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

Thomas Goltz claims that he has something most journalists don't: guts. Guts, Goltz insists, is something journalists lack when it comes to presenting controversial facts, often leading to the intentional obfuscation and disinformation that is then widely parroted by readers and politicians alike. Unfortunately, after reading Mr. Goltz's book, it becomes painfully obvious that this journalist is perhaps the worst individual to be dictating the morals and ethics that other journalists should be abiding by.

Goltz prides himself as being one of the most objective journalists to report on the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict (1988-1994) that raged on in the South Caucasus between the Armenian populated region Nagorno-Karabakh and its 70 year long tormentor, Azerbaijan, following the collapse of the Soviet Union. And at first glance, it indeed is evident that Goltz likes to bash the Azerbaijani side for corruption, selfishness, and a lack of patriotism during the war years, in an admittedly well-written narrative prose.

Goltz's main mission, though not explicitly stated in the book, is to "break" the myth that the Armenians were the victims of the Nagorno-Karbakah war. Presenting a relatively sanitized version of the events, Goltz shows the Armenians as a haughty, disingenuous, advantage-taking group of people, backed by a monolithic diaspora dispersed throughout the globe, that is intent on retaking territory that once belonged to it, at the expense of the poor, beleaguered nation of Azerbaijan. Thus, in interactions with them, the Armenians are presented with damaging adjectives and adverbs that are strewn around the text: an Armenian says something with a disingenuous and evil "smirk", with the guilty pleasure on the announcement of a coup in Baku, with apprehension when supposedly confronted with the "truth" in public. Gone are any mention of the brutal Armenian massacres by the Azerbaijanis in Baku and Sumgait and unsourced Armenian brutality towards Azerbaijanis is overemphasized. In reality, Goltz assembles his own frivolous strawmen and then proceeds to knock them down, from everything to supposedly adequate hospitals in Armenia (at a time when Armenia was perhaps in even worse condition than Azerbaijan) to supposed media manipulation in the United States. Not once does the reader ever encounter an Armenian whom Goltz is sympathetic to, his biases lying squarely with the Azerbaijan camp.

Goltz is correct in respect to journalist having guts. But for a journalist who is known as "Tommy the Turk" for his own pro-Turkish proclivities, Goltz clearly demonstrates that the same ethics that he enjoys to lecture other journalists on is not even respected by him. Taking a side in a debate is often inevitable when journalists enter a warzone and it becomes very difficult at times parting fact from fiction. Goltz may pretend that he is an objective journalist but to the careful observer that he is simply attempting to put a more humane face to Azerbaijan and, in the process, sacrificing his own credibility as an individual who is duty-bound to uphold the truth.

It is interesting to see that negative reviews are either from Armenians or Russians (their allies in the war) or anonymous customers, presumably Armenians as well. Well, I am happy and proud to say that I am an Azeri. I could but won't (is this the right place really?) bring as many documented examples of the genocide of Azeris by Armenians (so Hojaly nevere happenned, or it happened but was actually executed by Azeris themselves, or the bodies were actually of Armenians killed by Azeris...?). I suppose each is entitled to their 'objective' opinion on the book and the conflict, but the attemps to rewrite history (including, co-incidentally and rather amuzingly, prior history of the Azeri nation) are not made by the author of this book - they are made by these reviewers who forget one simple fact: that 20% of Azerbaijan's territory is still occupied by Armenia (not the other way around!), including territories other than Nagorny Karabah (which is where my mother and many generations of her predecessors are from), and that over 1 million of Azeris were made refugees from their historic homeland. They use this review board as a platform to launch hateful and degrading remarks about Azerbaijan and the Azeri people, clearly revealing little more than their own blinding and blindingly obvious bias in the matter. Whoever is on their side is right and telling the full truth - the rest are liars, spies, etc

Reading this book while visiting a friend in Azerbaijan, I could not put it down. The incredible history of this small country and the current issues both told in a very entertaining narrative that can't be found anywhere else.

This is one of the rare historic books reflecting the Armenia-Azerbaijan conflict from both sides. It is reach in historic and political facts, and also reflects the author's own eyewitness of the war.

Also in this book, Mr. Goltz makes it clear in the book his unfriendly relations with Azerbaijani government, and criticizes the structure of the gorevnment, and it's adiministration which lead to series of strategic mistakes.

Thomas Goltz's book on Azerbaijan is unique, for many reasons. First, he was among the few western journalists to be and actually live in the Caucasus when hell broke loose in the conflicts of the region. Secondly, He speaks the language, bringing him across cultural barriers that even Russian-speakers encounter though they seldom know they do in the non-Russian partso the former USSR. Third, Goltz has a smell for the events of the country and understands the backdoor politics.

In the final analysis, no serious book on Azerbaijan has been written since Goltz published Azerbaijan Diary. This is sad, since his book mainly covers the transition from communism over the brief popular front period into the Aliyev era - and a lot has happened since.

Historians may come around to write books on this period. But no book is likely to be published on this era that physically makes you feel you were there both, when the Popular Front took over power in parliament; or when rockets came crushing down on Azeri positions in Karabakh.