And the Fraud Had a Name, Azerbaijan: the Real, the Fake and the Absurd

[Hellektor]

Re: And the Fraud Had a Name, Azerbaijan: the Real, the Fake and the Absurd

15 September 2008 [18:04] - Today.Az
"Azerbaijan should change its name for North Azerbaijan, which corresponds to the reality" (??? According to who? H.), said chairman of the United Popular Front Party of Azerbaijan Qudrat Hasanquliyev.

So you admit you stole the name of the northwest region of Iran and called your counterfeit state “Azerbaijan” to steal the real Azarbaijan (Atrpatakan) and annex it to your nonentity.

"We can not speak of the united Azerbaijan, as it is not like that. If we change the name of our country for North Azerbaijan, it would signal that there is also South Azerbaijan.

There has never been and there is no “South Azerbaijan” or “North Azerbaijan”. There's only one Real Azarbaijan (Atrpatakan) south of the Arax, yours is fake.

Moreover, we would inform the world about the historical truth of our country. I think it is a responsible and decisive step for us, including for the territorial integrity (??? Where and according to what document? H.). In case we win the presidential elections, we will take all actions for this idea to come true, for our party is called "United Azerbaijan" not by accident".

You would not inform. You never inform, all you do is misinform. The truth about you is that your “country's” name is fake, your history is fake, your geography is fake, your nationality is fake, your culture is fake, your heritage is fake, your genocide is fake, your monuments are fake, your ancestors are fake, your royal dynasties are fake, your heroes are fake, your poets are fake, your philosophers, etc., are fake. Your fake “Azerbaijan” is nothing but a genocidal, pan-Turkist extension of Turkey.

[lampron]

Re: And the Fraud Had a Name, Azerbaijan: the Real, the Fake and the Absurd

Hellektor's research on this subject should be circulated to as many foreign journalists, diplomats, businessmen, public figures as possible. It is one of the best I have seen. But no insults should be used. In any research document the facts should speak for themselves. The readers can then decide if 'Azerbaijan' really has any claims to karabakh and Shahumian and understand the reasons why the Tatars opportunistically came up with the name 'Azerbaijan'

[ninetoyadome]

Re: And the Fraud Had a Name, Azerbaijan: the Real, the Fake and the Absurd

Hellektor's research on this subject should be circulated to as many foreign journalists, diplomats, businessmen, public figures as possible. It is one of the best I have seen. But no insults should be used. In any research document the facts should speak for themselves. The readers can then decide if 'Azerbaijan' really has any claims to karabakh and Shahumian and understand the reasons why the Tatars opportunistically came up with the name 'Azerbaijan'

it was actually Stalin who came up with the name

A quick study of rare historical archives reveals a very cynically self-serving (and an unintentionally pan-Turanian) Russian approach to the Arran affair:

“The name “Azerbaijan” for the Republic of Azerbaijan (Soviet Azerbaijan) was selected on the assumption that the stationing of such as republic would lead to that entity Iranian to become one…this is the reason why the name “Azerbaijan” was selected (for Arran)…anytime when it is necessary to select a name that refers to the territory of the Republic of Azerbaijan, we should/can select the name Arran…”
Quote from Bartold, Soviet academic, politician and foreign office official. See Bartold, V.V., Sochineniia, Tom II, Chast I, Izdatelstvo Vostochnoi Literary, p.217, 1963.

This was a brilliant geopolitical move, as it now allowed for Russia, like the Ottoman Turks before them, to eventually make a grab for Iranian Azerbaijan. It is very likely that Joseph (Iosef) Stalin (born Djugashvilii – his mother was Ossetian) was complicit in this action. Stalin deliberately and repeatedly referred to many famous Iranian literary figures (such as Nizami, Ganji, Shabestari, etc.) as “great national Azerbaijani literary figures”, with no mention of their association and origins in Persia.

Stalin’s tactic was to lump all historical figures and references from Arran and Azerbaijan as “Azerbaijanis”, pretending that these were never distinct provinces of Persia, and that neither had any cultural, linguistic or historical association with Persia.

Stalin specifically worked at removing pre-communist (Tsarist) archives that referred to the historical designations of the Republic of Azerbaijan. This included the Russian language “Russian Encyclopedia” (printed in 1890, St. Petersburg & Leipzig, Imperial Germany – see Matini, 1989, p.455 in References) which clearly distinguished Albania/Arran from Azerbaijan in Iran.

It was Stalin who encouraged the museums and maps of the Soviet Republic of Azerbaijan to refer to Azerbaijani cities in the Soviet Union and Iran as if they were one province. Stalin wanted no distinctions made between former Arran (Soviet Azerbaijan) and historical Azerbaijan (in Iran). He instructed his hand-picked historians (both in Soviet Azerbaijan and Russia) to revise the entire history of Arran and its association with Persia, and to blur Arran’s distinction from the historical Azerbaijan of Iran (recall the quote from Bartold we cited previously).

By 1937, Soviet “Anthropologists” formally coined the ethnic name of "Azeris" to the Albanians/Arranis. These were published as azerbaidzantsi in Russian and rapidly translated by the Soviets to azarbaycanli, in Turkish. Stalin’s historians were instructed to engage in the process of ethno-engineering in which invented terms were used to de-Persianize those ethnic groups of the USSR that had long-standing associations with the culture and history of Persia. This has resulted in generations of people in the Republic of Azerbaijan being indoctrinated with Stalinist propaganda and falsified history. Today, a large number of the people of the Republic of Azerbaijan believe that Iranian Azerbaijan, which they call “Guney (South) Azerbaijan“, is “occupied” by Iran, and must be “liberated” and “reunited” with the Republic of Azerbaijan. These false distortions are being actively promoted among Iranian Azerbaijanis.

[Eddo211]

Re: And the Fraud Had a Name, Azerbaijan: the Real, the Fake and the Absurd

^^^yes, as I have always said "Azerbaijan" is just a province of Iran and Iranians do not recognize the arbitrarily borders that were drawn by Stalin.......hence their stand in Artsakh as well.

Good post niner

[lampron]

Re: And the Fraud Had a Name, Azerbaijan: the Real, the Fake and the Absurd

it was actually Stalin who came up with the name

I don't think so. Before Stalin there was an Ottoman Turkish invasion of the Caucasus, the capture of Baku and the massacre of Armenians in the city. Azerbaijan was 'born' sometime around May 1918, with the help of Ottomans. Stalin supported the idea, yes, for the reasons below, but there is no evidence that he participated in the naming of 'Azerbaijan' in 1918

This was a brilliant geopolitical move, as it now allowed for Russia, like the Ottoman Turks before them, to eventually make a grab for Iranian Azerbaijan

[Eddo211]

Re: And the Fraud Had a Name, Azerbaijan: the Real, the Fake and the Absurd

The name Azarbaijan has deep Persian roots long before Turks and Stalin. It was given the name as one of the northwestern provinces of Iran because most of the Iranian Azaris lived in that area.

[lampron]

Re: And the Fraud Had a Name, Azerbaijan: the Real, the Fake and the Absurd

The name Azarbaijan has deep Persian roots long before Turks and Stalin. It was given the name as one of the northwestern provinces of Iran because most of the Iranian Azaris lived in that area.

Yes that's correct. Azarbaijan (Atrpatakan) has been around for 2000 years or more. But 'Azerbaijan', north of the Arax river, never existed until 1918

[lampron]

Re: And the Fraud Had a Name, Azerbaijan: the Real, the Fake and the Absurd

In a trip to Turkey in 1934, Reza Shah of Iran became so mesmerized by the genocidal bandit Kemal Ataturk’s superficial modernization that he aided pan-Turkism, perhaps unintentionally, by ceding a beak shaped area from Iranian territory to the Turks to provide a fourteen kilometer border between Turkey and the illegally usurped Nakhijevan, in reality between Turkey and fake “Azerbaijan”.

how did kemal do this for Turks? What did Iran get in return? The area covered by Nakhijevan had been either under Persian or Russian control after independent Armenia ceased to exist. By creating a border on Nakhijevan, Kemal brought about the prospect in the long term of Turkey threatening Armenia from the south (as well as the west)

[bell-the-cat]

Re: And the Fraud Had a Name, Azerbaijan: the Real, the Fake and the Absurd

how did kemal do this for Turks? What did Iran get in return? The area covered by Nakhijevan had been either under Persian or Russian control after independent Armenia ceased to exist. By creating a border on Nakhijevan, Kemal brought about the prospect in the long term of Turkey threatening Armenia from the south (as well as the west)

Hellektor's claim is rubbish (like most of what Hellektor writes).

In the mid 1930s Iran ceded the eastern side of "little Ararat" to Turkey (in return, and to save face, it got from Turkey some insignificant villages further south). Turkey demanded that the territory be transferred because it needed to have the whole mountain under its control. Kurdish guerillas were able to easily move across the border at that location because Turkey and Iran were incapable of securing the border when it ran right up to the summit of the mountain. It was easier for Turkey to secure the border when it ran around the base of the mountain.

And, as I have said elsewhere, and regardless of the lies said in some Armenian propaganda, Turkey's border with Nakhchivan dates from the early 1920s, in the aftermath of the fall of the Armenian republic, and it arose because it followed the pre-existing border between the Russian empire and Persia (with anything south of the river that had been Russian territory becoming Turkish territory).

[lampron]

Re: And the Fraud Had a Name, Azerbaijan: the Real, the Fake and the Absurd

Hellektor's claim is rubbish (like most of what Hellektor writes).

In the mid 1930s Iran ceded the eastern side of "little Ararat" to Turkey (in return, and to save face, it got from Turkey some insignificant villages further south). Turkey demanded that the territory be transferred because it needed to have the whole mountain under its control. Kurdish guerillas were able to easily move across the border at that location because Turkey and Iran were incapable of securing the border when it ran right up to the summit of the mountain. It was easier for Turkey to secure the border when it ran around the base of the mountain.

And, as I have said elsewhere, and regardless of the lies said in some Armenian propaganda, Turkey's border with Nakhchivan dates from the early 1920s, in the aftermath of the fall of the Armenian republic, and it arose because it followed the pre-existing border between the Russian empire and Persia (with anything south of the river that had been Russian territory becoming Turkish territory).

Kars, Ardahan, Ararat, Igdir, Surmalu were not held by the ottomans when war broke out. They were seized during Kemals' attack on Armenia in 1920. Nakhichevan's 'status' is supposed to be 'guaranteed' by Turkey and Russia. If Turkey played a central role in the creation of the entity called 'Nakhichevan', why is it surprising that Turkey should have an interest in creating a border with it?

Hellektor's thesis is that Azerbaijan is an artificial country, with a name that has no relevance to the geographic area it occupies, and is using primary sources, many of them non-Armenian, to illustrate this point.