Political Analysis and Informational Provision Department head at the Azerbaijani Presidential Administration Elnur Aslanov.
2009 is coming to its logical end. When analyzing the year remaining in the memory with the global financial turmoil, it becomes apparent that everything around us is changing with catastrophic speed.
Not having time to get used to e-mail and blogging culture, we have been creating new space and correspond with each other through social networks. 4G replaces 3G, innovations transform our perception of reality day by day, television channels transforms to 3D, mobile phones became simple tube that no longer satisfy us. The Internet has become such an integral part of our lives that sometimes it is impossible to imagine yourself outside of the virtual space. All this affects the modernization of consciousness, emergence of new behavioral norms and attitudes in our way of life and relations with the outside world. We have become easier to communicate with each other in the virtual world, but we lose a sense of closeness to the real world.
However, it changes not only the attitude toward themselves and each other. As expected, it changes the attitude in general to a system of international relations. The relations between the subjects of international law, states, transnational corporations and other organizations acquire a different hue. It is clear that international relations in general have never shone high moral definitions and clearly has never been a lesser degree of priority quotes by Lord Palmerston (about friends and interests). But today they have become even more cynical and self-seeking.
All this naturally affects the behavior of an individual who receives information from the media. Today the mass media determine its own agenda anticipating the policy of the powerful. Thus, strangely enough, but at a time when humanity is facing one of the most peaceful periods of coexistence, since the number of wars and conflicts on the planet is much less than 50 or 100 years ago, it is the media escalates new confrontation and conflict.
If we say that the media is a system of transmission and analysis of information, but today there is a reasonable question - To whose interests this or other information serves? Independent, unbiased and objective information has now become the same rarity as the vegetation in the Sahara. It is difficult to meet the international news agency, the percentage of news which, basically, would consist of unbiased information on the processes in a particular region or country. In this position the one hand is more subjective, it is most true, that meets the interests of lobby groups and reflects the interest of various political power centers.
I recall the insistence of no more than a year ago had to seek publication of the article on the Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict at Radio Liberty in response to a number of articles of representatives of Armenia. Nearly a week after the publication of article reflecting Azerbaijan's fair position the site has posted an article of the so-called "NKR Representative in the United States" without a similar reduction, which in turn was subjected to my article. Radio Liberty was not interested in publication of response article of the Azerbaijani side.
Naturally, we can not forget the Machiavellian principle determining that the basis of the universe is to use all possible means to achieve goals, and the mass media in the 21st century is the most significant weapon in this matter.
Thus, today it is the media that become the mouthpiece of increased conflict, unresolved global issues, the escalation of violence, etc. The mass media broadcasts the ideas that excite the public and sow enmity. Every day we are confronted with how some news channels broadcast the one-sided information, while neglecting the position of the other side. Bogus representations of various issues are organized under the brand of democracy. The rights and freedoms, protection of mass media in general has become a business for a number of international NGOs, government and organizations that receive huge funds for various projects and initiatives. Fortunately you can always find a problem, but if it does not, so think of.
The more powerful and independent nation, the harder the dispute with him are. If the country prefers to put national interests above the interests of mercantile international officials tied to the political interests of certain centers of power in its foreign policy, then you can always find a reason to accuse and denigrate it. Above all, you need to have the willingness and the right to the media.
The 21st century became dependent on press, which increasingly resembles the Cold War, when we shared the curtain. What divides us today? Nothing. But does anything change? Nothing.
The media's dependence on outside interests and the total lack of objectivity is increasingly becoming a determining factor in the century, where information plays a priority role. The movie that Euronews broadcasted few days ago is example for it. The movie was devoted to the issue of the Armenian-Azerbaijani Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. I will not touch the issue that it is Armenian occupied the Azerbaijani territory, although the movie appears in a completely different light. I will not address the question that the movie lacked the Azerbaijani position and that the authoritative channel such as Euronews is obliged to adhere to the parity in informing. What is confusing is that all this is happening on the backdrop of the president's negotiations, the OSCE Minsk Group's statements, active participation of the heads of major powers and possibility to change something, to break the deadlock in the region for security and stability
Accordingly, the question arises - Whose interests do not satisfy the peace in the South Caucasus? Who does not want to bring justice and peace between Azerbaijan and Armenia? Who needs to see the tears of mothers losing their sons on both sides of the front?
A week earlier, the Armenian Diaspora in the U.S. has collected more than $ 15 million donation to restore the Shusha city and after a few days Euronews showed a plot about the Karabakh. I do not think there is a need to question how the diaspora spends the collected money or what earns Euronews, but the information supplied by such an authoritative channel must differ with strict objectivity, or at least a minimal statement of facts. I do not rule out that the journalist, preparing material the channel's leadership, allowing such broadcasts?
Today it is obvious that Armenia, which is too heavy is going through domestic political and economic situation, seeks to preserve the status quo in the region. Peace in the region does not meet its interests. The presence of war, even in conditions of the armistice - is always a very large finance, which can be "to lower" not only on weaponry, but also ensuring the political future of the regime. The Armenian leadership understands this and acts contrary to the interests of the Armenian society, which expects peace and stability in the region for their own welfare.
Unfortunately, this truth is difficult to understand and heads of media resources such as Euronews, which put their mercantile interests above the possible positive transformations in the South Caucasus. It is clear that for a number of the Western media, particularly for Euronews, still tenacious spirit of ideas "Arthashastra", which reads: "If your neighbor is loyal and calm, try to attack and harass him, even if there are no serious reasons for this. If, on the contrary, it is a source of aggression and violent behavior, try to calm the sweet persuasion."