Emre Serbest

Total 2 Posts
Vice President of Turkish Anti-Defamation Alliance


– An Article by Emre Serbest, Vice President of Turkish Anti-Defamation Alliance (TADA)

(*) Article Editor: Emre Yucel, Director of Public Relations at TADA

September 30, 2023

On Tuesday, September 19, 2023, The New York Times (NYT) featured a full-page paid advertisement that merits serious scrutiny. This advertisement, funded by an entity known as “The Armenia Project,” which possesses an obscure address in Armenia, contained content that was not only misleading but also deceptive, particularly in relation to the ongoing Karabakh Conflict. Furthermore, it is imperative to underscore that the contents of this advertisement align closely with a previous opinion piece [1] authored by Nicholas Kristof and published in The New York Times on September 2, 2023. Kristof’s piece drew widespread criticism for its discernible bias and dissemination of misleading information.

In essence, the advertisement implored President Joe Biden of the United States to intervene in what it purported as an impending “genocide” against 120,000 Armenian residents of Karabakh. In a striking parallel to Nicholas Kristof’s approach, the advertisers of this ad invoked the following statements made by Luis Moreno Ocampo, an Argentinian lawyer who held the position of the first prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC) from 2003 to 2012[2], as substantiation for their allegations of genocide: “[T]here are no crematories, and there are no machete attacks. Starvation is the invisible genocide weapon. The blockade of the ethnic Armenians of Nagorno-Karabakh represents the archetype of genocide through the imposition of conditions of life designed to bring about a group’s destruction.”

Pic. 1: Full page paid advertisement published by NYT on Tuesday, September 19, 2023

Since the above quoted remarks of Mr. Ocampo lacked context for average American reader to understand the essence of the issue, the publishers of the ad elaborated further: “[T]he blockade of the Lachin Corridor by Azerbaijani security forces impeding access to any food, medical supplies, and other essentials, and preventing free movement of 120,000 people, began in December 2022.”

 Finally, at the bottom of the ad, the publishers spit out the horse bean they have been keeping under their tongues all along: “Will the US allow another Armenian Genocide?”

 The contents of the aforementioned New York Times advertisement are a web of intricate falsehoods and deception, artfully constructed across multiple strata. Much akin to the widely recognized fallacy and defamatory lie of “Armenian genocide”, a term that has endured as one of the most extensively perpetuated untruths in history, this advertisement too treads a treacherous path of misinformation.

Furthermore, it is crucial to recognize that the advertisement ventures into the realm of defamation by leveling false accusations against the Azerbaijani Government, insinuating their involvement in an alleged attempted or ongoing genocide conspiracy. Such reckless allegations carry significant legal and ethical ramifications, and caution should be exercised when evaluating such claims. Readers are advised to scrutinize the veracity of the content and consider the potential legal consequences of perpetuating baseless accusations.

Newspapers and private entities, notwithstanding their protection under the umbrella of free speech, remain obligated to abide by the overarching principles of the rule of law. They are prohibited from disseminating hatred, defamation, falsehoods, or racist, unsubstantiated allegations against a sovereign state, a nation, or any ethnic group. Engagement in such unlawful and unethical practices poses an imminent threat to the dignitaries of the nation and the ethnic and racial communities represented by the targeted nation.

Consequently, it is imperative for any newspaper or private entity, regardless of their underlying motives, to acknowledge that they may incur legal expenses in the event of a breach of law. Unconstitutional actions, even if deferred rather than expedited, carry grave consequences for those responsible [Note footnote # [1]].

It is now appropriate to unveil and elucidate the veracity of the matter at hand.

First, let us start with the unfortunate remarks of former ICC prosecutor, Mr. Ocampo. If Mr. Ocampo was so sure about the existence of a genocidal starvation policy designed and implemented by the Azerbaijani Government, why did he not file a criminal complaint with the ICC Prosecutor’s Office? Such a filing need not come from the Armenian Government. Any competent person can file this criminal complaint with the ICC and have their case heard [3].

Likewise, this inquiry extends to the publishers responsible for disseminating the aforementioned advertisement. The question arises: Why have they not pursued recourse through the International Criminal Court (ICC) by lodging a formal criminal complaint, given their apparent financial capacity as evidenced by their substantial investment in a full-page New York Times (NYT) article? It is noteworthy that such advertisements typically command a considerable price tag, often surpassing several hundred thousand dollars in the contemporary media landscape. Consequently, it stands to reason that these advertisers possess the means to engage in legal representation competent in handling a criminal complaint at ICC.

Moreover, it is crucial to underscore that the expenditure associated with initiating a criminal complaint at the ICC would represent a mere fraction of the financial commitment allocated to the aforementioned NYT advertisement. Prudent and responsible engagement with legal avenues should be considered, particularly when allegations of such gravity are at play.

To help accusers understand legal ramifications of lies and defamation committed by their biased and untrue statements; here is a brief explanation: Their conspicuous absence from pursuing a criminal complaint at the International Criminal Court (ICC) may stem from the unmistakable reality that, in the event of such a filing, the onus of substantiating their allegations would firmly shift to the shoulders of the accusers.

It is imperative to underscore that, within the context of a legally constituted and duly authorized international court, the Azerbaijani Government would maintain its sacrosanct presumption of innocence. This presumption would remain unassailable until such time these allegations are conclusively established beyond reasonable doubt, pursuant to rigorous evidentiary standards and a fair and impartial adjudication process. The gravity of these implications should not be underestimated, and those contemplating such actions should be acutely aware of the legal ramifications they may incur.

The pivotal inquiry to be posed at this juncture is whether or not the accusers are capable of substantiating their genocide allegations —an inquiry which, upon a comprehensive examination of the aforementioned advertisement and Mr. Kristof’s opinion piece, ought to be resolved with the utmost clarity.

If Azerbaijan, as purported, has indeed engaged in a systematic campaign aimed at the extermination of 120,000 Armenians through starvation, spanning the duration of approximately ten months commencing in December of 2022, one would logically anticipate that these 120,000 individuals would now predominantly have met their demise. Consequently, an on-site investigation within the Karabakh Region should readily reveal the presence of mass graves of proportions comparable to several Olympic stadiums. Furthermore, in the “unlikely event” that any Armenians have survived within Karabakh, the highly capable prosecutors of the International Criminal Court (ICC) should be equipped to identify them within overburdened medical facilities, where they would be in dire need of medical attention.

It stands to reason that, at that juncture, ICC prosecutors should encounter minimal obstacles in garnering irrefutable evidentiary testimonies from these emaciated Armenians, thereby cementing their claims within the annals of official record. The apparent simplicity of this process underscores the gravity of the accusers’ obligations and the profound legal implications of their allegations.

However, the underlying issue is that none of the accusers’ claims can be substantiated by factual evidence because they are nothing but mere fabrications. There exist no mass graves of Olympic stadium proportions containing the remains of Armenians who allegedly perished from starvation in Karabakh. Likewise, Karabakh’s hospitals are not inundated with severely malnourished Armenians seeking medical care.

This fact is self-evident from the public statements [4] of David Babayan, former Minister of Foreign Affairs and Presidential Advisor of the self-proclaimed Armenian government in Nagorno-Karabakh, stating the following: “[…] Our people do not want to live as part of Azerbaijan. 99.9% prefer to leave our historic lands […]”. From this statement, we understand that the 120,000 Armenians in Karabakh are alive and well, but they just would rather leave Karabakh of their own accord, then live under Azerbaijani rule.

Hence, it is evident that these “genocide” assertions have been meticulously concocted to mislead the unsuspecting American public. Such falsifications, when subjected to scrutiny within the International Criminal Court (ICC), would undoubtedly be met with outright dismissal due to a glaring absence of credible evidence, potentially further resulting in derisive responses within the courtroom. The gravity of advancing uncorroborated claims should not be underestimated, as it may ultimately expose the accusers to legal repercussions.

Since the Armenians know that the law is obviously not on their side, due to lack of evidence, they resort to what they know best: Propaganda, in the form of ads and social media shares.

Their conduct mirrors disturbingly reminiscent patterns observed in the dissemination of false allegations and defamation, akin to the baseless and racially biased propaganda campaigns waged against Turks during World War I. These deplorable falsehoods were propagated by individuals such as Bryce, Morgenthau, and the Government of Lloyd George, who demonstrated an alarming lack of restraint in advancing racially biased defamatory narratives driven by their own prejudiced ideologies.

It is vital to acknowledge that such ideologies ultimately contributed to the economic decline of England and the unfortunate losses sustained by both Armenians and Greeks who, influenced by imperialist falsehoods, found themselves on the wrong side of history. It is crucial to remember that history does not inherently repeat itself; rather, it is the perpetuation of ignorance and the repetition of grievous errors that lead to the same catastrophic outcomes, resulting in the forfeiture of everything held dear.

Then, just what is truth about the so-called “blockade” at the Lachin Corridor?

Providing some historical context here, would enhance the reader’s comprehension of the matter at hand.

Recent declarations by the Presidents of Russia, Iran, Turkey, and Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan affirm that, in accordance with international law, the region referred to as “Nagorno-Karabakh” falls under Azerbaijani sovereignty.

Nonetheless, Armenia perpetrated an illegal invasion of this region during the years 1988 to 1994, marking the inception of the First Nagorno-Karabakh War. During this period, Azerbaijani civilians found themselves severely outgunned, rendering them incapable of mounting a substantial defense. Exploiting this vulnerability, the Armenian military and militant Armenian paramilitary groups affiliated with the Armenian Revolutionary Federation (ARF), colloquially known as the “Dashnak Party,” orchestrated a campaign characterized by ethnic cleansing and the systematic eradication of Azerbaijani Muslim inhabitants in Karabakh.

The harrowing apex of this brutality manifested in the Khojaly Massacre [5], a horrifying event perpetrated by Armenian forces in collusion with the Russian 366th Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) regiment. This massacre unfolded on February 26, 1992, within the town of Khojaly and stands as the most extensive single act of mass killing committed by the Armenian forces in collusion with the Russian 366th (CIS) throughout the entire Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. It resulted in the confirmed deaths of hundreds of Azerbaijani Turks, with thousands more unaccounted for—a grim testament to the scale of the atrocities inflicted upon Azerbaijani civilians, by the hands of radical Armenians.

It is imperative to reiterate and underscore that the abhorrent transgression against humanity in Khojaly was perpetrated by Armenian forces in connivance with the Russian 366th Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS), an act so grievous in its nature that the malevolent intent to orchestrate mass murder against the Turkish populace therein can only be viewed with the utmost condemnation and unforgiving scrutiny.

Subsequent to the instances of ethnic cleansing and extermination referenced herein, Armenians purportedly established a separatist entity within Karabakh, denominated as “Artsakh”, with apparent aspirations of eventual annexation of it to the Armenian mainland. It should be noted that Azerbaijan steadfastly resisted relinquishing control over this territory, particularly in light of the fact that “Artsakh”, as this secessionist entity was designated, remained devoid of official recognition by any nation across the global spectrum, including Armenia itself!

Establishment of “Artsakh” by terrorist Armenian assailants and their supporters is against the International Context. International legal context clearly provides a rule to allow for peaceful and legal existence of nations under the following rule: The establishment and recognition of states are governed by international law, particularly under the Montevideo Convention on the Rights and Duties of States of 1933, which outlines the criteria for statehood. Additionally, the principle of territorial integrity, enshrined in the United Nations Charter, reinforces Azerbaijan’s claim to Karabakh. The lack of international recognition for “Artsakh” underscores its status as a self-declared entity with no legal standing.

After 30 years of wasted negotiations [6] with the OSCE’s Minsk Group, tensions inevitably rose again. This led to the Second Karabakh War, which ended with Azerbaijan’s decisive victory. Following the capture of Shusha, the second-largest city in Nagorno-Karabakh, a ceasefire agreement [7] was signed on November 10, 2020, ending all hostilities in the area. At least for the time being.

Pursuant to this ceasefire accord, Azerbaijan reclaimed control over a substantial portion of the Karabakh Region. This arrangement saw the deployment of approximately 2,000 Russian peacekeeping forces within the area, and Armenians committed to a phased handover of specific adjacent districts, notably Kalbajar and Lachin, with completion scheduled for December 2020. An integral component of this agreement entailed the withdrawal of Armenian military forces and affiliated militant Armenian paramilitary elements.

Furthermore, the accord stipulated the establishment of a humanitarian passage, commonly referred to as the “Lachin Corridor,” by which Armenians desiring to depart from the Karabakh Region could do so under safe and humanitarian conditions. This arrangement was established to facilitate the movement of civilians and alleviate potential humanitarian concerns arising from the conflict.

Contrary to the terms of the agreement, Armenians persistently failed to uphold their commitments, thus exhibiting a pattern of disregard for the negotiated terms. Significantly, they reneged on their obligation to withdraw armed paramilitary units from the region. Moreover, these armed Armenian paramilitaries engaged in covert activities aimed at clandestinely introducing small and heavy weaponry and munitions into the area, often concealing these illicit supplies within humanitarian aid convoys. Their actions appeared to be motivated by the aspiration to regain territorial control at a later juncture. Recent remarks of Hikmet Hajiyev [8], an Azerbaijani public figure who serves as the Foreign Policy Advisor to the President of Azerbaijan, reveals the horrific extents of weapons of munitions amassed by armed Armenian combatants in Karabakh. Same statements led to an extensive article by Anatolian News agency [9] regarding the massive arms cache recently confiscated by the Azerbaijani Army in Karabakh. [Note: footnote[2]]

It should be noted that the self-proclaimed entity called “Artsakh”, though largely inactive in practice, was not officially dissolved, purportedly to facilitate the continued receipt of foreign aid, particularly from the United States and EU. This ostensible entity, “Artsakh”, also persisted in unlawful mining operations within the Karabakh region [10] for decades. These activities amounted to the illicit appropriation of Azerbaijan’s valuable natural resources, constituting an extended history of theft and exploitation.

Surely, Azerbaijan could not allow armed Armenian paramilitaries – essentially seasoned regional terrorists– to keep sneaking in arms and munitions into Karabakh territory and violate its national security. So, they established a military checkpoint outside the Lachin corridor. The so-called “blockade” Armenians scream about is, in fact, this military checkpoint [11].

There is no real blockade there, that blocks the passage of food and other humanitarian/medical aid materials or humans, which is why Armenians have not been starving by any stretch of imagination. Aid trucks were being released into the Karabakh territory after a thorough search for weapons, which somewhat delayed food deliveries.  Mr. Kristof’s assertion of “extensively long bread lines” wherein a few Armenian individuals have reportedly fainted, as highlighted in his notably biased article, could potentially be attributed to these delays. It is worth noting the considerable incredulity surrounding the accusation that such occurrences within “extensively long bread lines” can substantiate a claim of “attempted or ongoing genocide through starvation.”

Furthermore, it should be noted that an alternative truck route existed for quite some time, which circumvents the Lachin Corridor and facilitates the transportation of food and humanitarian aid materials to Karabakh and the city of Khankendi (also: Hankendi or commonly referred to as “Stepanakert”). It is pertinent to emphasize that Khankendi is a city characterized by a significant Armenian population. This alternative route traverses the Agdam District within the Karabakh Region [12]. So, Lachin Corridor is not the only route for the supply trucks.


It is imperative to underscore here that in response to the unfounded allegations of “genocide” propagated by the Armenian Diaspora within the United States, Azerbaijani authorities, motivated by growing unease, initiated a substantial humanitarian effort involving the dispatch of numerous food aid trucks to the Armenian population in Karabakh. Regrettably, these humanitarian convoys encountered repeated impediments in the form of security checkpoints, which were under the jurisdiction of Russian and Armenian military authorities [13]. Why? Presumably, the influx of substantial quantities of humanitarian assistance originating from Azerbaijan into the areas of Karabakh under Armenian administration would not serve to bolster the allegations of genocide, would it?

On the other hand, according to the ceasefire accord of 2020, signed between Azerbaijan and Armenia after the 2nd Karabakh war in 2020, Armenia agreed to open a humanitarian corridor through the Zangezur Region, commonly known as the “Zangezur Corridor” in return for Azerbaijan opening the Lachin Corridor. This corridor would also effectively connect Turkiye, Azerbaijan and the rest of the Turkic States in Asia. However, 3 years after the signing of the agreement, Armenia still has not opened the Zangezur Corridor. Is it not a hypocrisy and double standard that those folks who demand the opening of Lachin Corridor completely disregard the failed attempts of Turkiye and Azerbaijan to get the Zangezur Corridor opened up? Same folks are the ones who blatantly ignore the fact that military personnel, heavy weapons (such as tanks, artillery, and missiles) and munitions were sent from Armenia to Karabakh in the past, using the Lachin Corridor.

Undoubtedly, all these false genocide rhetoric and tensions caused by the continuing presence of the armed separatist Armenian forces in Karabakh were bound to cause more trouble. Built-up tensions finally led to a recent Azerbaijani “anti-terror operation”. Fortunately, the operation ended in just one day, on Wednesday, September 20, 2023, with Azerbaijan’s decisive victory.

As a result, separatist Armenian forces agreed to surrender, along with all their weapons and equipment. The knock-off state called “Artsakh” agreed to abolish itself and disband its military forces though a “presidential decree”[14]. Azerbaijan quickly took over the control of the last remaining enclaves of Karabakh that were still under Armenian control and commenced negotiations with an Armenian delegation to ensure the peaceful reintegration of Karabakh Armenians into Azerbaijan[15]. Azerbaijan’s President Ilham Aliyev has repeatedly said in the past that Karabakh residents (of Armenian origin) would “enjoy the same rights as other citizens of Azerbaijan”[16] and Armenian Prime Minister Pashinyan confirmed just yesterday that Karabakh Armenians were facing “no direct threat”[17], let alone genocide!

In summary, it is essential to convey that the world can be assured that no Armenian individuals are enduring genocidal conditions marked by starvation, as asserted by certain Armenian propaganda entities, notably the Armenian National Committee of America (referred to as “ANCA”). Such circumstances are not presently existent and are not anticipated in the foreseeable future. Consequently, it becomes abundantly evident that any assertion of genocide originating from these disreputable Armenian organizations, characterized by a hostile agenda, amounts to nothing but “meticulously devised propaganda”. This conclusion stands as discernible as the stark contrast between day and night.

However, all that false genocide rhetoric and propaganda engineered by Armenian Diaspora organizations in the US (such as ANCA and its affiliates) created such a climax of insecurity among the Karabakh Armenians that they began to leave Karabakh en masse. ABC reported on September 30, 2023, that over 100,000 Armenians have now fled Karabakh[18]. This is a terrific example of what kind of misery hatemonger organizations (such as ANCA and affiliates) can cause through their black propaganda. Now that it is clear that no “genocide” is going on in Karabakh, the same organizations are now shamelessly accusing Azerbaijan with “ethnically cleansing” Karabakh!

Now, one aspect that I find incredibly perplexing is the manner in which The New York Times (NYT) became embroiled in this defamatory campaign orchestrated by Armenian Diaspora organizations, and what underlying motivations precipitated their involvement? Is The New York Times (NYT) perhaps echoing a comparable pattern of promoting hatred and disseminating falsehoods, akin to the conduct exhibited by numerous American and British news agencies during World War I in their wartime propaganda efforts? Does this signify a recurrence of historical trends, or does it reflect a pervasive trend of mindless repetition and unexamined journalistic practices, characterized by a lack of due diligence in upholding standards of journalistic integrity?

Through their customary theatrical maneuvers, it is evident that Armenians are actively seeking to discredit the legitimacy of the State of Azerbaijan through unfounded accusations of genocide and ethnic cleansing. Additionally, they wield considerable financial resources, enabling them to exert influence through a significant number of advocates within the U.S. Congress. However, it remains unclear what motivates The New York Times (NYT) in its stance towards Azerbaijan. Is its position rooted solely in financial considerations, or does it harbor an intrinsic bias and antipathy towards the Turkish population, akin to that which Armenians exhibit?

Does NYT not have any editors to check the contents of full-page politically motivated ads or that of the highly biased pro-Armenian opinion pieces such as Mr. Kristof’s?

Well, thanks to the art and science of philosophy though, we have “philosophical razors” – principles or rules of thumb essentially – allowing us to eliminate or “shave off” unlikely explanations for a phenomenon to avoid unnecessary actions.

One of these philosophical razors, called Hanlon’s Razor[19], states that “we should never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by incompetence.” Hence, I am inclined to adopt the presumption that the editors of The New York Times (NYT) are afflicted by a significant deficiency in the execution of their professional responsibilities, in order to refrain from attributing their actions to malice.

Another philosophical razor, called Hitchen’s Razor[20], states: “[T]hat which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.” Since NYT and the Armenians who paid them with their advertising dollars have no evidence to prove their genocide allegations, I could just dismiss their allegations without evidence, with prejudice. However, I have provided the historical context and the basis of my arguments above. I am just being gracious today.

Finally, the “Sagan Standard” of philosophical argumentation states that: “Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence”. In the case of Armenians’ self-propagated “genocide-by-starvation” claims, we have seen none of it.

As for the remarkably distasteful quoted remarks of Mr. Ocampo, the former prosecutor of ICC… Where is the due process for his genocide allegations? Moreover, what has become of the fundamental principle of the “presumption of innocence until proven guilty”? How do these baseless accusations, lacking evidentiary substantiation, align with his career within the realm of legal practice?

In sum, regardless of the angles from which I assess The New York Times (NYT) with respect to principles derived from philosophy and the law, a consistent verdict emerges in my assessment: Their conduct lacks integrity! If there were even a modicum of honor present, NYT would refrain from compromising journalistic integrity in exchange for financial gains.


[1] Contemporary newspapers in the United States and the broader Western world grapple with a significant decline in readership and subscription rates, primarily attributed to concerns regarding their fidelity to journalistic integrity and truthfulness. This erosion of trust in the media was notably exemplified during the period of the Iraq invasion, wherein flagrant breaches of journalistic ethics and the validation of dubious news sources became apparent. Egregious instances came to light, including the exposure of a prominent reporter who maintained a facade of reporting from the Iraqi front while actually remaining in New York City. Similarly, an anchorman at a renowned news organization faced severe repercussions for falsely claiming to have witnessed damage to a military helicopter, despite being nowhere near the incident in question. Regrettably, certain media institutions omitted reporting on grave atrocities such as rape, mass murder, and profound suffering endured by Muslim populations during the Iraq invasion, seemingly drawing from a historical precedent set a century prior. During World War I, American news agencies, operating under the stringent censorship of entities like Westinghouse Publishing, were complicit in propagating falsehoods and defamation against nations including Germany, Austria, and notably, Turkey. This dissemination of biased information was perpetuated by individuals with racist inclinations, including figures such as Bryce and Lloyd George. Presently, the reprehensible consequences of the actions of these prejudiced individuals are widely acknowledged. However, the imperialistic dominance they once wielded has since waned.

[2] The contemporary actions undertaken by Armenians bear disconcerting resemblances to a historical continuum, commencing in the latter half of the 18th century within the context of the Ottoman Empire, particularly following the Empire’s loss of Cyprus to England. The inception of these events was marked by the exacerbation of tensions, catalyzed in part by Armenian terrorist activities against the Ottoman Empire. These activities encompassed the clandestine introduction and concealment of arms and munitions within Ottoman territories, with the explicit aim of fomenting insurrection and perpetrating acts of violence.

This historical narrative includes significant incidents such as the assault on the Ottoman Bank in Pera, the Sasun and Zeytun uprisings, and the Van massacre. The latter event bore witness to the horrific murder and mutilation of defenseless Muslim Ottoman citizens, including Turks and Kurds, at the hands of Armenian insurgents. These weaponry and munitions were often sourced from clandestine operatives of the Russian Empire, and at times, from the French and British Empires operating surreptitiously within the region.

The cumulative consequences of these historical actions were profoundly detrimental, resulting in widespread destruction of property and the loss of hundreds of thousands of lives. Present-day manifestations of Armenian engagement in similar acts, characterized by terrorism and illegal activities, appear to echo past behaviors. This continuity reflects a persistence of ignorance and arrogance, accompanied by misguided aspirations of territorial acquisition from sovereign nations.

It is imperative to emphasize that any nation endorsing or supporting such illegal activities may find its own sovereignty called into question, as it would be perceived as complicit in actions contrary to international law and norms. Similar to contemporary circumstances, the New York Times and other private newspapers of the era were notably remiss in disseminating an accurate account of the massacres and mutilations endured by Muslim Turks within the region. These media outlets invariably adhered to the influence of Westinghouse, a British propaganda apparatus notorious for its dissemination of falsehoods and defamation, not only targeting the Ottoman Empire but also casting aspersions upon Germany and Austria. The fabrications proffered by this propaganda machine reached levels of incredulity, often culminating in self-contradictory claims.

Indeed, Professor Dr. Justin McCarthy meticulously documented the deleterious effects of this pernicious racist propaganda campaign in his seminal work, “Turks in America.” McCarthy’s scholarship offers a cogent and elucidating exposition of the illicit proliferation of falsehoods and defamation orchestrated by this propaganda apparatus, thereby laying bare the magnitude of its impact.


[1] “Another Ethnic Cleansing Could Be Underway — and We’re Not Paying Attention”, Opinion piece by Nicholas Kristof, New York Times, Sep.2, 2023.Link: < https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/02/opinion/armenia-azerbaijan-nagorno-karabakh.html >

[2] Link: < https://carrcenter.hks.harvard.edu/people/luis-gabriel-moreno-ocampo >

[3] “How to file a communication to the ICC-Prosecutor”, Link:< https://coalitionfortheicc.org/how-file-communication-icc-prosecutor >, “[…] Pursuant to Article 15 of the Rome Statute, any individual, group, or organization can send information on alleged or potential ICC crimes to the Office of the Prosecutor (OTP) of the ICC […]”

[4] “Ethnic Armenians will leave Nagorno-Karabakh, adviser to their leader says”, Reuters, September 24, 2023, Link: < https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/ethnic-armenians-will-leave-nagorno-karabakh-adviser-their-leader-2023-09-24/#:~:text=%22Our%20people%20do%20not%20want,move%20down%20the%20Lachin%20corridor. >

[5] Link to an article on Khojaly Massacre: < https://azerbaijan.az/en/related-information/278 >

[6] “The Minsk Group is Meaningless”, Foreign Policy, Link: < https://foreignpolicy.com/2021/07/23/armenia-azerbaijan-nagorno-karabakh-osce-minsk-group-meaningless/ >

[7] “2020 Nagorno-Karabakh Ceasefire Agreement”, Link: < https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_Nagorno-Karabakh_ceasefire_agreement >

[8] Statements of Hikmet Hajiyev: < https://twitter.com/HikmetHajiyev/status/1705598650355732901>

[9] AA Article regarding the arms and munitions confiscated by the Azerbaijani Army in Karabakh, Link: <https://www.aa.com.tr/tr/dunya/karabagda-son-3-gunde-el-konulan-silah-ve-muhimmatin-listesi-aciklandi/2999478>

[10] “Protests by Azerbaijani environmental activists on Lachin road reach 100 days”, Link:

< https://www.aa.com.tr/en/environment/protests-by-azerbaijani-environmental-activists-on-lachin-road-reach-100-days/2851563 >

[11] “Azerbaijan Establishes Border Checkpoint Along Lachin Road”, Link:

< https://jamestown.org/program/azerbaijan-establishes-border-checkpoint-along-lachin-road/ >



[13] “Azerbaijani aid for Karabakh Armenians stuck at Russian checkpoint”, Link:


[14] “Nagorno-Karabakh Republic will cease to exist from Jan 1 2024 – Nagorno-Karabakh authorities”, Reuters, September 28, 2023, Link: < https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/nagorno-karabakh-republic-will-cease-exist-jan-1-2024-nagorno-karabakh-2023-09-28/>

[15] “Azerbaijan Halts ‘Anti-Terrorist Operation’ as Karabakh Vows to Disarm”, Link:

<https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2023/09/20/azerbaijan-halts-anti-terrorist-operation-as-karabakh-vows-to-disarm-a82526 >

[16] “Nagorno-Karabakh: Conflict between Azerbaijan and Armenians explained”, Link:


[17] “[…] No direct threat to Karabakh Armenians”, Link:


[18] “Over 100,000 Armenians have now fled disputed enclave Nagorno-Karabakh”, ABC Article, September 30, 2023, Link: < https://abcnews.go.com/International/93000-armenians-now-fled-disputed-enclave-nagorno-karabakh/story?id=103596275#:~:text=Interest%20Successfully%20Added-,Over%20100%2C000%20Armenians%20have%20now%20fled%20disputed%20enclave%20Nagorno%2DKarabakh,of%20120%2C000%20has%20now%20left.&text=At%20least%2090%2C000%20people%20in,Armenia%2C%20according%20to%20local%20authorities. >

[19] “Hanlon’s Razor”, Link: < http://catb.org/~esr/jargon/html/H/Hanlons-Razor.html>

[20] Ratcliffe, Susan, ed. (2016). Oxford Essential Quotations: Facts (4 ed.). Oxford University Press. ISBN: 9780191826719. “What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence.”