KHOJALY: Chronicle, facts, events

KHOJALY: falsifications by eynulla fatullayev

Falsifications on Khojaly issue.
Eynulla Fatullayev and “The Karabakh Diary”

One of the favourite plots that Armenians occasionally resort to are the “materials” by an Azerbaijani journalist Eynulla Fatullayev published in his own newspaper “The Real Azerbaijan”.

According to the Armenian side, Fatullayev lays all the blame for the killing of innocent people on Azerbaijanis.
Basing on his observations and meetings during his visit to Armenia and the occupied territories of Azerbaijan, Eynulla Fatulllayev has published “The Karabakh Diary”.

Here we are mainly interested in the part of his papers where he wrote about Khojaly. This chapter is the mostly cited one and referred to by Armenian authors and websites.

There are three main statements highlighted in the content.

The first concerns the existence of the “escape route”.

The second is about the alleged talks with the Khodjaly refugees.

The third is devoted to the NFA*’s guilt in the killing of people.

We’ll consider these details and some other substantial ones, separately. Let us remind the audience that Eynulla Fatullayev was just a 16-year old student at that time. Neither he witnessed the Khodjaly events, nor took part in the conflict.

So, the first statement about the existence of the “escape route”- this matter was examined in detail in the course of the investigation conducted by Memorial human rights group and the international organization Human Rights Watch. Initiating the investigation right after the events, these agencies could not ascertain the presence of the humanitarian corridor, moreover, the Armenian side failed to submit any proof of the corridor, either. (Read more in the chapter “Escape route”) In his work Fatullayev wrote the following regarding the escape way: “…Having familiarized myself with the geographical area, I can say, fully convinced, that the conjectures that there had been no Armenian corridor are groundless. The corridor did indeed exist, otherwise the Khodjaly inhabitants, fully surrounded [by the enemy troops] and isolated from the outside world, would not have been able to force their way out and escape the encirclement…” - It seems as if the journalist described some man-made object, not the geographical area.

He supposes a version of the corridor non-existence a complete “conjecture”, while the credible international organizations have come to conclusions virtually contradicting Fatullayev’s statements. It should be mentioned that the town was assaulted from three sides, the eastern side deliberately left free by convention. According to the Armenian story, the “escape route” was located exactly there. A great number of people, however, were killed right on this direction.

The second statement by Fatullayev concerns the interviews allegedly taken from the Khodjaly refugees and recorded on the tape. When asked to submit these recordings, he couldn’t present a single one; furthermore, he failed to mention the names of Khodjaly residents allegedly interviewed. The refugees, in their turn, don’t remember anyone named Eynulla Fatullayev, who supposedly interviewed them on a tape recorder.

In his work, Fatullayev referred to the refugees allegedly telling him of the «humanitarian corridor”, but there were no evidence to prove the credibility of those talks.
The third statement of Fatullayev touches upon the role of people from NFA detachments defending the town. His words regarding their part are given below:
«However, having crossed the area behind the Kar-Kar River, the row of refugees was separated and, for some reason, a group of [them] headed in the direction of Nakhichevanik. It appears that the NFA battalions were striving not for the liberation of the Khojaly civilians but for more bloodshed on their way to overthrow A. Mutalibov.”

Fatullayev claims some soldiers from the battalions of the NFA had led part of the refugees in the direction of the village of Nakhichevanik (where they came under the hard fire by Armenians) which during that period had been under the control of the Armenians' Askeran battalion. He perceives an evil intent here and supposes that the soldiers had done that willfully. However, there emerge two questions.

Question 1: Armenians firing indiscriminately, why did the NFA battalions lead refugees to the place they would be surely shot at, together with the civilians? If Fatullayev really holds them to be suicides, then that must be proved, as well, which he failed to do.

Question 2: Why did Armenians fired at people reaching Nakhichevanik, provided they didn’t intent to kill civilians?

Furthemore, Fatullayev didn’t mention the fire opened at the Khodjali residents before Nakhichevanik, at the settlement of Kyatuk, where the first hard fire was opened and refugees were taken captives.

Fatullayev states that after Nakhichevanik «…The other group of refugees was hit by artillery volleys [while they were reaching] the [foot of the] Agdam Region…» - here the author made a blatant error either by an oversight or intentionally. The Agdam region is not located in an upland area, therefore, it can’t be said “to have a foot”, either.
As to the artillery volleys mentioned, this version is marginal, too. The footage from the scene of the tragedy spread all over the world and everyone can find them on the Internet. If there had been any artillery salvo, there should have been some shell holes formed on the ground. But there is not a single one on the photos.
As we can see, “the confession by Eynulla Fatullayev” so much resorted to and cited by Armenians, falls apart at the seams when thoroughly examined. A lot of information can be submitted to prove that Fatullayev’s work is a pure coinage in the gonzo journalism style. The chapter, however, considers not only Fatullayev, but some other forgers, as well.

________________________________
*NFA- the National Front of Azerbaijan.