Armenian history distorted in Ukraine

PanARMENIAN.Net - A book entitled "Post-Soviet Conflicts and Wars" (authors: V. Yu. Bogdanovich, A. Ya. Manachnisky and others) was published in Kiev in 2008. The authors really took up serious work - they engaged themselves in conflict study. In the section devoted to Karabakh conflict they just invented stuff and nonsense.



In particular, they wrote the following, "History tells us that in 1813 Karabakh was annexed to Russia as part of the Azeri- ruled Karabakh khanate (khan: Ibrahim Khalil). According to the 'Description of Karabakh Province' (1823), Armenians made up a quarter of the province's population (Acting State Councilor Mogilevskij and Colonel Yermolov, Tiflis, 1866). As to the present-day Armenian majority, they are immigrants from Persia who settled here after the successive Russian-Persian war. Karabakh Khanate has always been an Azerbaijani governed territory. It was Persia's vassalage till 1805; later it passed under Russia's rule. Armenians resettled in Karabakh from Iran after Russian-Persian war. Other Armenian immigrants came here after the treaties of Gulistan (1813) and Turkmanchai (1828) were signed," writes David Davtyan, expert in ANALITIKA.at.ua centre.



"Touching upon true historical records, let's first of all note that Artsakh (Karabakh) was for many centuries a province of the Armenian kingdom. In the period of the re-establishment of Bagratuni's royal house, the princedom of Khachen was established here. At that time, Artsakh formed part of the Armenian statehood. Armenian chronicles identify Artsakh with Khachen princedom because the major part of the land was situated in Khachen. As a result, the princedom was divided into upper and lower Khachens, ruled by Dopyanov and Hasan-Djalalov respectively. Established in XIII-century Persian and Arab Chronicles, the given historical fact is beyond any doubt. There are also available records about the existence of political and economic ties between Khachen and Cilician Armenia. Despite numerous Turkish invasions and wars, Karabakh maintained its semi-independent status. In 1603, Persian king Shah-Abbas I conferred the title of Meliks upon Armenian lords, thus asserting Persian rulers' sovereign rights on the land. Nadir-Shah, another Persian ruler (1736-1747, conferred the title of Sultan upon Melik Israel (Djarber) and the title of Khan - upon Melik Avan (Dizak). After the death of Nadir-Shah, one of the leaders of Caucasian Tatar tribes (or Caucasian muslims), Panakh declared himself the Khan of Karabakh, receiving Persian King Adil Shakh's approval. To be fair, let's note that Panakh Ali took control over the Meliks of Khamsa. In 1785, Panakh's son - Ibrahim Khalil (Ibrahim Khan). who had created a rather strong semi-independent state, invited 3 Meliks and had them arrested. But that didn't much affect Armenian Melik's sovereign rights. Later, in 1799, five Armenian Meliks recognized the sovereignty of Russian Empire. Furthermore, the Meliks' sovereign status was recognized by European states. Now, a couple of words about Ibrahim Khalil, the Khan of Karabakh, who was forcibly subordinated to Russia in 1805. The Khan was not an Azeri ruler, as some Azerbaijani's and other ignorant circles claim. De jure, he was the Persian Shah's official representative. It is noteworthy to mention here that Azeris, as separate ethnic group, did not exist before the establishment of Soviet rule," the article says.



As regards the number of Armenians in Karabakh province, it should noted that the authors of the falsified best-seller did not take pains to explain to reader that Armenians in the mountainous part of Karabakh province (present-day Nagorno Karabakh) constituted a majority (30.850 people or 84,6 % of the population) while the Muslims, i.e. Kurds and Tatars (currently known as Azeris) were a minority (5.370 people or 14.7% of total population).



The authors proceed with their false statements, saying, "Gathering in Kremlin in 1920, Armenian commissars applied to Stalin with a request to deprive Azerbaijan not only of Karabakh but also Nakhichevan and Geycha Zangezour (Geicha being the Azeri name for Sevan). They managed to seize only Geycha-Zangezour." Thus, as we see that the falsifiers did really turn everything upside down. Such misinterpretation of history is just blasphemy; it's a moral crime. The most awful thing about all this is that the book has been published in many copies, and is available to public at large.