Azerbaijan in the late 1980s (4)

4.Reflection of the January tragedy of 1990 in some Soviet media

As soon as the Soviet press did not incline Baku and Baku After the bloody night of January 20, 1990, the Soviet press wrote different false information about Baku and Baku citizens; and only a few of the correspondents of the central publications provided separate objective episodes regarding the bloody events organized in the city by the Soviet army. We continue the cycle of conversations with the Azerbaijani historian, publicist Teymur Atayev about the events of 29 years ago.

- In our last conversation we said that the Moscow News newspaper (MN) published, albeit in an abbreviated form, the Conclusion of independent Soviet military experts (public organization "SHIT" (SHIELD) about the Baku slaughterhouse sanctioned by Mikhail Gorbachev in January 1990. However, it is generally known that this publication itself, when covering the topic of the Karabakh confrontation, was initially distinguished by a special bias towards Azerbaijan. What, in your opinion, are the reasons for giving space in the MN for the results of an independent investigation by the organization SHIT, which submitted the Conclusion to the USSR Chief Military Prosecutor's Office?

- In the period of perestroyka (restructuring) of the MN declared by M. Gorbachev (ed. Egor Yakovlev), they were positioned as one of the most important horns of the so-called "Liberal-democratic" direction in the Russian (or rather Moscow) society. Therefore, the editorial decision to publish the document by "SHIT" (SHIELD) (a) is not justified by the sudden pro-Azerbaijani sentiments, but rather, the anti-army format of the Expert Opinion, which suddenly appeared in the bowels of the publication.

But, regardless of the driving forces that prompted the editor-in-chief to publish such serious material against the official Soviet propaganda in covering the events around January 20, one cannot but admit that Moscow News was one of the rarest Soviet publications that objectively reflected certain moments of those days, with rather hot tracks (albeit in the minimum number of articles). Although taking into account the previous position of the newspaper, this is a kind of paradox. Shortly before Bloody January only "Komsomolskaya Pravda" in a number of reports provided readers with true pictures of what was happening in the region, the on January 28, 1990 the Moscow News published some material that highlighted some important points.

- Can you identify any nuances from that article?

- Elementary, already at the beginning the special correspondent of the newspaper, Vladimir Shevelev reveals that another explosion of the situation in the region occurred "after the Supreme Council of the Armenian SSR adopted two resolutions - on the accession of Nagorno-Karabakh to Armenia and on the inclusion of an economic and social development plan NKAO. These decisions of Yerevan have caused in Baku "a storm of indignation: they again dispose our land."

Acknowledging the presence of anti-Armenian manifestations in Baku, the correspondent records the presence of Azerbaijani refugees from Armenia in the city: "Nearly two hundred thousand people left their native places in less than a year." "These days," V. Shevelev specifies, "many activists of the Popular Front of Azerbaijan (PFA) showed themselves worthily. Members of the PFA sheltered people from bandits, took care of the wounded when there was no other way out, helped them leave the republic." The journalist emphasizes that "he met the picketers of the PFA with tricolor bandages on the streets", who "were determined to help the unfortunate." In any case, he noted, by January 20, "according to official reports and according to my personal observations, atrocities began to decline" (Moscow News, No. 4, January 28, 1990).

- The famous article by Russian director Stanislav Govorukhin "Rehearsal" was also published in the "Moscow News".

- It is true. Admitting the fact of anti-Armenian manifestations in Baku at the beginning and middle of the second decade of January 1990, S. Govorukhin does not consider the aspect of Azerbaijani refugees from Armenia. But he focuses attention on the fact that "the Soviet army entered the Soviet city as an army of invaders: under cover of night, on tanks and armored vehicles, clearing the way for itself with fire and sword." "I returned from Baku completely crushed, stunned by what I saw," the director shares with the reader, "immediately sat down at the table: these terrible impressions could not be left in myself." Here S. Govorukhin fixes the presence of "balconies shot through by bursts of houses with bullets pockmarked"; because "many died in their apartments, on the balconies of houses."

At the same time, an outstanding Russian intellectual puts all the dots on, revealing that "there would be fewer victims if people were not convinced that the army, their army, would not shoot at its citizens." If the troops entered the city not to protect the city, then why, S. Govorukhin asks? According to him, "two million residents of Baku understood it this way: tanks entered the city to punish people demanding sovereignty. And to punish roughly, so that other republics would not teach."

In my memory, in those days tragic for Azerbaijanis, the article by S. Govorukhin (Moscow News, No. 7, February 18, 1990) was the only such report about the January tragedy.

- Of course, S. Govorukhin"s position deserves respect.

- In my opinion, this position was justified by his civil courage. Indeed, at that stage, the central authorities actually imposed a taboo on objective coverage of the anti-Azerbaijani punitive operation by the Soviet army. I remember how Alexander Tikhomirov, a political observer at Central Television, the author of the weekly program "Seven Days," disappeared overnight from the television screen. I cannot say for what reason exactly this happened, but the fact remains: in his report on the bloody events in Azerbaijan, he recorded the presence of deaths in Baku (from shots of soldiers of the Soviet army) among women and children. That program was broadcast on January 28, 1990. So, Govorukhin showed civic courage by stating his thoughts in "Rehearsal". May he rest in peace.

- Returning to the beginning of today's conversation, we can probably say that, in the context of the above materials, the publication of fragments from the independent investigation of SHIT organization on the events related to the tragedy of January 20, 1990, directly to the Ministry of Education will not seem surprising.

- This document was published in the Ministry of Defense in the issue of August 12, 1990. Honor and praise to the members of the Commission of independent military experts (Captain 1st Rank Reserve Evstigneyev A.A., Captain 2nd Rank Reserve Melkov G. M., Lieutenant Colonel Murasov B.V.) who arrived in Baku at the invitation of the Investigation Commission of the Supreme Soviet of the Azerbaijan SSR and conducted their own investigation.

- What are the accents from the expert Opinion would you highlight?

- The document, for example, emphasized that the power unit of the Azerbaijani television and radio center "was put out of action" not "by the leaders of the Popular Front", but "blown up by a special group of the Soviet Army or the KGB of the USSR."

Also in the Conclusion it was recorded that "the deployment of troops to Baku began on January 20 at 00 o'clock", but "for the first time the population learned about the state of emergency in Baku from the commandant of the city "via" radio and from leaflets, which were dropped from helicopters only at 5:30 in the morning of January 20, when the city was occupied by troops and blood was shed. "

At the same time, the "personnel" of the military units of the Soviet army that entered the city were "inspired": they enter Baku to protect "the Russians, who are brutally exterminated by the local population; houses, roofs, apartments are packed with machine gunners. "

At the same time, "the experts came to the conclusion: in the first hours of January 20, there was no intensive machine-gun fire to kill and no sniper fire from the houses of the village [around the Salyan barracks]. The fire opened from the village houses on January 21-24 with blank cartridges by a special group. This imitation was necessary for the command to create the appearance of a long fighting opposition to extremists, to justify numerous civilian casualties."

The members of the independent Commission recorded the facts of executions of "people on the ground, point-blank, with particular cruelty", etc. According to their conclusions, "the armed forces of the USSR were used in Baku not for protection against external aggression, but against their own people. This punitive operation is a pre-organized slaughter of innocent people, committed with the use of means of warfare prohibited by international law."

We agree that we can only express respect for the members of this group of experts who were not afraid to raise the voice of truth and to a certain extent contribute to breaking the information blockade around Azerbaijan.

- Thank you for the interesting conversation and acquaintance the readers with very important facts on the tragedy of January 20.

- Thank you.