbooks do not distort this part of Turkish history,” said Steinbach (Feb 3, 2014, http://eupolitics.einnews.com/news/erika-steinbach).

2 D. Holthouse, State of Denial. Turkey Spends Millions to Cover Up Armenian Genocide. -Intelligence Report, Summer 2008, Issue Number: 130 (http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/ intelligence-report/browse-all-issues/2008/summer/state-of-denial).

3 Harut Sassounian, Justice Dept. Records Reveal: Azerbaijan Pays Millions to U.S. Firms. October 15th, 2013 http://asbarez.com/115007/justice-dept-records-reveal-azerbaijan-pays-millions-to-u-s-firms/

126

<21st CENTURY», № 1 (15), 2014

E. Danielyan

the research and cultural fields realized by the Azerbaijan propaganda state machine make it imperative to disclose these falsifications and expose their threats not only for Armenia but also for the whole region”.1 The Armenian Defense Minister stressed the importance of Armenia’s overwhelming priority on the moral-spiritual and cultural front in information warfare against Azerbaijan’s hostile propaganda2.

Analyzing the informational data concerning information warfare waged by Turkey and Azerbaijan and their allies against the NKR, Gagik Ter-Harutyunyan noted: “Analysis of information flows give the impression that the Azerbaijani structures waging information warfare get certain, in particular methodological support of the specialists from Turkey and other ally states of Azerbaijan. It is also not excluded the participation of experts of big energy companies based in this country in information operations against the NKR.”3

Employing creative methods, providing deeply rooted analyses for fundamental issues of history and politics are important from the aspect of Armenian national security. Considering the role of the media from the point of view of national security, it is noted: “Today there is a direct relationship between media and national security. National security issues can be investigated in relation to secure and unsecure factors, a distinction that helps to clarify the relation between internal security and communications, on the one hand, and the effects of new communication media on external dimension, on the other hand. New media in the information era challenge many previous assumptions and principles concerning national security” [73, p. 37].

1 http://old.armradio.am/arm/news/?part=polid=42227

2 “History and Culture: against falsifications and infringement”. - The Republican Scientific Conference. 04 May 2011.

3 Gagik Ter-Harutyunyan, Information Warfare and Nagrno-Karabakh Republic, 23.06.2008 http://www.noravank.am/eng/articles/detail.php?ELEMENT_ID=3556

127

E.Daniefyan

<21st CENTURY», № 1 (15), 2014

The enormous efforts and huge amounts of money that Turkey and Azerbaijan spend on information warfare against the Republic of Armenia, the Artsakh Republic (the NKR) and the Armenian Diaspora are doomed to fail, because of irrefutable facts of the history of Armenia and the spiritual power of the Armenian historical heritage, as a proof of irresistible force of historical truth revealed through the history of Armenia and historical justice crowned with the Artsakh victory.

April, 2014

Reference Sources and Literature

1. Wintle W J, Armenia and Its Sorrows. Third edition, London, 1896.

2. The Armenian Massacres 1894-1896: U.S. Media Testimony, Detroit, 2004.

3. Գասպարյաե Ռուբեե, Հայկական կոտորածները Կիլիկիայում (XIX դարի 90 -ական թթ.-1921թ.), Երևան, 2005:

4. Simonyan Hrachik, The Destruction of Armenians in Cilicia, April 1909, London, 2012.

5. Horton G, The Blight of Asia. An Account of the Systematic Extermination of Christian Populations by Mohammedans and of the Culpability of Certain Great Powers; with the True Story of the Burning of Smyrna, Printed in the USA, 1926.

6. Kirakosyan J., The Armenian Genocide: the Young Turks before the Judgment of History, Madison, 1992.

7. Dadrian Vahagn, The History of Armenian Genocide, Oxford, 1995.

8. Геноцид армян: ответственность Турции и обязательства мирового сообщества. Составитель, отв. ред., автор предисловия и комментария Ю.Г. Барсегов, т. 1, М., 2002, т. 2, ч.1, 2003, ч. 2, 2005.

9. Kirakosyan Arman, The Armenian Question and the Armenian Genocide, Yerevan, 2006.

10. A. de Zayas, The Genocide against the Armenians 1915-1923 and the Relevance of the 1948 Genocide Convention, Beirut, 2010.

11. Safrastyan Ruben, Ottoman Empire: the Genesis of the Program of Genocide (1876-1920), Yerevan, 2011.

12. Сваранц Александр, Геноцид армян в Османской Турции: причины, этапы и последствия в национальной и международной жизни. — «Հայաստան» տեղեկագիր, N2, 2005 (հատուկ թողարկում).

128

«21st CENTURY», № 1 (15), 2014

E. Danielyan

13. Մարգարյաե Վ, Հայերի դեմ իրագործած ցեղասպանության համար Թուրքիայի Հանրապետության միջազգային իրավական պատասխանատվության հիմքերը, եղանակները, ձևերը և տեսակները. - «Նորավանք» ԳԿՀ Տեղեկագիր N 1, 2006:

14. Մեքոնյան Աշոտ, Հայոց պատմության դասերն ու պատգամները, Երևան, 2013:

15. Մարուքյան Արմեն, Հայոց ցեղասպանության հետևանքների հաղթահարման հիմնախնդիրներն ու պատմաիրավական հիմնավորումները, Երևան, 2014:

16. Scot Macdonald, Propaganda and Information Warfare in the Twenty-First Century: Altered Images and Deception Operations, London and New York, 2007.

17. Hutchinson William, Information Warfare and Deception. - Informing Science, Edith Cowan University, Perth, Australia, vol. 9, 2006.

18. Zurcher Erik J, Turkey: A Modern History. London. New York,1993.

19. Զnւլաըաե Մանվել, Հայոց պատմության խեղաթյուրումը արդի թուրք պատմագրության մեջ (հին և միջին դարեր), Երևան, 1995:

20. Clive Foss, “When Turks Civilized the World”. - History Today, Vol. 55, N 8, 2005.

21. Smith R. W, Markusen Eric, Lifton Robert Jay, Professional Ethics and the Denial of Armenian Genocide. - Holocaust and Genocide Studies, vol. 9, N l, Spring 1995.

22. Victor Hugo, Oeuvres completes. Poesie I. Paris, 1985, L’enfant.

23. Mark Twain, The Innocents Abroad, New York, 1964.

24. History of the United Nations War Crimes Commission and the Development of the Laws of War, London: His Majesty’s Stationery Office, 1948.

25. Shabas William A., Genocide in International Law, The Crime of Crimes. National University of Irealand, Galway. Cambridge, 2000.

26. Speros Vryonis Jr., The Turkish State and History: Clio Meets the Grey Wolf, New York, 1993.

27. Pope Nicole and Hugh Pope. Turkey Unveiled - A History of Modern Turkey. Woodstock, N.Y., Overlook Press, 1997.

28. T. Ozal, La Turquie en Europe, Paris, 1988.

29. T. Ozal, Turkey in Europe and Europe in Turkey, Revised English edition, Nicosia, 1991.

30. M.Monmonier, How to Lie with Maps, Chicago, 1991.

31. Seton Lloyd, “Ancient Turkey: a Traveller’s History”, New Edition, London, 1999.

32. Antonio Sagona, Paul Zimansky, “Ancient Turkey”, London, 2009.

33. A. Sagona, The Heritage of Eastern Turkey: From Earliest Settlements to Islam, Melbourne, 2006.

34. Alan Palmer, The Decline and Fall of the Ottoman Empire, New York, 1994.

35. Arnold Toynbee, A Study of History, vol. II, Oxford University Press, London, New York, Toronto, 1955.

129

E.Daniefyan

<21st CENTURY», № 1 (15), 2014

36. A Philosophical Dictionary from the French of M. de Voltaire, London, 1824.

37. KAAYDIOY nTOAEMAIOY ГЕОГРАФ1КН YФHГHZIZ, Parisiis, 1901.

38. The Geography of Strabo, Cambridge, Mass., London, in eight volumes, vol. V, 1954.

39. The Armenian Architecture: a Cultural Genocide, Montreal: Armenian National Committee of Canada, 2005 (photo documentary).

40. Վարազդատ Հարությունյան, Հայկական ճարտարապետության պատմություն, Երևան, 1992:

41. Robert Kap/nEastward to Tartary, New York, 2000.

42. “Julfa. The Annihilation of the Armenian Cemetery by Nakhijevan’s Azerbaijani Authorities”, Beirut, 2006.

43. Adrian Room, Placenames of the World: Origins and Meanings of the Names for 6,600 Countries, Cities, Territories, Natural Features and Historic Sites, 2nd ed., Jefferson, North Carolina, 2006.

44. Karl Krumbacher, Geschichte der Byzantinischen literature von Justinian bis zum ende des Ostromischen reiches (527-1453), Munchen, 1897, Abriss der by-zantinischen Kaisergeschichte. Bearbeitet von Н. Gelzer.

45. Թէոդիկ, Ամենուն տարեցոյցը 1915 - Թ. Տարի, Բ. Հրատարակութիւն, Հալէպ Հայկական Մատենաշար Գալուստ Կիւլպէնկեան Հիմնարկութեան, Հրատարակչատուն ԿԻԼԻԿԻԱ, 2009:

46. Alex Alvarez, Genocidal Crimes, London, 2010.

47. Esat Uras, “The Armenians in History and the Armenian question”. An English translation of the revised and expanded second edition, Ankara, 1988.

48. Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland, 1990, N l.

49. Ռ Սահակյան, Արևմտահայության ցեղասպանությունը և ինքնապաշտպա-նական կռիվները 1915 թվականին, Երևան, 2005:

50. Международная жизнь, 1963, № 11.

51. E Danielyan, Turkish - Azerbaijani Falsifications of the Armenian Toponyms as an Indication of the Genocidal Policy. - Բանբեր հայագիտության, N 1 (1), 2013.

52. International Symposium Baku, April 1-3 2009, Deutsches Archaologisches Insti-tut, Eurasien-abteilung, Baku, 2009.

53. Հրանտ Ավետիսյան, Հայկական հարցը 1918 թ., Երևան, 1997:

Другие работы в данной теме:

К вопросу о сотрудничестве между Арменией и Казахстаном

Парламентские выборы в Болгарии и строительство «Южного потока»

Континуум войны и западная военная культура

Основные тенденции искажения ключевых вопросов истории Армении

Атропатена в эпоху арабских завоеваний

Политика КНР в регионе Северного Прикаспия

Вероятность «Случайной войны» и реализация сдерживания в Карабахском конфликте

О новых направлениях развития военной науки в США

Армения и армянская диаспора: расхождение и встреча