Israel’s Recognition of the Armenian Genocide Isn’t Enough

On June 28, 2026, Israel formally recognized the Armenian Genocide. Armenians should welcome the recognition, even if it is rooted more in diplomatic cynicism than principle. After all, there is no doubt except in extreme denialist circles about the scale, scope, and intent of the murders of the Armenians and, concurrently, the Pontic Greeks.

The move comes decades late, as successive Israeli governments feared angering Turks and the Turkish government who have never come to terms with Turkish culpability. Many Jewish groups, meanwhile, feared recognizing the Armenian Genocide would somehow detract from the uniqueness of the Holocaust, never mind that Nazi German leader Adolf Hitler cited the Ottomans’ ability to get away with their slaughter of the Armenians to justify his own policy against the Jews. To make an ahistorical analogy, Israeli non-recognition of the Armenian Genocide would be akin to U.S. governments refusing to recognize the Holocaust because they feared upsetting German trade deals or Arab countries that were hostile to Israel.

Israel’s motives in its recognition may not be fully principled, but the result—acknowledging historical fact—Armenians should nonetheless welcome.

Israelis may object to such an interpretation but, if so, they should go further. Realpolitik defines Israel’s relationship with Azerbaijan. Israelis insist that their investment in Azerbaijan paid huge intelligence and military dividends during the recent Iran war.

Still, the Israeli tendency to advocate for Azerbaijan with the same uncritical endorsement that U.S. Ambassador Tom Barrack advocates for Turkey can backfire. To rationalize Azerbaijani ethnic cleansing of Armenians and the destruction of Armenian churches, monasteries, and graveyards is to give the diplomatic and antisemitic lynch mob that wants to see Israel’s destruction or denies Jewish heritage in the Holy Land a precedent that would enable ignoring Palestinian bulldozing of Jewish cites and archaeological ruins in Jerusalem and the West Bank. While the late Ambassador Dore Gold long spoke of the need for defensible borders, Israel’s refusal to grant Armenia the same principle undermines Israel in future diplomatic negotiations.

Israel’s tight relations with Azerbaijan can be valuable if Israel uses its position to moderate Azerbaijani racism and incitement against Armenians. There is no strategic or logical reason why Azerbaijan should have destroyed the ancient cemetery at Julfa, for example. Israel should use its access to Azerbaijani leader Ilham Aliyev to counsel against the repetition of such destruction, especially as Azerbaijani forces destroy churches and graveyards in Nagorno-Karabakh.

Likewise, Azerbaijan has maneuvered itself into a corner with its unjustified arrest and kangaroo court trials of elected Nagorno-Karabakh political leaders like philanthropist Ruben Vardanyan and brilliant scholar-turned-diplomat Davit Babayan. Their imprisonment might satisfy Azerbaijani bloodlust, but Azerbaijan’s continued detention of prisoners of war—now for more than 1,000 days—only soils a reputation about which Azerbaijan is increasingly sensitive. Ilham Aliyev may believe Azerbaijan deserves a reputation akin to that of the United Arab Emirates, but such gratuitous attacks on Christians, the violent pursuit of diplomatic grievance, and multiple corruption scandals make Americans and Europeans increasingly see Azerbaijan more as the Algeria, if not Eritrea, of the Caucasus.

Diplomatic ties and partnerships should not require moral compromise or acquiescence to an ideology that amounts to continued cultural genocide. Instead, Israel should use its good offices to speak truth to Aliyev and advocate for an end to Azerbaijani policies that do nothing but undermine Azerbaijan’s reputation on the world stage. Israel should relieve Azerbaijan of the notion that its current strategy of transforming think tankers and academics into lobbyists, if not court jesters, will suffice to stop Azerbaijan’s continued reputational decline.