Andrey Nikiforov: Let's use our brains!

The entire generations of our fellow citizens grew up having confidence in "what is written in the newspaper" or "broadcasted on the TV". Of course, previously the information in the mass media was not always true as well. And we should admit that brainwashing also took place. But ... Brainwashing implies existence of brains. Those who are brainwashed and those who are brainwashing should have brains. In a word, the audience was treated in an adult way, and the profession of a journalist demanded from its bearers not only superior competence, but also the utmost responsibility for every word, and even for every letter...

Now we live in a different time when the printed word as well as the uttered one in the air devaluated many times and a lot. And the new tribe of boys and girls with the certificates, confirming that they are journalists, just do not understand what responsibility for the uttered word is. And it is not about the fact that previously everything was better.  It is about the fact that the profession of a journalist stopped being elite and became massive. And as it often happens in such cases it occurred at the expanse of the avalanching decrease of the level of professionalism.

It seems that everything is natural. And, nevertheless, how we may stand it, my dear editorial staff??? A few days ago a certain Bochkala in the air of one of the central TV channels, laying claim to respectability, makes the "analytical" story, based on the fact that his Turkish colleague blurred out that Turkey under certain circumstances may have right for the Crimea according to the Treaty of Küçük Kaynarca, which was allegedly concluded 230 years ago...

This article made him start on his journey: Bochkala went to Moscow to meet the author of the scrawl (an ignorant citizen of Turkey) and his colleague, then he went to Istanbul, where he talked to another citizen of Turkey ... And of course he did not pay those trips himself, but we will not envy and count other people's money. As a result a certain Bochkala named the Treaty of Küçük Kaynarca a "long forgotten" one, in spite of the fact that one can find it in any textbook and there one can find the date of his conclusion, which is 1774. That is the Treaty was concluded not 230, but 240 years ago. But this is such a trifle to take care about it. But it would not be a trifle if someone would cut off ten years of the lifespan of Mr. Bochkala, and he would definitely care about it. And meanwhile, ten years more or ten years less, what is the difference? But I will tell once again that the main achievement, to be more precise the main neglect, of our journalist is, of course, not about that fact.

In principle, I would not refuse to go Moscow and Istanbul during the searches of the content of the Treaty of Küçük Kaynarca. For someone else's expense, of course. But in this case the most important is not the way to the Truth, but the result. Bochkala did not get around finding out what is written in that "forgotten" (by HIM) treaty. It seems that he failed to find the text of the document... And I managed to find it without leaving my home.

It took me 3 (three) minutes to find the text in the Internet: I told you the time on purpose. It is not so large, and consists of only 28 articles, so that even Bochkala is able to read it, as well as his colleague a citizen of Turkey from Moscow, who started a false report; I would say the one, who started this scrawl. These guys are, probably, not aware that the Internet may be used not only for playing the computer games. I will not mention the fundamental libraries, where there are the paper-based publications of this and of many other documents. But to look through the books, especially if they are without a color pictures, is the relic of the past...

Now let’s get to the text of the treaty. Naturally, there is no and could not be information in the document about any rights of Turkey for the Crimea in case of its transfer to "the third State".  It is impossible at least because the Crimea did not exist as a separate administrative and territorial, and more over as a political unit in the eighteenth century. There was the Crimean Khanate. And this is a slightly different spatial configuration.

What does the treaty say about the Khanate? And here is the quote from Part 3:

" All Tartar peoples:  Crimean, Budzhat, Kuban, Yedisan, Zhambuyluk and Edichkul without exception from both empires may be acknowledged free and absolutely independent from any outer power, but being under autocratic power of their own khan of Genghis generation, who is elected by the whole Tatar society and elevated, who should govern them according to the ancient laws and traditions, without reporting anything to any other state; and for this purpose neither Russia nor the Ottoman Porte can interfere into the election or into the elevation of the mentioned above khan, as well as into the domestic, political, civil and internal affairs under no pretense, but will recognize and respect the above mentioned Tatar nation in the political and civil state like other states, which are under autocratic government and do not depend on anyone but the God...

Or here is one more extract:

" The Russian empire would leave this to Tatar nations, except the fortresses in Kerch and Enikol with their districts and docks, which the Russian empire leaves in its possession, all cities, fortresses, villages, lands and docks in the Crimea and in Kuban, which are obtained in battles, the land between the rivers the Berda and the Konskie Vody and the Dnepr, as well as all the land up to the Polish border, which is between the rivers the Bug and the Dnestr, excluding the fortress Ochakov with its old district, which remains in the possession of the Brilliant Porte, and promises according to the treaty about peace and  in the exchange of the above mentioned to withdraw all its troops from their  domain, and the Brilliant Porte is mutually obliged to evenly suspend from any right, from any right that it could have, for fortresses, cities, dwellings and for everything else situated in the Crimea, in Kuban and on the island Taman, and not to have garrisons and military people of its own there, giving away the mentioned above regions in such a way as Russia gives away to Tatars into the full autocratic and into the independent ownership and rule.".

Here is the quite full outline of an independent khanate. Where are the conditions not to pass something to the "third state"? Vice versa, we may see the clear conditions of the transfer to "the third state"! Herewith, the "third state" (the Crimean Khanate) was, in fact, fully occupied by the Russian troops. Is there anything else in the treaty concerning the Crimea? Only specifications of the stated in Article 3, which are written in the articles 18-21. I will quote them entirely.

" Art.  18. The castle Kinburn, located at the mouth of the river Dnepr, with the district on the left bank of the Dnepr and with an angle which consists of the  steppe, located between the rivers the Bug and the Dnepr, remains in full, eternal and unquestioningly possession of the Russian empire ".

" Art.  19. The fortresses Enikale and Kerch, located on the Crimean peninsula, with their docks and with everything that is in them, as well as with districts, starting from the Black Sea and following the ancient border of Kerch till the hole Bugak, and from Bugak straight upward to the sea of Azov, remain in full, eternal and unquestioningly possession of the Russian empire.

" Art.  20. The city of Azov with its district and with its borders, which are shown in the tools, concluded in 1700, that is in 1113, between the governor Tolstoy and the Agugskiy governor Gassan-Pasha, must belong forever to the Russian empire ".

" Art.  21. Both Kabardy, that is  the Large and the Small, adjacent to the Tatars have strong ties with the Khans of the Crimea, for this purpose their belonging to the Russian empire should be left to the will of the Crimean khan, with his Council and with the Tatar foremen ".

What do you think could the Ukrainian and Turkish journalists, as well as the involved by them "experts" read it before rambling on some stories, which are circulating in the information space for 25 already? These stories circulate only because people are lazy to look for a little bit and to read a little bit. They could read. But, it seems that acquisition of skills and competence of reading the texts was not part of the system of their professional training. Well, it should be noted that this problem is not the specifically Ukrainian one, as we used to think. As we may see, the citizens of Turkey have the same problem...

We will not reproach international journalists in absence of logics. This will be the low blow. We will not blame an old lady for the fact that she has no that things below the belt, that would make her an old gentleman in case they were there, won’t we?  That is why there is nothing surprising about the fact that the Turkish correspondent of the allegedly authoritative newspaper the Hürriyete Nerdun Khadzhyoglu writes, and Bochkala stupidly repeats after him, that as the Crimea was transferred to Russia (???) without the right of transfer to the third state (!!!), Turkey may lay claims on it in case of separation of Ukraine (???). If anyone found the logical link in the mentioned above phrase, he/she may boldly go to the nearest editorial office of any mass-media. You have unquestionable journalistic abilities, and you will for sure make a career of a journalist!

The rest of us may make some conclusions. Do not believe the info-liars, check the misinformation which they spread and present as "information". Use your brain! Not that the journalists are not able to do it, they even do not suspect that one can use the brain. There is no need in it, having a big mouth and naughty fingers, quickly working on the keyboard. But we are not journalists...

Присоединяйся к нам на канале в Яндекс.Дзен