21stcenturywire--2020-12-04--Danish Peer Reviewed Study: ‘Masks Only Provide a Small Degree of Protection’

A highly credible and in-depth peer reviewed study on the efficacy of masks was rejected by the leading UK and US medical journals – because findings went against the government and media narrative .
The Danish ‘ randomised control trial ’ study into the protective effects of facemasks caused the predictable furore when it was published this week .
Comparing a sample of 3000 people who were wearing masks and 3000 people who were not , 42 of the mask-wearers became infected with Covid-19 and 53 of the non-mask-wearers : a small , non-statistically-significant difference .
The self-appointed Defenders of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mode .
Oxford ’ s Trish Greenhalgh said it was not necessarily “ high quality science ” and made some technical objections to the study ; science-activists like Vincent Rajkumar , Editor-in-Chief of the Blood Cancer Journal , announced : “ Ignore the Danish study .
Masks work .
Wear a mask… Speaking as someone who has led 10 RCTs and knows when to ignore one ” ; a former CDC director lambasted the study in the same journal that published it .
To make it worse , there were rumours that the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rejected by medical journals on political grounds .
But in a sign of how rash this debate has become , none of the critics seems to have taken the time to talk to the study ’ s authors .
We spoke to the lead investigator , Professor Henning Bundgaard of the University of Copenhagen , and found him to be the most inoffensive , on-message , pro-mask advocate you could find .
It turns out that the scientist they were attacking was one of their own .
His view , it turns out @ @ @ @ @ @ @ protective effect is small , masks should be worn diligently wherever recommended .
The main benefit of masks is the ‘ source control ’ effect , where other people are protected from you , which the study does not cover .
The usefulness of the result is that it shows that you can not be complacent even if wearing a mask — it must be seen as one tool among many , including social distancing , hand hygiene etc .
There was no conspiracy to censor his results : even though the study @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Medicine , JAMA and The Lancet , he does not believe it was for political reasons , more likely simply that it was a neutral conclusion .
He fully stands by his results and maintains that the study was carried out as scientifically as it is possible to do .
“ I think the message should be that wearing a mask , in the correct way of course , would to some extent — not a large extent but some extent — protect you .
But it ’ s your contribution to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ care of each other .
All of us would hate the idea that I had a dangerous disease now I passed it on to you because I was not wearing a mask .
So we have good reasons to recommend masks , I guess.
” Not exactly someone worthy of the heavy-handed cancellation treatment .
Watch : SUPPORT OUR WORK BY SUBSCRIBING & BECOMING A MEMBER @ 21WIRE.TV

By
A highly credible and in-depth peer reviewed study on the efficacy of masks was rejected by the leading UK and US medical journals – because findings went against the government and media narrative.
UnHerd reports….
The Danish ‘randomised control trial’ study into the protective effects of facemasks caused the predictable furore when it was published this week. Comparing a sample of 3000 people who were wearing masks and 3000 people who were not, 42 of the mask-wearers became infected with Covid-19 and 53 of the non-mask-wearers: a small, non-statistically-significant difference.
The self-appointed Defenders of Science were quick to move into attack mode. Oxford’s Trish Greenhalgh said it was not necessarily “high quality science” and made some technical objections to the study; science-activists like Vincent Rajkumar, Editor-in-Chief of the Blood Cancer Journal, announced:
“Ignore the Danish study. Masks work. Wear a mask… Speaking as someone who has led 10 RCTs and knows when to ignore one”; a former CDC director lambasted the study in the same journal that published it.
To make it worse, there were rumours that the study had been squashed or censored, rejected by medical journals on political grounds.
But in a sign of how rash this debate has become, none of the critics seems to have taken the time to talk to the study’s authors. We spoke to the lead investigator, Professor Henning Bundgaard of the University of Copenhagen, and found him to be the most inoffensive, on-message, pro-mask advocate you could find. It turns out that the scientist they were attacking was one of their own. His view, it turns out, is that:
Even though the protective effect is small, masks should be worn diligently wherever recommended.
The main benefit of masks is the ‘source control’ effect, where other people are protected from you, which the study does not cover.
The usefulness of the result is that it shows that you cannot be complacent even if wearing a mask — it must be seen as one tool among many, including social distancing, hand hygiene etc.
There was no conspiracy to censor his results: even though the study was rejected from the New England Journal of Medicine, JAMA and The Lancet, he does not believe it was for political reasons, more likely simply that it was a neutral conclusion.
He fully stands by his results and maintains that the study was carried out as scientifically as it is possible to do.
“I think the message should be that wearing a mask, in the correct way of course, would to some extent — not a large extent but some extent — protect you. But it’s your contribution to protect others, that we should take care of each other. All of us would hate the idea that I had a dangerous disease now I passed it on to you because I was not wearing a mask. So we have good reasons to recommend masks, I guess.”
Not exactly someone worthy of the heavy-handed cancellation treatment. Watch:
READ MORE CORONAVIRUS NEWS AT: 21st Century Wire Coronavirus Files
SUPPORT OUR WORK BY SUBSCRIBING & BECOMING A MEMBER @21WIRE.TV


21stcenturywire--2020-12-03--Trump Campaign to Officially Challenge Nevada Election Results

As of this week , the Trump campaign is still pursuing legal challenges in Pennsylvania , Michigan , Georgia , Wisconsin , and Arizona .
But the clock is running , as America approaches the upcoming deadline for the Electoral College on December 14th .
As of this morning , you can add another name to that list : Nevada .
Since the November election , Democrats and the media have kept up a constant , mantra-like refrain that there is “ no evidence of widespread election fraud.
” Even specific allegations of fraud , irregularities , and the flouting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ states have been waved away by reporters and pundits as “ baseless ” and “ without evidence ” —even in cases where witnesses to alleged crimes have signed sworn affidavits .
But it might not be so easy to dismiss the allegations and evidence Trump campaign lawyers will present to a district court judge in Nevada on Thursday afternoon .
Campaign lawyers have been working overtime in Nevada in recent weeks , scrambling to subpoena witnesses , collect evidence , and catalog their findings , which they say proves widespread election fraud—not hundreds @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hundred thousand , enough to overturn Joe Biden ’ s 33,000-vote margin of victory in the state .
“ The evidence we are about to submit to the court proves that massive voter fraud permeated the Nevada presidential election and shows that the certification of Joe Biden as the winner of the presidential election should be immediately reversed and for President Trump to be awarded his electors , ” said Jesse Binnall , a lawyer heading the campaign effort in Nevada .
The state lawsuit Binnall and his team have filed is separate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Nevada Republicans , who earlier this month alleged that thousands of people who no longer live in Nevada cast ballots in the November election .
The Trump team believes they have solid evidence of voter fraud and election fraud which will be sufficient to change 2020 Nevada results .
However , thus far , no judges on a state or federal level have sided with Republicans in their court challenges .
SUPPORT OUR WORK BY SUBSCRIBING & BECOMING A MEMBER @ 21WIRE.TV

By
As of this week, the Trump campaign is still pursuing legal challenges in Pennsylvania, Michigan, Georgia, Wisconsin, and Arizona. But the clock is running, as America approaches the upcoming deadline for the Electoral College on December 14th.
As of this morning, you can add another name to that list: Nevada.
John Daniel Davidson from The Federalist reports…
Since the November election, Democrats and the media have kept up a constant, mantra-like refrain that there is “no evidence of widespread election fraud.” Even specific allegations of fraud, irregularities, and the flouting of state election laws in key battleground states have been waved away by reporters and pundits as “baseless” and “without evidence”—even in cases where witnesses to alleged crimes have signed sworn affidavits.
But it might not be so easy to dismiss the allegations and evidence Trump campaign lawyers will present to a district court judge in Nevada on Thursday afternoon.
Campaign lawyers have been working overtime in Nevada in recent weeks, scrambling to subpoena witnesses, collect evidence, and catalog their findings, which they say proves widespread election fraud—not hundreds of illegal votes but more than a hundred thousand, enough to overturn Joe Biden’s 33,000-vote margin of victory in the state.
“The evidence we are about to submit to the court proves that massive voter fraud permeated the Nevada presidential election and shows that the certification of Joe Biden as the winner of the presidential election should be immediately reversed and for President Trump to be awarded his electors,” said Jesse Binnall, a lawyer heading the campaign effort in Nevada.
The state lawsuit Binnall and his team have filed is separate from a suit dropped last week by Nevada Republicans, who earlier this month alleged that thousands of people who no longer live in Nevada cast ballots in the November election.
The Trump team believes they have solid evidence of voter fraud and election fraud which will be sufficient to change 2020 Nevada results. However, thus far, no judges on a state or federal level have sided with Republicans in their court challenges.
Fox News’ Jeff Paul reports:
Visit 2020 Election Edge LIVE Blog Here
READ MORE 2020 ELECTION NEWS AT: 21st Century Wire 2020 Files
SUPPORT OUR WORK BY SUBSCRIBING & BECOMING A MEMBER @21WIRE.TV


21stcenturywire--2020-12-03--AstraZeneca Under Scrutiny Again as Countries Spend Billions on Questionable Vaccine

Another AstraZeneca vaccine trial participant alleges serious injury , but the vaccine is still a favorite with the Gates Foundation and developing countries .
AstraZeneca ’ s COVID vaccine faced new controversy this week after a trial participant in India alleged that the vaccine caused him serious “ neurological and psychological ” symptoms .
The accusation was the latest in a series of complaints or concerns surrounding Covishield , the AstraZeneca vaccine being developed in partnership with Oxford University .
Yet despite concerns about safety and trial design , countries are already spending billions of dollars in taxpayer funds to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ part because , compared with frontrunners Moderna and Pfizer , AstraZeneca ’ s vaccine is easier to store and faster to distribute .
The latest news also hasn ’ t changed plans by the Global Alliance for Vaccine Initiative ( GAVI ) , a public-private partnership founded by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation , to distribute the AstraZeneca COVID vaccine globally , once it ’ s approved .
On Nov. 21 , a 40-year-old participant in AstraZeneca ’ s clinical trial , who lives in India , sent a legal notice to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the vaccine caused him to develop acute neuro encephalopathy .
In the notice , the participant said he “ must be compensated , in the least , for all the sufferings that he and his family have undergone and are likely to undergo in the future.
” The Serum Institute , which has a deal with AstraZeneca to manufacture a billion doses of the vaccine , maintains that the participant ’ s medical complications are unrelated to the vaccine trial .
A spokesperson for the Institute said the trial participant is “ falsely @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on the COVID vaccine trial ” and that “ it is evident that the intention behind the spreading of such malicious information is an oblique pecuniary motive.
” A statement released by the Institute claimed that they are “ sympathetic with the volunteers medical condition ” but also that they claim to take legal action against the injured participant for maligning the company ’ s reputation , seeking damages in excess of $ 13 million .
On Tuesday , Indian Health Secretary Rajesh Bhushan said that the adverse event “ will not affect @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Bioethicists and scientists are questioning the ethics of the Serum Institute , which has received at least $ 18.6 million from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation .
“ This is the first time I have ever heard of a sponsor threatening a trial participant , ” said Dr. Amar Jesani , editor of the Indian Journal of Medical Ethics .
Dr. John Jacob , virologist and former professor at Christian Medical College , agreed the actions of the institute were uncalled for .
He told the Times of India , “ The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ day after the adverse event was reported .
And within a week it could have been investigated .
That would have instilled confidence and trust in the minds of people .
Stonewalling , refusing to answer , waiting for a lawsuit to bring things out , it speaks volumes about the lack of professionalism.
” This wasn ’ t the first time a trial participant has complained that the AstraZeneca vaccine caused a neurological injury .
In July , a trial volunteer developed symptoms of transverse myelitis , a rare debilitating neurological disorder @ @ @ @ @ @ @ global trials were temporarily paused after another participant in the UK developed symptoms also consistent with transverse myelitis .
In October , a participant in Brazil died , though in that case , AstraZeneca suggested that the person was part of the control group and thus hadn ’ t received the COVID-19 vaccine .
The Brazil trial wasn ’ t paused .
Covishield trials are currently taking place in the UK , South Africa , Brazil and Japan .
As reported by The Defender in November , according to the company ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ dose of AstraZeneca ’ s vaccine during Phase I/II trials in the UK to cause more than 50 % of participants to experience adverse events .
If the AstraZeneca vaccine , once approved , does produce harmful side effects and adverse reactions in the U.S. , the company won ’ t be held accountable .
In March 2020 , the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services issued a COVID-19-specific declaration under the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act , providing liability immunity “ against any claim of loss caused by , arising @ @ @ @ @ @ @ resulting from the manufacture , distribution , administration , or use of medical countermeasures , ” including COVID-19 vaccines .
The European Union and Australia have also followed suit , indemnifying vaccine manufacturers from liability .
In addition to reports of vaccine-related injuries , there have been other problems with AstraZeneca ’ s trials .
For example , trial administrators gave the control group in the UK Pfizer ’ s Nimenrix , a meningitis vaccine .
A saline solution is the gold standard placebo because researchers can be sure it won ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s meningitis vaccine as a placebo allows AstraZeneca to undercut any adverse reactions in its COVID vaccine group by showing the control group suffered adverse reactions as well .
“ The meningitis vaccine in the AstraZeneca trial is what I would call a ‘ fauxcebo , ’ a fake control whose real purpose is to disguise or hide injury in the vaccine group , ” said Mary Holland , general counsel at Children ’ s Health Defense .
“ The trial sponsor can say , ‘ look , the vaccine group is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ when in fact the trial proves that the control group was as dangerous as the vaccine group.
” In a tweet , Oxford University ’ s Oxford Vaccine Group explained the decision , stating that it only made sense to use Pfizer ’ s meningitis vaccine as a placebo because “ otherwise participants who have any reaction to the injection would be able to guess that they had received the ChAdOx1-nCoV-19 vaccine , ” indicating that adverse reactions are expected .
In November , AstraZeneca released data showing a 90 % efficacy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ were only 2,741 participants in the test group .
Dr. Saad Omer , director of the Yale Institute for Global Health , told CNN that the test group was “ relatively small ” and said “ it might not hold up when more people are given this regimen.
” After releasing the data , AstraZeneca acknowledged a “ mistake ” in the amount of vaccine given to some trial participants .
That news led the New York Times to report that the company had undercut its own credibility .
“ I think that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ whole development program , ” Geoffrey Porges , an analyst for the investment bank SVB Leerink , told the Times .
Dr. Natalie Dean , a biostatistician and expert in vaccine trial design at the University of Florida , wrote on Twitter that overall , Oxford and AstraZeneca get “ a poor grade for transparency and rigor when it comes to the vaccine trial results they have reported.
” Price , speed and connections to Gates Foundation key to big contracts At only a few dollars a dose , Covishield is often hailed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ faster to distribute compared with the vaccines developed by frontrunners Pfizer and Moderna .
As CNN reported , Covishield will “ be far easier to transport and distribute in developing countries than its rivals.
” When the Thomson Reuters Foundation asked several experts which COVID-19 vaccine could “ reach the poorest soonest , ” all three who answered declared a preference for the AstraZeneca candidate .
Oxford and AstraZeneca already have a plan to provide more than 1 billion doses of their vaccine , commonly referred to as the COVID-19 vaccine that will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the developing world .
Europe will receive 400 million doses of the vaccine while the U.S. and GAVI will receive 700 million doses , and India 1 billion doses .
The company ’ s plan relies heavily on its connections to the Gates Foundation .
Dr. Andrew Pollard , director of the Oxford Vaccine Group which is producing the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine , is tightly intertwined with the Gates Foundation .
His employer , the University of Oxford , has received $ 11 million for vaccine development research from the foundation over the past @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in grants over the past decade .
In 2016 , the Gates Foundation gave $ 36 million for research into vaccine development by a team of researchers which was headed by Pollard .
In addition , Pollard ’ s private laboratory is funded by the Gates Foundation .
Pollard is also chair of the UK Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation which advises the government policy on immunization and vaccines , and a member of the National Institute for Biological Standards and Control Scientific Advisory Committee , which advises the Medicines and Healthcare Products @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s ties to Oxford , AstraZeneca , the Gates Foundation and the U.K. government make plain what vaccine public-private partnerships mean in practice , ” Holland said .
*** This article was originally published by Children ’ s Health Defense .
SUPPORT OUR WORK BY SUBSCRIBING & BECOMING A MEMBER @ 21WIRE.TV

Another AstraZeneca vaccine trial participant alleges serious injury, but the vaccine is still a favorite with the Gates Foundation and developing countries.
By Jeremy Loffredo
AstraZeneca’s COVID vaccine faced new controversy this week after a trial participant in India alleged that the vaccine caused him serious “neurological and psychological” symptoms.
The accusation was the latest in a series of complaints or concerns surrounding Covishield, the AstraZeneca vaccine being developed in partnership with Oxford University.
Yet despite concerns about safety and trial design, countries are already spending billions of dollars in taxpayer funds to purchase AstraZeneca’s vaccine, in part because, compared with frontrunners Moderna and Pfizer, AstraZeneca’s vaccine is easier to store and faster to distribute.
The latest news also hasn’t changed plans by the Global Alliance for Vaccine Initiative (GAVI), a public-private partnership founded by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, to distribute the AstraZeneca COVID vaccine globally, once it’s approved.
Second participant reports neurological adverse effect
On Nov. 21, a 40-year-old participant in AstraZeneca’s clinical trial, who lives in India, sent a legal notice to the Serum Institute of India alleging that the vaccine caused him to develop acute neuro encephalopathy.
In the notice, the participant said he “must be compensated, in the least, for all the sufferings that he and his family have undergone and are likely to undergo in the future.”
The Serum Institute, which has a deal with AstraZeneca to manufacture a billion doses of the vaccine, maintains that the participant’s medical complications are unrelated to the vaccine trial.
A spokesperson for the Institute said the trial participant is “falsely laying the blame for his medical problems on the COVID vaccine trial” and that “it is evident that the intention behind the spreading of such malicious information is an oblique pecuniary motive.”
A statement released by the Institute claimed that they are “sympathetic with the volunteers medical condition” but also that they claim to take legal action against the injured participant for maligning the company’s reputation, seeking damages in excess of $13 million.
On Tuesday, Indian Health Secretary Rajesh Bhushan said that the adverse event “will not affect the timeline in any manner whatsoever.”
Bioethicists and scientists are questioning the ethics of the Serum Institute, which has received at least $18.6 million from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. “This is the first time I have ever heard of a sponsor threatening a trial participant,” said Dr. Amar Jesani, editor of the Indian Journal of Medical Ethics.
Dr. John Jacob, virologist and former professor at Christian Medical College, agreed the actions of the institute were uncalled for. He told the Times of India, “The trial should have been halted the next day after the adverse event was reported. And within a week it could have been investigated. That would have instilled confidence and trust in the minds of people. Stonewalling, refusing to answer, waiting for a lawsuit to bring things out, it speaks volumes about the lack of professionalism.”
This wasn’t the first time a trial participant has complained that the AstraZeneca vaccine caused a neurological injury. In July, a trial volunteer developed symptoms of transverse myelitis, a rare debilitating neurological disorder linked to vaccines.
In September, global trials were temporarily paused after another participant in the UK developed symptoms also consistent with transverse myelitis.
In October, a participant in Brazil died, though in that case, AstraZeneca suggested that the person was part of the control group and thus hadn’t received the COVID-19 vaccine. The Brazil trial wasn’t paused. Covishield trials are currently taking place in the UK, South Africa, Brazil and Japan.
As reported by The Defender in November, according to the company’s own data, it took only one dose of AstraZeneca’s vaccine during Phase I/II trials in the UK to cause more than 50% of participants to experience adverse events.
If the AstraZeneca vaccine, once approved, does produce harmful side effects and adverse reactions in the U.S., the company won’t be held accountable. In March 2020, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services issued a COVID-19-specific declaration under the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act, providing liability immunity “against any claim of loss caused by, arising out of, relating to, or resulting from the manufacture, distribution, administration, or use of medical countermeasures,” including COVID-19 vaccines.
The European Union and Australia have also followed suit, indemnifying vaccine manufacturers from liability.
Drugmaker’s trial design also at issue
In addition to reports of vaccine-related injuries, there have been other problems with AstraZeneca’s trials. For example, trial administrators gave the control group in the UK Pfizer’s Nimenrix, a meningitis vaccine.
A saline solution is the gold standard placebo because researchers can be sure it won’t cause any adverse reactions. Using Pfizer’s meningitis vaccine as a placebo allows AstraZeneca to undercut any adverse reactions in its COVID vaccine group by showing the control group suffered adverse reactions as well.
“The meningitis vaccine in the AstraZeneca trial is what I would call a ‘fauxcebo,’ a fake control whose real purpose is to disguise or hide injury in the vaccine group,” said Mary Holland, general counsel at Children’s Health Defense. “The trial sponsor can say, ‘look, the vaccine group is as safe as the control group,’ when in fact the trial proves that the control group was as dangerous as the vaccine group.”
In a tweet, Oxford University’s Oxford Vaccine Group explained the decision, stating that it only made sense to use Pfizer’s meningitis vaccine as a placebo because “otherwise participants who have any reaction to the injection would be able to guess that they had received the ChAdOx1-nCoV-19 vaccine,” indicating that adverse reactions are expected.
In November, AstraZeneca released data showing a 90% efficacy rate but citing the fact that there were only 2,741 participants in the test group. Dr. Saad Omer, director of the Yale Institute for Global Health, told CNN that the test group was “relatively small” and said “it might not hold up when more people are given this regimen.”
After releasing the data, AstraZeneca acknowledged a “mistake” in the amount of vaccine given to some trial participants. That news led the New York Times to report that the company had undercut its own credibility.
“I think that they have really damaged confidence in their whole development program,” Geoffrey Porges, an analyst for the investment bank SVB Leerink, told the Times.
Dr. Natalie Dean, a biostatistician and expert in vaccine trial design at the University of Florida, wrote on Twitter that overall, Oxford and AstraZeneca get “a poor grade for transparency and rigor when it comes to the vaccine trial results they have reported.”
Price, speed and connections to Gates Foundation key to big contracts
At only a few dollars a dose, Covishield is often hailed as cheaper, easier to store and faster to distribute compared with the vaccines developed by frontrunners Pfizer and Moderna. As CNN reported, Covishield will “be far easier to transport and distribute in developing countries than its rivals.”
When the Thomson Reuters Foundation asked several experts which COVID-19 vaccine could “reach the poorest soonest,” all three who answered declared a preference for the AstraZeneca candidate.
Oxford and AstraZeneca already have a plan to provide more than 1 billion doses of their vaccine, commonly referred to as the COVID-19 vaccine that will be able to meet the requirements of the developing world. Europe will receive 400 million doses of the vaccine while the U.S. and GAVI will receive 700 million doses, and India 1 billion doses. The company’s plan relies heavily on its connections to the Gates Foundation.
Dr. Andrew Pollard, director of the Oxford Vaccine Group which is producing the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine, is tightly intertwined with the Gates Foundation. His employer, the University of Oxford, has received $11 million for vaccine development research from the foundation over the past three years, and $208 million in grants over the past decade.
In 2016, the Gates Foundation gave $36 million for research into vaccine development by a team of researchers which was headed by Pollard. In addition, Pollard’s private laboratory is funded by the Gates Foundation.
Pollard is also chair of the UK Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation which advises the government policy on immunization and vaccines, and a member of the National Institute for Biological Standards and Control Scientific Advisory Committee, which advises the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency.
“Dr. Pollard’s ties to Oxford, AstraZeneca, the Gates Foundation and the U.K. government make plain what vaccine public-private partnerships mean in practice,” Holland said.
***
This article was originally published by Children’s Health Defense.
READ MORE COVID 19 NEWS AT: 21st Century Wire COVID-19 Files
SUPPORT OUR WORK BY SUBSCRIBING & BECOMING A MEMBER @21WIRE.TV


21stcenturywire--2020-12-03--Dr Michael Yeadon: ‘Strong Evidence’ of COVID Herd Immunity in the UK

Dr Mike Yeadon , a former chief scientific adviser for respiratory research with Pfizer , has claimed there is “ @ @ @ @ @ UK has developed some herd immunity against coronavirus .
Speaking with talkRADIO ’ s Julia @ @ @ @ @ said that herd immunity is evident by a number of proven facts including “ lack @ @ @ @ @ in metropolitan centres like London .
Yeadon said he would accept any vaccine provided it @ @ @ @ @ .
went through all proper safety and efficacy research , and also if it ‘ @ @ @ @ @ ’ both of which do not appear to be evident in this case .
“ @ @ @ @ @ day seven months ago .
I checked three days ago , it was nine – @ @ @ @ @ ” .
Yeadon also voiced concerns over the mass roll out of the newly approved @ @ @ @ @ because it was “ too early ” to know its the long term safety or @ @ @ @ @ OUR WORK BY SUBSCRIBING & BECOMING A MEMBER @ 21WIRE.TV

By
Dr Mike Yeadon, a former chief scientific adviser for respiratory research with Pfizer, has claimed there is “strong evidence” that the UK has developed some herd immunity against coronavirus.
Speaking with talkRADIO’s Julia Hartley-Brewer, the lockdown sceptic said that herd immunity is evident by a number of proven facts including “lack” of COVID deaths happening in metropolitan centres like London.
Yeadon said he would accept any vaccine provided it was well developed, eg. went through all proper safety and efficacy research, and also if it ‘fulfilled as health need,’ both of which do not appear to be evident in this case.
“It was about 200-250 a day seven months ago. I checked three days ago, it was nine – so about 90-95% lower”.
Yeadon also voiced concerns over the mass roll out of the newly approved Pfizer and BioNTech jab, because it was “too early” to know its the long term safety or effectiveness. Watch:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aRLnM8DsLLM
READ MORE COVID NEWS AT: 21st Century Wire COVID-19 Files
SUPPORT OUR WORK BY SUBSCRIBING & BECOMING A MEMBER @21WIRE.TV


21stcenturywire--2020-12-04--UKC News: Who Will Slow the Great Vaccine Juggernaut?

The UK Government-Media Complex has gone into overdrive this week , crowing about their alleged ‘ miracle ’ vaccine for @ @ @ @ @ sorts of categorical promises and assurances about the vaccine ’ s safety and effectiveness , @ @ @ @ @ Pharma has only been testing for a few months , how can they possibly make @ @ @ @ @ long-term safety of their vaccines ?
This is shaping up to the most important international @ @ @ @ @ history .
Will the people choose correctly ?
All this and more .
Co-hosts Brian @ @ @ @ @ the end of week news round-up .
Watch : SUPPORT OUR WORK BY SUBSCRIBING & @ @ @ @ @

By
The UK Government-Media Complex has gone into overdrive this week, crowing about their alleged ‘miracle’ vaccine for COVID-19, and making all sorts of categorical promises and assurances about the vaccine’s safety and effectiveness, and telling. If Big Pharma has only been testing for a few months, how can they possibly make such broad claims about the long-term safety of their vaccines? This is shaping up to the most important international public health issue in modern history. Will the people choose correctly? All this and more.
Co-hosts Brian Gerrish and Patrick Henningsen with the end of week news round-up. Watch:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6bfhAe8zVf0
READ MORE COVID 19 NEWS AT: 21st Century Wire COVID-19 Files
SUPPORT OUR WORK BY SUBSCRIBING & BECOMING A MEMBER @21WIRE.TV


21stcenturywire--2020-12-05--COVID: The ‘Experts’ Finally Admit They Were Wrong from the Beginning

After nine consecutive months of one failed policy after another , prominent scientists and medical professionals continue to point out how the Government ’ s COVID strategy has been wrong all along .
Available public data now proves this , along with copious evidence revealing how Government ’ s supposed ‘ gold standard ’ PCR test been systematically used on fraudulent basis in order to wildly inflated the numbers of alleged COVID “ cases ” and “ infections.
” Now that this is all public knowledge , why do their failures still persist ?
The result of politicians overtly trying @ @ @ @ @ @ @ leverage power ( see New York and California ) has had a devastating impact on health , the economy , families , society , education , and even on democracy itself – all of which has been caused by draconian measures by the state , and mass hysteria fomented by the mainstream media .
The failure of Government to rethink its suicidal course means that the damage has now become irreparable .
The legacy of their epic failures will last for decades , and yet , they ’ re all still determined to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ save face , and to preserve their prized ‘ careers ’ in power , along with their future board positions and lucrative shareholdings in the burgeoning transnational corporate biotech and pharmaceutical industrial complex .
Host Tucker Carlson calls out recently canonized Dr. Anthony Fauci and other ‘ public health ’ officials for misleading the public on every single policy since the COVID crisis was created – including the disastrous policy of school closures .
Watch : SUPPORT OUR WORK BY SUBSCRIBING & BECOMING A MEMBER @ 21WIRE.TV

By
After nine consecutive months of one failed policy after another, prominent scientists and medical professionals continue to point out how the Government’s COVID strategy has been wrong all along. Available public data now proves this, along with copious evidence revealing how Government’s supposed ‘gold standard’ PCR test been systematically used on fraudulent basis in order to wildly inflated the numbers of alleged COVID “cases” and “infections.” Now that this is all public knowledge, why do their failures still persist?
The result of politicians overtly trying to politicize the pandemic so as to leverage power (see New York and California) has had a devastating impact on health, the economy, families, society, education, and even on democracy itself – all of which has been caused by draconian measures by the state, and mass hysteria fomented by the mainstream media.
The failure of Government to rethink its suicidal course means that the damage has now become irreparable.
The legacy of their epic failures will last for decades, and yet, they’re all still determined to double-down, in a vain attempt to save face, and to preserve their prized ‘careers’ in power, along with their future board positions and lucrative shareholdings in the burgeoning transnational corporate biotech and pharmaceutical industrial complex.
Host Tucker Carlson calls out recently canonized Dr. Anthony Fauci and other ‘public health’ officials for misleading the public on every single policy since the COVID crisis was created – including the disastrous policy of school closures. Watch:
READ MORE COVID NEWS AT: 21st Century Wire COVID Files
SUPPORT OUR WORK BY SUBSCRIBING & BECOMING A MEMBER @21WIRE.TV


21stcenturywire--2020-12-05--Nagorno-Karabakh: The Aftermath of the Attack on Artsakh

Now that Turkey has become a presidential one-party state ruled by Recep Tayyip Erdoğan ( aka the Prez ) , like in Ottoman times , the country ’ s affairs are once again being run from the palace – the Beştepe Palace in Ankara , to be precise .
Living in this huge palace in conjunction with his wife Emine , the one-time humble and modest Erdoğan has now become a man whom his critics call a “ billionaire several times over , ” holding “ at least eight Swiss bank accounts ” and who has in the past “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ never resolved due to his parliamentary immunity .
In spite of these allegations of sheer avarice and rank corruption , or “ the misuse of public power for private benefit , ” as an individual , Tayyip Erdoğan is deeply attached to his religion and he has been at pains to implement what I have termed a veritable ‘ policy of Sunnification ’ in the country in an effort to ‘ make Turkey Muslim again.
’ Over the past years , Erdoğan has skillfully used his Justice and Development Party ( or AKP @ @ @ @ @ @ @ into an Islamic state in all but name called the New Turkey , well and truly embarked on a post-Kemalist path leading further and further away from Mustafa Kemal Atatürk ( 1881-1938 ) ’ s example and principles .
Still , this seemingly novel political construct more often than not relies on policies and relationships harking back to the good old day when Turkish nationalism was all but synonymous with the Kemalism .
Recently , Turkey ’ s traditionally close ties to the Turkic nation state on the Caspian Sea have been revived @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s independence on 9 November 1991 , ” prior to the official fall of the Soviet Union ( 26 December 1991 ) , and the recent revival of cordiality has also led to the outbreak of a new war in the Southern Caucasus .
In this way , the Prez has suddenly become very close to Azerbaijan ’ s strongman , President Ilham Aliyev , whom the Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project ( or OCCRP ) awarded the epithet “ Corrupt Person of the Year ” in 2012 .
As a result @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s Prez and his Azerbaijani strongman are nothing but a couple of swells , whose personal proclivities are now also matched by their public policies , bringing Ankara and Baku even closer together .
Between 27 September 2020 and 10 November 2020 ( or six weeks all together ) , the Republic of Azerbaijan attacked Armenian positions in the disputed area of Nagorno-Karabakh ( known as Artsakh , to Armenians ) as well as targets in Armenia proper .
Though the Armenian side displayed a lot of bravado during the conflict , in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Pashinyan agreed to Russian mediation in order to bring an end to further bloodshed .
The resultant agreement was hailed as a victory by Azerbaijan and its brother-in-arms , Turkey .
In fact , in the succeeding hours a video recording of the Azerbaijani strongman Aliyev emerged on social media , with the latter mocking Armenia ’ s PM , ostentatiously asking , “ What happened Pashinyan ?
” Six Weeks That Did Not Shake The World As I have previously outlined , for a whole range of reasons , Tayyip Erdoğan ‘ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ recent Azerbaijani attack : “ It was with Turkey ’ s funding , munitions and guidance that Azerbaijan attacked Artsakh on Sept. 27 , 2020 , “ declared the Armenian politician Raffi K. Hovannisian assuredly ( on 21 October 2020 ) .
According to the Armenian authorities , a grand total of 2,425 of its soldiers have perished in the conflict , as reported by the Associated Pres ( or AP ) .
On Twitter , however , the independent journalist and analyst Neil Hauer estimates that “ [ l ] osses in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ war : based on the amount of soldiers still missing and presumed dead , they are starting to talk about 7-8,000 or even *10,000* dead .
In 44 days.
” adding in a subsequent tweet that “ [ n ] one of this is official , obviously , just estimates I have heard from well-informed locals involved in search efforts , etc.
” The AP ’ s Avet Demourian then adds that a “ hundreds , possibly thousands [ have been killed ] , in six weeks , but [ Russia-brokered cease-fire ] @ @ @ @ @ @ @ some areas it holds outside Nagorno-Karabakh ’ s borders to Azerbaijan.
” Still , the now-beleagered Pashinyan took to Facebook to assure his people and possibly keep the door open for any future resistance : In Azerbaijan , on the other hand , the Russian-brokered road map was seen as a declaration of victory .
The Azerbaijani writer Cavid Aga , on Twitter , gave voice to the sentiment on the street : “ Since the announcement of [ a ] ceasefire , [ the ] Azerbaijani public has gone from one mood @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they celebrated , made feasts , paraded.
” Next stating that “ three dominant groups have [ subsequently ] formed in society , ” with the first being “ satisfied with current outcome , ” a second group , on the other hand , wanting the “ war to continue , ” and a third , desirous of “ Turkish peacekeepers beside Russians as they don ’ t trust the latter.
” The Russian-brokered document itself is unequivocal , starting off that a “ complete ceasefire and termination of all hostilities in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ starting 12:00 am ( midnight ) Moscow time on November 10.
” The plan gave the Azerbaijani side considerable territorial gains : the “ Agdam District shall be returned to the Republic of Azerbaijan by November 20 , 2020 ” and the “ Republic of Armenia shall return the Kalbajar District to the Republic of Azerbaijan by November 15 , 2020 , and the Lachin District by December 1 , 2020.
” Still , a “ Lachin Corridor ( 5 km wide ) , which will provide a connection between Nagorno-Karabakh and Armenia @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Shusha , shall remain under the control of the Russian Federation peacemaking forces.
” This means that the Kremlin shall remain an active player in the Southern Caucasus for the foreseeable future .
In other words , though not quite reviving the 11-article Treaty of Kurekchay ( 14 May 1805 ) , the current peace treaty of sorts ensures that Russia will continue to be a palpable presence locally .
In contrast , Turkey also wants to be part of the configuration , with the all-but-impotent Turkish Parliament ( or , TBMM ) @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on 17 November to deploy Turkish troops to Azerbaijan to serve at a joint monitoring mission , in conjunction with Russia that has been tasked to “ watch and inspect a ceasefire between Azerbaijan and Armenia in Nagorno-Karabakh.
” The head of Turkey ’ s Parliamentiary Defense Commission , İsmet Yılmaz pointedly and arguably somewhat idealistically remarked that the “ Turkish presence in Azerbaijan and Karabakh is of vital importance for the protection of the historic victory.
” Previously , on Twitter , the AKP-member Yılmaz had proclaimed his wish that the “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the “ heavens of Karabakh.
” In reality though , the Russians gave the Turks quite a cold shower in this respect , in spite of having set up a joint Russian-Turkish monitoring center for control of ceasefire observance in Azerbaijan , and having deployed “ some 2,000 Russian peacekeepers ” to Nagorno-Karabakh , yet remaining firm that Turkish boots be firmly off the ground .
Russian Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova was quite vocal in this respect : “ one needs to understand clearly that we are not talking about the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about a different mission.
” Russia clearly calls the shots and has granted Turkey a face-saving role on Azerbaijani soil but has made sure to keep Turkish troops away from the conflict zone proper , that is Nagorno-Karabakh .
Now Armenians are busily vacating the grounds handed back to Azerbaijan , burning their houses before abandoning the area , as can be seen on numerous video recordings spread into the world via social media , particularly on Twitter .
These scorched earth efforts appear puzzling , but seem to point towards some kind @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ) for the Azerbaijanis .
Dr. Gayane Novikova points out the presence of a “ singular victim complex among Armenians [ as a collection of individuals ] who had been struggling for survival for centuries ” – victims who , rightly or wrongly , feel particularly persecuted by ‘ Turks.
’ And in this context , Armenians regard Turks , Azerbaijanis or Tatars as interchangeable names for people having “ initiated any and all threatening actions and violence against Armenians.
” Novikova maintains that “ owing to historical experience and memory , ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ enemy ’ category in the perceptions of broad cross sections of Armenians.
” Dr Novikova here seems to slyly refer to the Armenian Genocide as a crime against humanity perpetrated by the Ottoman government , but popularly ascribed to the “ Turks , ” as a general derogatory name for bloodthirsty homicidal maniacs , ethnically related to Azerbaijanis .
A recent report by the RT journalist Murad Gazdiev all but underlines this assessment .
Gazdiev presents an Armenian couple called “ Lilit ” and “ Igor , ” who have lived in their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to Armenians as Karvajar or Karvatchar ) region for the past 17 years .
They had even built the house with their own hands .
As a school teacher Lilit seems to possess large swathes of empathy and is thus unwilling to burn down the house they are going to abandon .
Suddenly , her husband gets upset , saying “ To hell with them , I am going to burn it down , burn it right down.
” This couple now has to abandon their home in accordance with the stipulations of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they have inhabited for 17 years , or since 2003 .
The home they built on territory in one of the “ seven districts surrounding Nagorno-Karabakh ” that Armenia occupied in the aftermath of the signature of the provisional ceasefire agreement known as the Bishkek Protocol on 5 May 1994 .
In other words , they were settlers that have now been forced to vacate the location they took over .
As explained by Eurasianet ’ s Caucasus editor Joshua Kucera about two years ago , the “ seven surrounding territories had had @ @ @ @ @ @ @ were ] instead inhabited mainly by Azerbaijanis and Kurds .
As a result of the war [ that took place between 20 February 1988 and 12 May 1994 ] they were emptied of their population and about 618,000 Azerbaijanis remain displaced from the conflict , according to United Nations figures , the large majority of those from the seven districts.
” In the early years of the 21st century , the Armenian authorities in Nagorno-Karabakh started to establish their own government infrastructure in the “ occupied ” or “ liberated ” territories .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ saw the incorporation of these seven territories into the de facto Republic of Artsakh .
The Senior South Caucasus Analyst at the International Crisis Group , Olesya Vartanyan puts forward that settlement “ became a clear policy of the local [ Artsakh ] leadership ” in 2007 , adding that “ [ r ] oads were built , many problems with electricity resolved , new schools built , houses repaired , and so on .
All was done to support the existing [ settler ] population in the [ newly acquired ] territories.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ not feel any sympathy for the Muslim “ Azerbaijanis and Kurds ” whom they had in large measure replaced .
But now , on 25 November 2020 , Azerbaijan ’ s Defense Ministry announced summarily that “ units of the Azerbaijan Army [ have ] entered the Kalbajar region , ” in accordance with a trilateral statement signed by the presidents of the Republic of Azerbaijan , the Russian Federation and the prime minister of the Republic of Armenia – the event dreaded by “ Lilit ” and “ Igor.
” Two days @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ President Ilham Aliyev and [ his ] First Lady ” ostentatiously visited the Juma mosque in the ghost town of Aghdam , that had been abandoned during the 1988-94 war .
On Twitter , the Turkish journalist of Armenian descent ( and actually residing in Armenia ) Alin Ozinian adds that Aliyev , dressed up in a military uniform , performed prayers and bequeathed a copy of the Quran that had come form the holy city of Mecca to the mosque .
Ozinian cheekily remarks that Azerbaijan ’ s President couldn ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wear in order to perform this strange act , which she calls a “ cocktail of Jihadism-militarism-pan-Turkism.
” Ozinian ’ s analysis shows the extent to which Aliyev has now apparently become subject to Erdoğan ‘ s role model , as a “ ’ Turkist-Islamist ’ Soviet leftover , ” in Ozinian ’ s words , who is now trying to realign himself on an axis congruent with the New Turkey ’ s policy of Sunnification , albeit that the Azerbaijani nation adheres to the Shi ’ a version of Islam .
Still @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Turkish nationalism and militarism that characterizes the New Turkey ’ s post-Kemalist era seems to exude a heady allure , apparently easily able to trangress confessional borders and migrate from Sunni to Shi ’ a climes .
Artem Avdalyan , a Lieutenant Colonel in the Armenian army , states clearly that “ [ f ] ollowing the Bishkek agreement , Azerbaijan focused its efforts both on the development of its energy export based economy and in the rapid increase of its military capabilities.
” This heightened military fire-power not coincidentally also emerged @ @ @ @ @ @ @ out beyond its traditional boundaries within the framework of the Partnership for Peace programme , which also encompassed Azerbaijan .
Baku ’ s hydrocarbon wealth led to a “ windfall of revenues ” that in turn gave rise to increased spending on military expenditure : from a meagre $ 240 million in 1998 to a whopping $ 1.453 billion in 2007 , reaching the heights of $ 2 billion in 2012 and dropping off to $ 1.6 billion in 2018 .
The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute indicates that Armenia ’ s “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has given less leeway for increased spending on .
.
.
the military .
.
.
sector.
” Yet , the unresolved ‘ frozen conflict ’ in Nagorno-Karabakh was clearly the main reason for Baku ’ s spending spree and this year ’ s six-week war was all but its logical outcome .
In addition to its own awesome military firepower , the Azerbaijani side also relied on a “ fleet of Israeli and Turkish drones ” that has inflicted major damage on “ Armenian tanks , air defences and heavy weapons.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ indicated that so-called Israeli ‘ kamikaze drones ’ “ reportedly make up a portion of Azerbaijan ’ s arsenal.
” Various users on social media have posted video footage of these drones destroying Armenian positions and hardware , in particular the Orbiter 1K drone .
Produced by the Israeli Aeronautics Group , this unmanned aerial vehicle is a “ loiter munition platform , based on the combat proven , mature Orbiter 2 MUAS with the fuselage adapted for explosive payloads.
” In fact , Israel ’ s state-owned aerospace manufacturer , IAI ( @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2012 signed a $ 1.6 billion contract with Baku , in a clear effort to take advantage of the “ windfall of revenues ” that were re-directed to military expenditure eyeing the eventual re-ignition of the ‘ frozen conflict ’ in Nagorno-Karabakh .
The fact that Israel has over the years become the Middle East ’ s high-tech production hub , including the manufacture of sophisticated weaponry , has led to this , at first sight , somewhat odd relationship between the Caspian oil-and-gas powerhouse and the Jewish state located in Palestine .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , “ Israel receives about half of its crude oil supply from Azerbaijan , ” as pointed out by the Yerevan-based David Davidian .
In fact , President Aliyev himself is reported to have likened this relationship to an iceberg by stating that “ nine-tenths of it is below the surface.
” Closer to home , Baku has also relied on Ankara to acquire unmanned killing machines able to get the job done without any significant risk or danger .
Like Israel , AKP-led New Turkey has also been trying hard to transform @ @ @ @ @ @ @ high-tech killing gadgets – as worded by the freelance journalist Ferhat Gurini , “ Turkey ’ s growing defense industry is a cornerstone of Erdogan ’ s independent and assertive foreign policy.
” In this respect , the Beştepe Palace is but following good old Turkish precedent , the Presidency of Defence Industries ( Savunma Sanayii Başkanlığı ) having been set up as long ago as 1985 .
Following the example of the not-quite Islamist ( he was nevertheless openly affiliated with the Naqshbandi brotherhood ) but outspoken neoliberal Turgut Özal ( 1927-93 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ partnerships , with such by now prominent firms like ASELSAN , HAVELSAN and TAI .
Originally , this deadly hardware was destined solely for Turkey ’ s Armed Forces ( or TSK , in acronymized Turkish ) , but the demands of capitalist expansion have led to Turkey now also exporting weapons systems to other countries – such as , Kazakhstan , the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia , Malaysia , the UAE , Indonesia and , significantly , Azerbaijan .
Recently , Turkey ’ s arms industry has specialized in the production of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , having seemingly acquired the expertise from Israel after IAI sold drone technology to the TSK .
For Turkey and Israel have enjoyed a “ secret but close ” defense relationship since the late fifties , as alleged by the Israeli writer and journalist Yossi Melman .
He explains that “ [ o ] ver the years , especially in the 1980s and 1990s , Israel ’ s defence industries sold arms to Turkey , which included intelligence equipment , missiles avionics and upgraded tanks and planes , ” amounting to a $ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ exchange has now resulted in the NewTurkey ’ s blooming arms industry .
In recent years , Turkish Bayraktar TB2 and Anka-S drones have been deployed all over the place – in Syria , Iraq , and Libya , but now also in the Southern Caucasus .
Last June , the “ Azeri parliament approved a bill to receive financial assistance from Turkey to be used for the purchase of weapons systems.
” And Baku then went ahead and used these funds to buy Ankara ’ s Bayraktar TB2 drones – “ developed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Baykar Makina and the Kale Group.
” The Washington Post ‘ s foreign correspondent Robyn Dixon explains that Azerbaijan used these Turkish drones to good effect to kill “ Armenian and Nagorno-Karabakh soldiers and destroy tanks , artillery and air defense systems.
” Last October then , Azerbaijan ’ s strongman Ilham Aliyev appeared on the Turkish state broadcaster TRT to tell the brotherly nation that “ [ t ] hanks to advanced Turkish drones owned by the Azerbaijan military , our casualties on the front shrunk .
.
.
These drones show @ @ @ @ @ @ @ empowers us.
” While on social media , video footage of the Azerbaijani use of these Turkish weapons was distributed as well : “ Azerbaijan Armed Forces is continuing to destroy enemy positions and vehicles with the aerial assaults conducted by Bayraktar TB2 Armed UAVs.
” During his TRT appearance , Azerbaijan ’ s strongman did not seem to hide his admiration for the Prez : “ Turkey has the second strongest army among NATO countries , and we are building a small model of this Army.
” Ethnic Cleansing and Memories of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that Turkey and Azerbaijan have populations that are ethnically Turkic and that both people adhere to the religion of Islam , albeit one being Sunni and the other Shi ’ a , did Ankara have any ulterior motives in providing Baku with support and leadership ?
!
?
In this context , the American Enterprise Institute ( AEI ) ’ s resident scholar Dr Michael Rubin has recently put forward an interesting suggestion .
Rubin namely argues that the Turkish and Azerbaijani strongmen want to “ replicate ” Operation Peace Spring ‘ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Tayyip Erdoğan pursued his plan of having Sunni Syrian refugees replace Kurdish civilians in northern Syria , at the time he had actually been thinking about re-settling “ 2 million Syrians.
” In fact , the outspoken Erdoğan critic contends that AKP-led Ankara has been employing Sunni Syrians inside Turkey in a similar fashion , in attempts to neutralize “ predominantly Alevi areas in Hatay ” and “ Kurdish towns and villages in southeastern Turkey.
” Regarding Nagorno-Karabakh , Rubin reasons that “ ridding the region of Christians ” is the ultimate goal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Azeris want to live there , ” given its landlocked status and the opportunities and job prospects contained in Azerbaijan proper .
Dr Rubin spells out his suggestion as follows : Rubin ’ s interpretation is all but congruent with accusations of ethnic cleansing and human rights ’ abuses , uttered by many Armenians and documented on social media .
For example , on 29 October 2020 , a Twitter user calling themselves Anna posted an AP video showing the shelling of a hospital in the Artsakh capital of Stepanakert , adding the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Artsakh without Armenians , and their aim is the ethnic cleansing of Armenians in Artsakh.
“ A German internet user called Dennis is particularly active in this respect , making ‘ objective ’ videos on the war in Nagorno-Karabakh using the name Vagabondings for his YouTube channel .
And he really does a good job , documenting ‘ war crimes ’ and ‘ crimes against humanity.
’ His internet-based activism has even led to a certain degree of mainstream media recognition , as illustrated by an interview conducted by Los Angeles-based KTTV FOX11 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ anchor Araksya Karapetyan .
This plethora of social media activity has now even led the “ Azerbaijani authorities [ to tell BBC Azeri that ] they are looking into the beheading video circulating on social media as well as other gruesome images that appear to show war crimes being committed by their servicemen in Karabakh , ” as related by the BBC News journalist Grigor Atanesian on Twitter ( 23 November 2020 ) .
In parallel to Armenians ’ apparent outspoken hatred and disgust for Azerbaijanis , it seems that Baku ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ turning the population against their Christian neighbours , as illustrated by the case of Nurlan Ibrahimov , an official at the Azerbaijani football club Qarabag .
On social media , Ibrahimov published the following message : The UEFA investigated the official for potentially “ violating basic rules of decent conduct ” and banned him subsequently ( 26 November 2020 ) .
The next day , the Investigative Committee of the Republic of Armenia even issued a search warrant for the Azerbaijani football official , charging him with ‘ inciting national , racial or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Criminal Code ) , inciting direct and public genocide ( Point 1 of the Part 2 of the Article 393.1 of RA Criminal Code ) , justifying and endorsing genocide and other crimes against peace and security of humanity ( Article 373.1 of RA Criminal Code ) .
’ Ibrahimov ’ s words are troubling , as they display unthinkable levels of hatred and disgust , and are nothing but a public call for the implementation of a genocidal policy beyond mere ethnic cleansing .
There are those who would say that the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ statement responds to a statement made by Tayyip Erdoğan in the summer preceding the outbreak of the war : “ [ t ] his mission , whatever it might entail , which our ancestors [ meaning , the Ottomans ] have carried out for centuries in the Caucasus , we will continue to fulfill again ” ( 14 July 2020 ) .
The above-quoted Davidian , for instance , interprets “ Erdogan ’ s outburst [ as ] a reference to the Turkish genocide of the Armenians.
” After having spoken the words @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ age-old ” ties with the “ brother ” and “ friend ” Azerbaijan and Turkey ’ s moral duty to help and assist against unwarranted Armenian aggression .
At first sight , it would seem reasonable to assume that the Turkish President was effectively hinting at the events of the early 20th century , when the Ottomans were fighting alongside the Germans in the Great War ( 1914-18 ) and the promulgation of the ‘ Deportation Act ’ ( Tehcir Kanunu ) on 24 April 1915 led to the massacre of untold @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the ‘ First Genocide of 20th Century.
’ But when looking at the exact words used by Erdoğan , one could arguably derive a somewhat different interpretation .
The Turkish President used the term ‘ ecdadimiz ’ to refer to the Ottomans , a term that corresponds to ancestors , a term that has become quite popular in Turkey these days ( corresponding to the Arabic term ‘ ajdad ) .
He did not talk about our ‘ forefathers ’ or ‘ grandfathers , ’ in which case he could have used the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ seem logical when referring to people active in the early years of the previous century .
Moreover , Tayyip Erdoğan specifically spoke about a ‘ mission ’ that had been ‘ carried out for centuries.
‘ Looking back at the historical circumstances in the past centuries , it seems hard to understand which “ mission ” Erdoğan had in mind while talking about the Caucasus .
In Ottoman times , the Caucasus region primarily functioned as a buffer zone with the Safavids , ruling over the Iranian lands to the south .
In @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it became primarily an area of confrontation with the Russian Empire .
For the Ottomans , centred in İstanbul , the Caucasus region was situated at the periphery of their world , beyond the Ottoman centre of gravity and the area that is now Azerbaijan really constituted the Ottoman Empire ’ s ‘ near abroad , ’ to borrow a phrase more commonly used in connection with Russia .
The Ottoman mission the Prez was talking about seems to have had more to do with ensuring peace and non-hostile activity ( such as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Caucasus than with eradicating Christians or Armenians .
The Prez did talk about ‘ centuries ’ rather than ‘ last century , ’ which would have been a time frame in line with the Armenian Genocide .
For , even though Ottomans and Safavids clashed regularly in the Southern Caucasus , trade and commercial exchanges were nevertheless very important and at times very vibrant between the Sunni and Shi ’ a power blocs of the Islamic world in the early modern period and beyond .
Though he is a pious Muslim and an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in strategic terms , Tayyip Erdoğan is primarily a practical and pragmatic politician who wants to further his own or rather Turkey ’ s agenda .
A news item carried by the Azebaijani private media outlet Trend News Agency on 30 November 2020 all but spells out one of the Prez ’ s ulterior motives for supporting the “ brotherly ” nation : “ Azerbaijan , Turkey plan MoU on natural gas transportation to Nakhchivan Autonomous Republic ” .
Recently , Azerbaijan ’ s Minister of Energy Parviz Shahbazov told the press that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ volumes of natural gas supplied from Azerbaijan to Turkey to Nakhchivan via the Igdir-Nakhchivan gas pipeline.
” In other words , the recent ‘ liberation ’ of Nagorno-Karabakh will also turn out to be instrumental for Turkey as it pursues its longtime ambition of becoming an energy hub .
Turkey ’ s active pipeline politics have already secured important links between both Turkic nations , with the recently completed Trans Adriatic Pipeline ( or TAP ) but the cherry on top of Tayyip Erdoğan ‘ s forays into Pipelineistan and the 2005-completed Baku–Tbilisi–Ceyhan @ @ @ @ @ @ @ between Ankara and Baku .
Now that Azerbaijan has completed its takeover of land that was given up by Armenia as part of a Moscow-brokered peace deal at the beginning of this month , Azerbaijan ’ s strongman has told the world that this military and political “ victory opens a new era for our country .
It will be an era of development , security and progress.
” These three words – “ development , security and progress ” – are but music to Erdoğan ‘ s ears as he seemingly prepares @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by his Ottoman ancestors and sets out to secure the New Turkey ’ s near abroad in the Southern Caucasus and proceeds to mark the region with his very own pseudo-Ottoman stamp , as an equal partner of Russia ’ s Putin not quite knowing yet what to expect from the incoming “ Harris administration with Joe Biden as president ” of the United States .
*** 21WIRE special contributor Dr. Can Erimtan is an independent historian and geo-political analyst who used to live in Istanbul .
At present , he is in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a wide interest in the politics , history and culture of the Balkans , the greater Middle East , and the world beyond .
He attended the VUB in Brussels and did his graduate work at the universities of Essex and Oxford .
In Oxford , Erimtan was a member of Lady Margaret Hall and he obtained his doctorate in Modern History in 2002 .
His publications include the revisionist monograph “ Ottomans Looking West ?
” as well as numerous scholarly articles .
In Istanbul , Erimtan started publishing in Today ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
In the next instance , he became the Turkey Editor of the İstanbul Gazette .
Subsequently , he commenced writing for RT Op-Edge , NEO , and finally , the 21st Century Wire .
You can find him on Twitter at @ theerimtanangle .
Read Can ’ s archive here .

By
Dr Can Erimtan
21st Century Wire
Now that Turkey has become a presidential one-party state ruled by Recep Tayyip Erdoğan (aka the Prez), like in Ottoman times, the country’s affairs are once again being run from the palace – the Beştepe Palace in Ankara, to be precise. Living in this huge palace in conjunction with his wife Emine, the one-time humble and modest Erdoğan has now become a man whom his critics call a “billionaire several times over,” holding “at least eight Swiss bank accounts” and who has in the past “faced 13 corruption probes” which were never resolved due to his parliamentary immunity.
In spite of these allegations of sheer avarice and rank corruption, or “the misuse of public power for private benefit,” as an individual, Tayyip Erdoğan is deeply attached to his religion and he has been at pains to implement what I have termed a veritable ‘policy of Sunnification’ in the country in an effort to ‘make Turkey Muslim again.’ Over the past years, Erdoğan has skillfully used his Justice and Development Party (or AKP) to transform the Turkish nation state into an Islamic state in all but name called the New Turkey, well and truly embarked on a post-Kemalist path leading further and further away from Mustafa Kemal Atatürk (1881-1938)’s example and principles. Still, this seemingly novel political construct more often than not relies on policies and relationships harking back to the good old day when Turkish nationalism was all but synonymous with the Kemalism.
Recently, Turkey’s traditionally close ties to the Turkic nation state on the Caspian Sea have been revived again – “Turkey recognized Azerbaijan’s independence on 9 November 1991,” prior to the official fall of the Soviet Union (26 December 1991), and the recent revival of cordiality has also led to the outbreak of a new war in the Southern Caucasus. In this way, the Prez has suddenly become very close to Azerbaijan’s strongman, President Ilham Aliyev, whom the Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project (or OCCRP) awarded the epithet “Corrupt Person of the Year” in 2012. As a result, it seems obvious that Turkey’s Prez and his Azerbaijani strongman are nothing but a couple of swells, whose personal proclivities are now also matched by their public policies, bringing Ankara and Baku even closer together.
Between 27 September 2020 and 10 November 2020 (or six weeks all together), the Republic of Azerbaijan attacked Armenian positions in the disputed area of Nagorno-Karabakh (known as Artsakh, to Armenians) as well as targets in Armenia proper.
Though the Armenian side displayed a lot of bravado during the conflict, in the end Armenia’s PM Nikol Pashinyan agreed to Russian mediation in order to bring an end to further bloodshed. The resultant agreement was hailed as a victory by Azerbaijan and its brother-in-arms, Turkey. In fact, in the succeeding hours a video recording of the Azerbaijani strongman Aliyev emerged on social media, with the latter mocking Armenia’s PM, ostentatiously asking, “What happened Pashinyan?”
Six Weeks That Did Not Shake The World
As I have previously outlined, for a whole range of reasons, Tayyip Erdoğan‘s New Turkey directed and coached the recent Azerbaijani attack: “It was with Turkey’s funding, munitions and guidance that Azerbaijan attacked Artsakh on Sept. 27, 2020,“ declared the Armenian politician Raffi K. Hovannisian assuredly (on 21 October 2020). According to the Armenian authorities, a grand total of 2,425 of its soldiers have perished in the conflict, as reported by the Associated Pres (or AP). On Twitter, however, the independent journalist and analyst Neil Hauer estimates that “[l]osses in Armenia and Artsakh in the recent Karabakh war: based on the amount of soldiers still missing and presumed dead, they are starting to talk about 7-8,000 or even *10,000* dead. In 44 days.” adding in a subsequent tweet that “[n]one of this is official, obviously, just estimates I have heard from well-informed locals involved in search efforts, etc.” The AP’s Avet Demourian then adds that a “hundreds, possibly thousands [have been killed], in six weeks, but [Russia-brokered cease-fire] stipulated that Armenia turn over control of some areas it holds outside Nagorno-Karabakh’s borders to Azerbaijan.” Still, the now-beleagered Pashinyan took to Facebook to assure his people and possibly keep the door open for any future resistance:
Getting the realization of these programs on irreversible institutional tracks will take 6 months. In June 2021 I will deliver the performance report of this roadmap, and the public opinion and reaction will be taken into account for deciding future actions.
In Azerbaijan, on the other hand, the Russian-brokered road map was seen as a declaration of victory. The Azerbaijani writer Cavid Aga, on Twitter, gave voice to the sentiment on the street: “Since the announcement of [a] ceasefire, [the] Azerbaijani public has gone from one mood to other. At first, naturally they celebrated, made feasts, paraded.” Next stating that “three dominant groups have [subsequently] formed in society,” with the first being “satisfied with current outcome,” a second group, on the other hand, wanting the “war to continue,” and a third, desirous of “Turkish peacekeepers beside Russians as they don’t trust the latter.”
The Russian-brokered document itself is unequivocal, starting off that a “complete ceasefire and termination of all hostilities in the area of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict is declared starting 12:00 am (midnight) Moscow time on November 10.” The plan gave the Azerbaijani side considerable territorial gains: the “Agdam District shall be returned to the Republic of Azerbaijan by November 20, 2020” and the “Republic of Armenia shall return the Kalbajar District to the Republic of Azerbaijan by November 15, 2020, and the Lachin District by December 1, 2020.” Still, a “Lachin Corridor (5 km wide), which will provide a connection between Nagorno-Karabakh and Armenia while not passing through the territory of Shusha, shall remain under the control of the Russian Federation peacemaking forces.” This means that the Kremlin shall remain an active player in the Southern Caucasus for the foreseeable future. In other words, though not quite reviving the 11-article Treaty of Kurekchay (14 May 1805), the current peace treaty of sorts ensures that Russia will continue to be a palpable presence locally. In contrast, Turkey also wants to be part of the configuration, with the all-but-impotent Turkish Parliament (or, TBMM) approving the Beştepe Palace’s request on 17 November to deploy Turkish troops to Azerbaijan to serve at a joint monitoring mission, in conjunction with Russia that has been tasked to “watch and inspect a ceasefire between Azerbaijan and Armenia in Nagorno-Karabakh.” The head of Turkey’s Parliamentiary Defense Commission, İsmet Yılmaz pointedly and arguably somewhat idealistically remarked that the “Turkish presence in Azerbaijan and Karabakh is of vital importance for the protection of the historic victory.” Previously, on Twitter, the AKP-member Yılmaz had proclaimed his wish that the “call to prayer” would never cease in the “heavens of Karabakh.” In reality though, the Russians gave the Turks quite a cold shower in this respect, in spite of having set up a joint Russian-Turkish monitoring center for control of ceasefire observance in Azerbaijan, and having deployed “some 2,000 Russian peacekeepers” to Nagorno-Karabakh, yet remaining firm that Turkish boots be firmly off the ground. Russian Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova was quite vocal in this respect: “one needs to understand clearly that we are not talking about the peacekeeping effort described in the statement but about a different mission.” Russia clearly calls the shots and has granted Turkey a face-saving role on Azerbaijani soil but has made sure to keep Turkish troops away from the conflict zone proper, that is Nagorno-Karabakh.
An Armenian Defeat: “What happened Pashinyan?”
Now Armenians are busily vacating the grounds handed back to Azerbaijan, burning their houses before abandoning the area, as can be seen on numerous video recordings spread into the world via social media, particularly on Twitter. These scorched earth efforts appear puzzling, but seem to point towards some kind of deep-seated disdain (or even hatred) for the Azerbaijanis. Dr. Gayane Novikova points out the presence of a “singular victim complex among Armenians [as a collection of individuals] who had been struggling for survival for centuries” – victims who, rightly or wrongly, feel particularly persecuted by ‘Turks.’ And in this context, Armenians regard Turks, Azerbaijanis or Tatars as interchangeable names for people having “initiated any and all threatening actions and violence against Armenians.” Novikova maintains that “owing to historical experience and memory,” Azebaijanis “were included into the ‘enemy’ category in the perceptions of broad cross sections of Armenians.” Dr Novikova here seems to slyly refer to the Armenian Genocide as a crime against humanity perpetrated by the Ottoman government, but popularly ascribed to the “Turks,” as a general derogatory name for bloodthirsty homicidal maniacs, ethnically related to Azerbaijanis.
A recent report by the RT journalist Murad Gazdiev all but underlines this assessment. Gazdiev presents an Armenian couple called “Lilit” and “Igor,” who have lived in their own house in the Kalbajar (known to Armenians as Karvajar or Karvatchar) region for the past 17 years. They had even built the house with their own hands. As a school teacher Lilit seems to possess large swathes of empathy and is thus unwilling to burn down the house they are going to abandon. Suddenly, her husband gets upset, saying “To hell with them, I am going to burn it down, burn it right down.” This couple now has to abandon their home in accordance with the stipulations of the Russian-brokered road map, a home they have inhabited for 17 years, or since 2003. The home they built on territory in one of the “seven districts surrounding Nagorno-Karabakh” that Armenia occupied in the aftermath of the signature of the provisional ceasefire agreement known as the Bishkek Protocol on 5 May 1994. In other words, they were settlers that have now been forced to vacate the location they took over.
As explained by Eurasianet’s Caucasus editor Joshua Kucera about two years ago, the “seven surrounding territories had had a negligible Armenian population, [and were] instead inhabited mainly by Azerbaijanis and Kurds. As a result of the war [that took place between 20 February 1988 and 12 May 1994] they were emptied of their population and about 618,000 Azerbaijanis remain displaced from the conflict, according to United Nations figures, the large majority of those from the seven districts.” In the early years of the 21st century, the Armenian authorities in Nagorno-Karabakh started to establish their own government infrastructure in the “occupied” or “liberated” territories. The constitution, adopted in 2006, saw the incorporation of these seven territories into the de facto Republic of Artsakh. The Senior South Caucasus Analyst at the International Crisis Group, Olesya Vartanyan puts forward that settlement “became a clear policy of the local [Artsakh] leadership” in 2007, adding that “[r]oads were built, many problems with electricity resolved, new schools built, houses repaired, and so on. All was done to support the existing [settler] population in the [newly acquired] territories.” And these Christian settlers clearly do not feel any sympathy for the Muslim “Azerbaijanis and Kurds” whom they had in large measure replaced. But now, on 25 November 2020, Azerbaijan’s Defense Ministry announced summarily that “units of the Azerbaijan Army [have] entered the Kalbajar region,” in accordance with a trilateral statement signed by the presidents of the Republic of Azerbaijan, the Russian Federation and the prime minister of the Republic of Armenia – the event dreaded by “Lilit” and “Igor.”
Two days previously (23 November 2020), “President Ilham Aliyev and [his] First Lady” ostentatiously visited the Juma mosque in the ghost town of Aghdam, that had been abandoned during the 1988-94 war. On Twitter, the Turkish journalist of Armenian descent (and actually residing in Armenia) Alin Ozinian adds that Aliyev, dressed up in a military uniform, performed prayers and bequeathed a copy of the Quran that had come form the holy city of Mecca to the mosque. Ozinian cheekily remarks that Azerbaijan’s President couldn’t have picked a better costume to wear in order to perform this strange act, which she calls a “cocktail of Jihadism-militarism-pan-Turkism.” Ozinian’s analysis shows the extent to which Aliyev has now apparently become subject to Erdoğan‘s role model, as a “’Turkist-Islamist’ Soviet leftover,” in Ozinian’s words, who is now trying to realign himself on an axis congruent with the New Turkey’s policy of Sunnification, albeit that the Azerbaijani nation adheres to the Shi’a version of Islam. Still, the heady mix of Jihadi Islam, Turkish nationalism and militarism that characterizes the New Turkey’s post-Kemalist era seems to exude a heady allure, apparently easily able to trangress confessional borders and migrate from Sunni to Shi’a climes.
Azerbaijan’s Gambit: Money Talks
Artem Avdalyan, a Lieutenant Colonel in the Armenian army, states clearly that “[f]ollowing the Bishkek agreement, Azerbaijan focused its efforts both on the development of its energy export based economy and in the rapid increase of its military capabilities.” This heightened military fire-power not coincidentally also emerged at a time when NATO was reaching out beyond its traditional boundaries within the framework of the Partnership for Peace programme, which also encompassed Azerbaijan. Baku’s hydrocarbon wealth led to a “windfall of revenues” that in turn gave rise to increased spending on military expenditure: from a meagre $240 million in 1998 to a whopping $1.453 billion in 2007, reaching the heights of $2 billion in 2012 and dropping off to $1.6 billion in 2018. The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute indicates that Armenia’s “more moderate economic growth . . . has given less leeway for increased spending on . . . the military . . . sector.” Yet, the unresolved ‘frozen conflict’ in Nagorno-Karabakh was clearly the main reason for Baku’s spending spree and this year’s six-week war was all but its logical outcome.
In addition to its own awesome military firepower, the Azerbaijani side also relied on a “fleet of Israeli and Turkish drones” that has inflicted major damage on “Armenian tanks, air defences and heavy weapons.” The Jerusalem Post‘s Seth Frantzman indicated that so-called Israeli ‘kamikaze drones’ “reportedly make up a portion of Azerbaijan’s arsenal.” Various users on social media have posted video footage of these drones destroying Armenian positions and hardware, in particular the Orbiter 1K drone. Produced by the Israeli Aeronautics Group, this unmanned aerial vehicle is a “loiter munition platform, based on the combat proven, mature Orbiter 2 MUAS with the fuselage adapted for explosive payloads.” In fact, Israel’s state-owned aerospace manufacturer, IAI (or Israel Aerospace Industries) already in 2012 signed a $1.6 billion contract with Baku, in a clear effort to take advantage of the “windfall of revenues” that were re-directed to military expenditure eyeing the eventual re-ignition of the ‘frozen conflict’ in Nagorno-Karabakh. The fact that Israel has over the years become the Middle East’s high-tech production hub, including the manufacture of sophisticated weaponry, has led to this, at first sight, somewhat odd relationship between the Caspian oil-and-gas powerhouse and the Jewish state located in Palestine. Far from being a totally one-sided affair, “Israel receives about half of its crude oil supply from Azerbaijan,” as pointed out by the Yerevan-based David Davidian. In fact, President Aliyev himself is reported to have likened this relationship to an iceberg by stating that “nine-tenths of it is below the surface.”
Closer to home, Baku has also relied on Ankara to acquire unmanned killing machines able to get the job done without any significant risk or danger. Like Israel, AKP-led New Turkey has also been trying hard to transform itself into a veritable production hub of high-tech killing gadgets – as worded by the freelance journalist Ferhat Gurini, “Turkey’s growing defense industry is a cornerstone of Erdogan’s independent and assertive foreign policy.” In this respect, the Beştepe Palace is but following good old Turkish precedent, the Presidency of Defence Industries (Savunma Sanayii Başkanlığı) having been set up as long ago as 1985. Following the example of the not-quite Islamist (he was nevertheless openly affiliated with the Naqshbandi brotherhood) but outspoken neoliberal Turgut Özal (1927-93), Tayyip Erdoğan continues encouraging public-private partnerships, with such by now prominent firms like ASELSAN, HAVELSAN and TAI. Originally, this deadly hardware was destined solely for Turkey’s Armed Forces (or TSK, in acronymized Turkish), but the demands of capitalist expansion have led to Turkey now also exporting weapons systems to other countries – such as, Kazakhstan, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, Malaysia, the UAE, Indonesia and, significantly, Azerbaijan. Recently, Turkey’s arms industry has specialized in the production of unmanned aerial vehicles (or drones), having seemingly acquired the expertise from Israel after IAI sold drone technology to the TSK. For Turkey and Israel have enjoyed a “secret but close” defense relationship since the late fifties, as alleged by the Israeli writer and journalist Yossi Melman. He explains that “[o]ver the years, especially in the 1980s and 1990s, Israel’s defence industries sold arms to Turkey, which included intelligence equipment, missiles avionics and upgraded tanks and planes,” amounting to a $10bn turnover. This somewhat unseen commercial exchange has now resulted in the NewTurkey’s blooming arms industry. In recent years, Turkish Bayraktar TB2 and Anka-S drones have been deployed all over the place – in Syria, Iraq, and Libya, but now also in the Southern Caucasus.
Last June, the “Azeri parliament approved a bill to receive financial assistance from Turkey to be used for the purchase of weapons systems.” And Baku then went ahead and used these funds to buy Ankara’s Bayraktar TB2 drones – “developed by Kale-Baykar, a joint venture of Baykar Makina and the Kale Group.” The Washington Post‘s foreign correspondent Robyn Dixon explains that Azerbaijan used these Turkish drones to good effect to kill “Armenian and Nagorno-Karabakh soldiers and destroy tanks, artillery and air defense systems.” Last October then, Azerbaijan’s strongman Ilham Aliyev appeared on the Turkish state broadcaster TRT to tell the brotherly nation that “[t]hanks to advanced Turkish drones owned by the Azerbaijan military, our casualties on the front shrunk . . . These drones show Turkey’s strength. It also empowers us.” While on social media, video footage of the Azerbaijani use of these Turkish weapons was distributed as well: “Azerbaijan Armed Forces is continuing to destroy enemy positions and vehicles with the aerial assaults conducted by Bayraktar TB2 Armed UAVs.” During his TRT appearance, Azerbaijan’s strongman did not seem to hide his admiration for the Prez: “Turkey has the second strongest army among NATO countries, and we are building a small model of this Army.”
Operation Peace Spring Redux:
Ethnic Cleansing and Memories of the Armenian Genocide
Aside from the fact that Turkey and Azerbaijan have populations that are ethnically Turkic and that both people adhere to the religion of Islam, albeit one being Sunni and the other Shi’a, did Ankara have any ulterior motives in providing Baku with support and leadership?!?
In this context, the American Enterprise Institute (AEI)’s resident scholar Dr Michael Rubin has recently put forward an interesting suggestion. Rubin namely argues that the Turkish and Azerbaijani strongmen want to “replicate” Operation Peace Spring‘s goals in Nagorno-Karabakh. In 2019, Tayyip Erdoğan pursued his plan of having Sunni Syrian refugees replace Kurdish civilians in northern Syria, at the time he had actually been thinking about re-settling “2 million Syrians.” In fact, the outspoken Erdoğan critic contends that AKP-led Ankara has been employing Sunni Syrians inside Turkey in a similar fashion, in attempts to neutralize “predominantly Alevi areas in Hatay” and “Kurdish towns and villages in southeastern Turkey.” Regarding Nagorno-Karabakh, Rubin reasons that “ridding the region of Christians” is the ultimate goal, as he states that “few Azeris want to live there,” given its landlocked status and the opportunities and job prospects contained in Azerbaijan proper. Dr Rubin spells out his suggestion as follows:
Documents captured during the recent Armenia-Azerbaijan War as well as prisoner interrogations reveal that Turkey facilitated the transport of more than 7,700 Syrian Islamists to Azerbaijan in the months before the September 27 outbreak of fighting . . . [and now that the war over, these] Syrian mercenaries are both sending for their family members to come to Azerbaijan and seeking to then settle in southern areas of Karabakh that have now reverted to Azerbaijan.
Rubin’s interpretation is all but congruent with accusations of ethnic cleansing and human rights’ abuses, uttered by many Armenians and documented on social media. For example, on 29 October 2020, a Twitter user calling themselves Anna posted an AP video showing the shelling of a hospital in the Artsakh capital of Stepanakert, adding the following words: “#Azerbaijan wants Artsakh without Armenians, and their aim is the ethnic cleansing of Armenians in Artsakh.“ A German internet user called Dennis is particularly active in this respect, making ‘objective’ videos on the war in Nagorno-Karabakh using the name Vagabondings for his YouTube channel. And he really does a good job, documenting ‘war crimes’ and ‘crimes against humanity.’ His internet-based activism has even led to a certain degree of mainstream media recognition, as illustrated by an interview conducted by Los Angeles-based KTTV FOX11’s Good Day L.A‘s anchor Araksya Karapetyan. This plethora of social media activity has now even led the “Azerbaijani authorities [to tell BBC Azeri that] they are looking into the beheading video circulating on social media as well as other gruesome images that appear to show war crimes being committed by their servicemen in Karabakh,” as related by the BBC News journalist Grigor Atanesian on Twitter (23 November 2020).
In parallel to Armenians’ apparent outspoken hatred and disgust for Azerbaijanis, it seems that Baku’s propaganda efforts have been equally effective in turning the population against their Christian neighbours, as illustrated by the case of Nurlan Ibrahimov, an official at the Azerbaijani football club Qarabag. On social media, Ibrahimov published the following message:
We must kill all Armenians – women, children, the elderly. We need to kill them without distinction. No regrets. No compassion.
The UEFA investigated the official for potentially “violating basic rules of decent conduct” and banned him subsequently (26 November 2020). The next day, the Investigative Committee of the Republic of Armenia even issued a search warrant for the Azerbaijani football official, charging him with ‘inciting national, racial or religious hatred (Article 226 of RA Criminal Code), inciting direct and public genocide (Point 1 of the Part 2 of the Article 393.1 of RA Criminal Code), justifying and endorsing genocide and other crimes against peace and security of humanity (Article 373.1 of RA Criminal Code).’
Ibrahimov’s words are troubling, as they display unthinkable levels of hatred and disgust, and are nothing but a public call for the implementation of a genocidal policy beyond mere ethnic cleansing. There are those who would say that the Azerbaijani football official’s social media statement responds to a statement made by Tayyip Erdoğan in the summer preceding the outbreak of the war: “[t]his mission, whatever it might entail, which our ancestors [meaning, the Ottomans] have carried out for centuries in the Caucasus, we will continue to fulfill again” (14 July 2020). The above-quoted Davidian, for instance, interprets “Erdogan’s outburst [as] a reference to the Turkish genocide of the Armenians.” After having spoken the words, the Prez continued by stressing the “age-old” ties with the “brother” and “friend” Azerbaijan and Turkey’s moral duty to help and assist against unwarranted Armenian aggression. At first sight, it would seem reasonable to assume that the Turkish President was effectively hinting at the events of the early 20th century, when the Ottomans were fighting alongside the Germans in the Great War (1914-18) and the promulgation of the ‘Deportation Act’ (Tehcir Kanunu) on 24 April 1915 led to the massacre of untold Armenians in what has been erroneously named the ‘First Genocide of 20th Century.’
Turkey’s Mission in the Southern Caucaus
But when looking at the exact words used by Erdoğan, one could arguably derive a somewhat different interpretation. The Turkish President used the term ‘ecdadimiz’ to refer to the Ottomans, a term that corresponds to ancestors, a term that has become quite popular in Turkey these days (corresponding to the Arabic term ‘ajdad). He did not talk about our ‘forefathers’ or ‘grandfathers,’ in which case he could have used the term ‘dedelerimiz,’ as would seem logical when referring to people active in the early years of the previous century. Moreover, Tayyip Erdoğan specifically spoke about a ‘mission’ that had been ‘carried out for centuries.‘ Looking back at the historical circumstances in the past centuries, it seems hard to understand which “mission” Erdoğan had in mind while talking about the Caucasus. In Ottoman times, the Caucasus region primarily functioned as a buffer zone with the Safavids, ruling over the Iranian lands to the south. In the 19th and early 20th centuries, it became primarily an area of confrontation with the Russian Empire. For the Ottomans, centred in İstanbul, the Caucasus region was situated at the periphery of their world, beyond the Ottoman centre of gravity and the area that is now Azerbaijan really constituted the Ottoman Empire’s ‘near abroad,’ to borrow a phrase more commonly used in connection with Russia. The Ottoman mission the Prez was talking about seems to have had more to do with ensuring peace and non-hostile activity (such as trade and commerce) in the Southern Caucasus than with eradicating Christians or Armenians. The Prez did talk about ‘centuries’ rather than ‘last century,’ which would have been a time frame in line with the Armenian Genocide. For, even though Ottomans and Safavids clashed regularly in the Southern Caucasus, trade and commercial exchanges were nevertheless very important and at times very vibrant between the Sunni and Shi’a power blocs of the Islamic world in the early modern period and beyond.
Though he is a pious Muslim and an outspoken Islamist, above all else, in strategic terms, Tayyip Erdoğan is primarily a practical and pragmatic politician who wants to further his own or rather Turkey’s agenda. A news item carried by the Azebaijani private media outlet Trend News Agency on 30 November 2020 all but spells out one of the Prez’s ulterior motives for supporting the “brotherly” nation: “Azerbaijan, Turkey plan MoU on natural gas transportation to Nakhchivan Autonomous Republic”. Recently, Azerbaijan’s Minister of Energy Parviz Shahbazov told the press that “it is planned to transport some volumes of natural gas supplied from Azerbaijan to Turkey to Nakhchivan via the Igdir-Nakhchivan gas pipeline.” In other words, the recent ‘liberation’ of Nagorno-Karabakh will also turn out to be instrumental for Turkey as it pursues its longtime ambition of becoming an energy hub. Turkey’s active pipeline politics have already secured important links between both Turkic nations, with the recently completed Trans Adriatic Pipeline (or TAP) but the cherry on top of Tayyip Erdoğan‘s forays into Pipelineistan and the 2005-completed Baku–Tbilisi–Ceyhan pipeline but the beginning of the friendship between Ankara and Baku. Now that Azerbaijan has completed its takeover of land that was given up by Armenia as part of a Moscow-brokered peace deal at the beginning of this month, Azerbaijan’s strongman has told the world that this military and political “victory opens a new era for our country. It will be an era of development, security and progress.”
These three words – “development, security and progress” – are but music to Erdoğan‘s ears as he seemingly prepares to take up the mantle once carried by his Ottoman ancestors and sets out to secure the New Turkey’s near abroad in the Southern Caucasus and proceeds to mark the region with his very own pseudo-Ottoman stamp, as an equal partner of Russia’s Putin not quite knowing yet what to expect from the incoming “Harris administration with Joe Biden as president” of the United States.
***
21WIRE special contributor Dr. Can Erimtan is an independent historian and geo-political analyst who used to live in Istanbul. At present, he is in self-imposed exile from Turkey. He has a wide interest in the politics, history and culture of the Balkans. the greater Middle East, and the world beyond.. He attended the VUB in Brussels and did his graduate work at the universities of Essex and Oxford. In Oxford, Erimtan was a member of Lady Margaret Hall and he obtained his doctorate in Modern History in 2002. His publications include the revisionist monograph “Ottomans Looking West?” as well as numerous scholarly articles. In Istanbul, Erimtan started publishing in the English language Turkish press, culminating in him becoming the Turkey Editor of the İstanbul Gazette. Subsequently, he commenced writing for RT Op-Edge, NEO, and finally, the 21st Century Wire. You can find him on Twitter at @TheErimtanAngle. Read Can’s archive here.
READ MORE TURKEY NEWS AT: 21st Century Wire Turkey Files
SUPPORT OUR MEDIA PLATFORM – BECOME A MEMBER @21WIRE.TV