Azerbaijan Diary: A Rogue Reporter's Adventures in an Oil-Rich, War-Torn, Post-Soviet Republic

Thomas Goltz spent six years as a reporter in and around Azerbaijan, starting in 1991. He saw the collapse of the USSR and the start of the Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict, and filed many war-zone reports. The result is fascinating, though a little uneven in places: Goltz is a fine war reporter, but not the best historiographer in the world.

Despite the title, the book is not quite a diary, although there is a good detail of day-to-day detail about life in Azerbaijan (he spent most of his time in Baku). The book's two main foci are the political history of Azerbaijan during this period, and the conflict with Armenia. The political history is done very well -- Goltz introduces a large cast, keeps them fairly distinct, and through his personal acquaintance with almost all of them brings them to life. It's clear that Goltz acquired a good deal of affection for the Azerbaijanis, and he is enraged by the corruption and indifference of many of the Azerbaijan political class. When, in the end, the old Soviet-era fox Heydar Aliyev wins power and actually gets the Caspian oil (and concomitant money) to flow via deals with international oil companies, Goltz is grudgingly respectful -- Aliyev may be lying about his democratic credentials, but he did achieve some benefit to Azerbaijan, which is more than most of his predecessors did.

As I said, Goltz is fond of the Azerbaijanis, and this does come through in his reporting of the war, which as a result feels a little less even-handed. There's no doubt about the accuracy of his central complaint, often-repeated: that the Armenians, apparently with Russian help, were directly involved in the Karabakh conflict, despite all their claims that it was mere "volunteerism"; and that the media has generally been much kinder to the Armenians than they deserve. He is also scathing about the Azerbaijan military's incompetence and corruption; and he finds the time to make positive comments about Armenia, though he spent relatively little time there. Still, he is pro-Azeri, and it occasionally shows.

The blurb urges you to read this for the adventure if you're not interested in the politics or history, and there are certainly some scary moments as Goltz barely makes it out of some of the more dangerous places alive. But I can't recommend it for that alone. If you like politics and history, this is a great source on Azerbaijan in the 90's; it's not great writing but it's interesting and has details you won't find anywhere else.

Although many "reviewers" here might disagree with me, but this is a pretty neutral, fair, clear and well-explained story about Azerbaijan's Independece. As it is seen, many reviewers of Armenian origin feel hatred towards everything connected to fair judging of Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict. I would like to ask those reviwers to not mislead the content of the book. IT IS NOT ABOUT ARMENIAN GENOCIDE BY OTTOMANS. Proof your disagreemen by evidences...!!! Finish this disinformation. Let people at least see one fair book about Dagliq Qarabag in the West!!!

While I agree with most of the other reviews (I would take the one that trashs his book with a grain of salt as my guess is that he is an Armenian/NK national that is offended by this book which is very critical of Armenia) I also want to stress that this book should be read (and will be enjoyed) by anyone interested in foreign affairs.

It's true that this book is essential for anyone interested in the Caucasus (as an American working here it was a great introduction to the recent history), the book, in addition to being an interesting story, is also a fascinating look into the aftermath of the fall of the Soviet Union and the new role of Russia in the region, ethnic conflict, and how international news gets reported and covered. The book definitely opened my eyes and made me a lot more skeptical about everything I read in the paper. If NK is anything to go by, what happens and what gets reported are two extremely different things.

While it's probabably true that the book could have used a bit more editing (you can sort of sense that it is collected from news stories he wrote during the years), that's really only a minor problem. Don't let the size of the book daunt you, it's a relatively quick read.

I would also recommend that the next edition have a list of names! It was a little hard to keep track of all the names so a listing at the front of the book would have been helpful.

Finally, if you want more information on Azerbaijan an the conflict in N-K, check out the following website....

Gotlz was on the front line of a nasty little war that few in the West took much notice of. His time in Azerbaijan got him a front row seat to the crumbling edges of the Soviet empire. The author describes well how chaotic modern war can be. Since he was one of the few Americans in Azerbaijan at the time, since the oil boom had yet to begin, he stuck up relationships with many characters that go on to rule Azerbaijan. Ten years after the fact the combat writing holds up well, but the political chapters have not. The author does not seem to hide that he is pro-Azeri. You can sense his rage as he tries unsuccessfully to get anybody in the Western media to care about the war. A good editor could have chopped this book down by a third and made it a better read. Azeri's love the book, Armenians hate it, but what would you expect.

This book is an absolute myth; as in half-truth. It was written by a journalist who was paid off from organizations sponsoring anti-Armenian sentiment. ... The fact is during the last decades of the Soviet Union, Azerbaijani forces began massacring the Armenian minority in Azerbaijani SSR. Soviet troops entered the territories trying to end the bloody conflict. All hell broke loose and then Armenia and Azerbaijan were at war. Thousands of people were killed on both sides.

Azerbaijan now claims Armenians as being the aggressors in the decades-old conflict. Bull! Azerbaijanis started a mini-genocide against Armenians and when the Armenians defeated them, whilst liberating Armenian land thus forming the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic, they began ... campaigns trying to influence intolerance of Armenians. It hasn't worked.

Why didn't this book write about the massacre of Armenians prior to the war between the two former Soviet Republics? Why didn't it mention that Karabakh had always been Armenian land until Stalin forcefully seceded Karabakh from Armenian SSR and incorporated it to Azerbaijani SSR? Why didn't this book print pictures of centuries-old Armenian churches in Karabakh? Why didn't it present all the historical evidence pointing Karabakh as part of Armenia?

It doesn't make sense to me how a journalist can travel to a foreign country for a couple days and almost instantly become intelligent on a subject concerning two rival nationalities. ...