The New York Times Wrote About Azerbaijan's Naftalan And How...

(MENAFN- AzerNews) By Baheddin Hazi, Exclusive for AzerNEWS

"In Azerbaijan, which is an oil country, people are not only proud of their oil but also bathe in it. Because they believe in the health benefits of oil."

These sentences were written by Anton Troyanovski, a correspondent of "The New York Times" (NYT) newspaper sent to Azerbaijan, in his report entitled "Bathing in oil at the climate summit. The stain remains". The reporter writes that he took an oil bath during the climate summit. In his impressions, the journalist wrote that he felt like an "animal covered in oil".

How a Slavic American journalist feels like a living being is, of course, his own business. However, he even wrote the report from the resort town of Naftalan, from the treatment sanatorium, with prejudice.

Troyanovski writes that he came to Azerbaijan to participate in COP29 and went to the city of Naftalan, which is 4 hours away from Baku. There he saw and heard that there are people from all over the former Soviet Union who come here for treatment. "The number of people coming from Russia has increased due to the sanctions in light of the war in Ukraine," he writes. He spoke with a patient from Kazakhstan. He spoke with other guests as well. Everyone has talked about the benefits of these oil baths.

It may be asked, where is the bias of the reporter here?

Pay attention to this sentence: "By building a modern oil industry, Azerbaijan has created opportunities for itself and a threat to our civilization."

The newspaper of the world's largest oil and gas producing country writes that Azerbaijan has endangered humanity by creating a modern oil industry. They write this in the world's leading media outlet, can you imagine?

I have to repeat the comparison I made in my previous post.

Please note: Azerbaijan's annual gas production is 34 billion cubic meters. However, 1 trillion 29 billion cubic meters of gas is produced annually in the United States. Almost 1 trillion cubic meters more than Azerbaijan. In other words, there is a difference of 30 times, no less, no more. Also, Canada produces 188 billion cubic meters of gas, Norway 124 billion cubic meters, etc. Apart from that, if we look at oil production, Azerbaijan ranks 23rd, and the United States ranks first.

The oil produced in Azerbaijan does not even reach 1 percent of the world's oil production. Gas production is also: 0.7 percent. In this case, who is "endangering our civilization"?!

"The New York Times" writes that while the climate conference is looking for ways to reduce fossil fuel emissions, "Azerbaijanis are proud of their oil" and say: "Oil played a major role in the Soviet Union's victory over Nazi Germany."

A journalist who approaches the subject so simply and thinks so primitively works in the world's leading media organization. It is impossible not to be surprised.

First of all, not only Azerbaijanis but also Americans are proud of the victory over Nazi Germany. I remind the NYT's Slavic-American journalist that the United States was an ally of the Soviet Union in World War II and considered the victory over Nazi Germany as its own victory, of course. During the war, 90 per cent of the gasoline used by military equipment was supplied by Baku, Azerbaijan. Why Azerbaijan not be proud of it?! Should he feel sorry and apologize?! Secondly, as for fossil fuel waste, only 0.1 per cent of it falls on Azerbaijan's share. But 12.6 per cent of waste gases are released into the atmosphere from the United States, 7.6 per cent from India, 6.4 per cent from the European Union, and 1.52 per cent from Canada.

Who is the threat to civilization in this case?!

In this article, the journalist gives a biased interpretation of Azerbaijan's restoration of its territorial integrity and victory over Armenia. He writes that more people came to Naftalan after the Azerbaijani army "recaptured Nagorno-Karabakh, which is located near Naftalan, and removed the contact line."

Again, the expression "Nagorno-Karabakh" is used, and it is another story. The journalist interprets Azerbaijan's liberation of its territory as a "recapturing". What does it mean for a state to recapture its territory?! Can journalists working in the largest media holdings in a country like America make such an obvious mistake? There may be a lack of information about Azerbaijan, perhaps it is understandable. However, it is not difficult for the NYT employee who wrote this article to get accurate and complete information about the territories of Azerbaijan recognized by the United Nations, including those recognized by the United States. One click is enough.

Looking for an excuse to blame Azerbaijan even on the most “innocent” topics...This seems to be a disease of the Western media that cannot be cured by any treatment protocol.

I read, review, watch and analyze such articles in such media. I think: are they really that big, or have we magnified too much in our own eyes?!

No, the NYT is a really big media outlet; It has a huge budget and an army journalist. There are incredible amounts of advertising and sales revenue. But...

But the people within these media giants are small; they approach countries like ours with small feelings and weak interests. Just like in this report I wrote about.

PS After bathing in an oil bath, a stain of oil remains on the person. This is natural. If you wash it, it will go away. But if a person's conscience is stained, he will draw "political" conclusions in the treatment procedure.

MENAFN24112024000195011045ID1108919134