Mrs. Clinton supports terrorists?!

[gamavor]

Well, the logic is very straightforward. It is well documented fact (tons of material evidence, instruction pamphlets written in Afghani dialects Urdu and Pashtu, military equipment, captured American made enemy arsenal), that during the Artsakh (Karabagh) war, Azerbaijani government employed mujahidins from Afghanistan, Chechnya and other places to wage a holy jihad against the native Armenian population of Karabagh. Yet, the F..... State Department of the UNITED SNAKES of AMERICA in their so called "annual human rights report" has the guts to call Armenian defense units "separatists". Separatists from what? From their native homeland?

 

Stupid, Stupidest, American! What about Kosovo?

 

 

RHETORICAL QUESTIONS TO CLINTON'S VISIT

Leonid MARTIROSSIAN

 

Editor-in-Chief of Azat Artsakh newspaper

Wednesday, 30 May 2012 09:54

 

As it is known, a visit of US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to

the South Caucasus region is expected. There is no doubt that the

agenda of the visit also includes the issue of Karabakh settlement,

which Mrs. Clinton as a representative of the OSCE Minsk Group

co-chair-state will certainly discuss with the Presidents of Armenia

and Azerbaijan with the aim of "finding a mutually acceptable solution

to the problem". All is seemingly understandable and logical, if not a

"but" just running counter to the common logic.

 

The matter is that the official website of the U.S. State Department

has recently placed the annual report on human rights for 2011, where

the section devoted to the Karabakh conflict reads: "Ethnic Armenian

separatists, supported by Armenia, continue to control most of the

Nagorno-Karabakh region of Azerbaijan and seven adjoining Azerbaijani

territories". Agree, in this case the vocabulary and the conceptual

formulations of the State Department do not differ at all from the

Azerbaijani vocabulary, which official Baku put into propaganda

circulation long ago. This fact is confirmed by the report itself,

which contains a reference to the "government sources". Surely,

the Azerbaijani government is meant.

 

Frankly speaking, it seems that such a serious structure as the

State Department is not serious about its own reputation, allowing

Azerbaijan to include in the report pleasing-to-it formulations

hat completely distort the essence of the conflict and the existing

realities. I must say that the Azerbaijani authorities previously too

managed to feed the State Department with obvious lie and to squeeze

in its annual reports open anti-Armenian theses having nothing to

do with the reality and relating, in particular, to the alleged use

of the territory of Nagorno-Karabakh for drug trafficking. Later,

such misinformation was, surely, denied by all means, including by

representatives of corresponding international structures who had

visited the NKR. But in this particular case, the authors of the

above mentioned report do not even have to visit the conflict region

to have a real idea of the situation. After all, the United States as

a co-chair of the OSCE Minsk Group have dealt with the Karabakh issue

for many years, and the foreign ministry of this country should not

make up an obviously biased report.

 

In this context, a quite natural question arises: how does such a

biased report relate to the position of the U.S. as an impartial

mediator? Calling, even if with the filing of official Baku,

Nagorno-Karabakh "Nagorno-Karabakh region of Azerbaijan", the State

Department, actually, predetermines its status and, therefore,

prejudges the outcome of the ongoing negotiations and thus makes

them simply senseless. As you know, one of the basic principles, on

which the OSCE mediators offer to resolve the Karabakh issue, is the

people's right to self-determination. And another question to the State

Department occurs here: how reasonable is to call "separatists" the

people of Nagorno-Karabakh, which gained independence in the territory

of its historical residence? Another question smoothly follows from

this: is the concept of "separatism" applicable to Kosovo, which gained

its independence in a foreign, i.e. the Serbian territory, but which

was widely supported by Washington? And, finally, doesn't official

Washington contradict itself, signing with one hand the notorious

report and with the other hand - a document on financial assistance to

the NKR? After all, these funds are allocated not only for humanitarian

programs, but also for "projects and activities in Nagorno-Karabakh".

 

The sounded questions are, surely, rhetorical, but they automatically

lead to the idea of double standards. To specify, the double standards

of the Obama administration, which poses itself as an apologist

of democracy, but in practice supports the totalitarian regime

of Azerbaijan, which unleashed a war for the extermination of the

indigenous Armenian population of Nagorno-Karabakh, which proclaimed

its independence just on the basis of democratic principles and in

strict accordance with international law.

 

And what is the reason for such a benevolent attitude towards

Azerbaijan, which, despite numerous appeals of reputable institutions,

including European and American, to stop the gross violations of

human rights in the country, remains deaf to them? Is it not that

the same U.S. and Europe have their own political and economic, in

particular, energy interests in Azerbaijan, which outweigh the scale,

on which are the human rights and democratic values? In addition,

today Azerbaijan is a transit territory for the transfer of military

equipment and troops of the U.S. and NATO to Afghanistan. Consequently,

in response to these services, the civilized West shuts its eyes to

the anti-democratic actions of Azerbaijan within the country and its

militaristic licentiousness in the process of Karabakh settlement. Is

it worth saying that such tolerance of Europe and the USA towards

Azerbaijan is, without any doubt, dangerous not only for the region?

 

And that will the pay for the deliberate unscrupulousness and

ignorance of human and peoples' rights be? It would be good to ask

these questions to Mrs. Clinton in Yerevan, since she will be asked

entirely different questions in Baku.

 

 

http://groong.com/news/msg423966.html