Customer Rating: 
Summary: An Objective Eye on a Forgotten Land
Comment: The conflict over the Armenian territory of Artsakh, also known as Garapakh (hence the title of the book), has been intractable since the fall of the Soviet Union. Yet few today remember how the conflict originated, how Joseph Stalin's purges and ethnic engineering shaped the region, and how the Mountain Turks (called "Azeris" since WWI), the Armenians, and indeed most of the Soviet Union's subjects were used in the often arbitrary Stalinist decisions. In this mostly objective work, the origins of the conflict are traced in such a way as to explain why feelings in that region of the world are so strong, why the Mountain Turks want Artsakh from the Armenians, and the relation between the Genocide of the innocent Armenians in 1915 by murderous Turkey itself still has ramifications in the present.
Customer Rating: 
Summary: Unbiased? No -- Biased? Nope.
Comment: The problem with ethnic issues is that often the only people that care about them are people of that ethnicity -- therefore, this author is going to be called biased and unbiased by the 2 sides. I found this book an interesting account of how the issue of Karabagh was used by the National Democratic Movement (a loaded term -- basically, the people who were pro-democracy in the end of the USSR who also happened to all be of the ethnicity) in promoting their own goals. I read this book twice in an academic setting and found it to be one of the best on the subject.
Customer Rating:
Summary: Product of propaganda
Comment: I would advise to read this book to noone, maybe only to knowledgeable people, who know the real situation and won't be misled by the tricky description of the author. Why? Just to see the real face of Armenian nationalism in its veil of "national democracy".
Customer Rating:
Summary: Would not recommend. Very biased.
Comment: This is a very dangerous book. It is full of hatred and false information. I guess that is how "inspirational" material is created for racist movements. The author claims that Garabagh is an Armenian land and justifies brutal crimes that Armenian armed units committed against Azerbaijani population. In reality, Garabagh historically has never been Armenian, and Armenians came there 150 years ago. Before the conflict started in 1988, Azeris made over 25% of population of Upper Garabagh autonomous province of Azerbaijan. In the beginning of this century, Azeris made over 50% of Upper Garabagh. This province even does not have borders with Armenia and located in the center of Azerbaijan Republic. If you take the whole Garabagh area, not just the upper part of it, Azeris make over 75% of population. Armenians did not even have majority in this geographic area. Now Azeris in those lands have been killed by Armenian aggressors or had to flee from their homes.
The Armenian population of Upper Garabagh is 30 times smaller than the population of Armenian republic, and more that 8 times smaller in territory. So, the book's story of "unification" or "self-determination" of Armenians" is not valid, since Upper Garabagh Armenians (120,000 people) do not make any significant share of Armenians in the world (over 5 mln people). Armenian nation has already determined itself in Armenian Republic by three million Armenians. Armenians in Los Angeles have even a bigger community than in Garabagh. Should they "determine themselves" too?
Before 1988, Armenians in Azerbaijan lived at the same rights and benefits like Azeris, and both Azerbaijan and Armenia was ruled by Russia. Armenians in Garabagh had schools, TV programs and all cultural and administrative institutions in Armenian language. Even street signs and posters were in Armenian. So there can not be any talks about discrimination of Armenians either.
Customer Rating:
Summary: Great Book
Comment: With the collapse of the Soviet Union I have had an interest in researching the emergence of Armenia and other former Soviet states as independent countries. Mr. Malkasian provides the reader with a great insites into what occurred in Armenia earler this decade and how the conflict in Karabagh connects with the drive for Armenian statehood. I would recommend it to anyone who has any interest in the history of the region.
