Aghdam events ‘eyewitness’ Azerbaijani photographer confuses evidence and can’t show any photo of ‘atrocities’
On the 23rd anniversary of the events in Aghdam, site Panarmenian.net turned to the memories and ‘evidence’ of the “National Geographic” photographer of Azerbaijani origin - Reza Deghati who is notorious for a series of contradicting statements made regarding the above-mentioned events. The site states that the photograph demonstrates bias claiming that in January 1990 he arrived in Baku where ‘Armenians were killing Azerbaijanis.’ This is how he described a week-long massacre of Armenians in Baku.
Besides, the photograph claims that “then Azerbaijani ambassador of UNESCO to Paris Elnura Huseynova” met him in Baku. What happens is that Azerbaijan was a member of the USSR (note that he got his visa in Moscow) in 1990 and did not have a representative in UNESCO. Azerbaijan set on an autonomous cooperation with that organization on 3 June, 1992, that is 2 years after the mentioned arrival in Baku. Moreover, the name of the Azerbaijani ambassador to UNESCO was not Elnura, but Eleonora.
Further, he tells about his arrival in Azerbaijan on 28-29 February, 1992 on the occasion of the events in Aghdam. Citation, “So… With that team I arrived in Aghdam, where people, who had managed to save themselves from the atrocities of the Armenians in Khojalu, gathered. At that time the Red Cross Community negotiated with the Armenians to return the dead bodies. I took some photos when we exchanged captives on Aghdam – Khojalu border. At that time one of the Armenian soldiers showed me a teaspoon taking it out of his pocket. I asked why he needed that. The soldier declared that they used it to gouge out the captives’ eyes.”
It is very important to note that he is not only a journalist, but he is a photographer, that is, a person who carries with him all the necessary equipment to capture the historical events on the spot. And here again inconsistencies come out in his story. First, the Armenian side itself transferred the corpses of the ‘people from Khojalu’ to Azerbaijan without preconditions 2 days later. And this is not the Red Cross Community’s merit; the reason was commonplace and simple: it was impossible to keep them in a country undergoing famine because of blockade.
Second, the sources and archives titled “Azerbaijan” from Deghati’s exhibitions, including his website and other propaganda resources, have been studied. Everywhere a few photos taken in Aghdam are featured as ‘khojalu’ photo-evidence that depict living, healthy people, without any trace of atrocities and tortures. Several sobbing women, an old woman at the mosque in Aghdam, mourning over a man’s body in the mosque, and that is all. It is quite strange that a professional photographer, witnessing ‘atrocities and horrors,’ did not take any photo of the victims of ‘khojalu’ and of ‘the executioner with a silver spoon.’
Further, Deghati organized an exhibition “Parole de liberté,” demonstrating the ‘horrors of khojalu’ at Paris metro station Luxemburg in 2010. However, there was only one photo related to the events in Aghdam on the stand. The rest depicted Afghanistan, Africa, Sarajevo. Yet the inscription emblazoned in the centre reads, “Azerbaijan. Aghdam. April, 1992” while he claimed that he had been in Aghdam and Khojalu in February, rather than in April.
And at last, in 2015 the title “Photos from the Khojalu genocide” appeared in the Azerbaijani press. 15 of the published 21 photos demonstrated scenes depicting living crying people what is natural for wartime, including men in transport - apparently refugees from Khojalu. 3 photos of graves, it is unknown who are those people, but judging by the headstone it is a man at whose age one is supposed to fight – a far cry from being a civilian and a ‘genocide victim.’ And 3 more photos depicting corpses. Those corpses belong to adult and mature men who can never be ranked as civilians. Remarkably, one of them is in a striped vest which is given to the military people.
Be as it may, it is strange that a photographer should claim having ‘seen’ something without showing a single photo of that. He does not remember people he met, their names, and confuses the events of 1990 and 1992.