Only the Armenian authorities could reduce the Turkish guilt

Nikol Pashinyan’s message on the occasion of the 111th anniversary of the Armenian Genocide was the weakest April 24th message among the world leaders, which can only be compared with Erdogan’s message. About this 168TVof Revue he said on the air of the program Gevorg Ghukasyan, candidate of political sciences, responsible for the programs of the Central Office of the ARF Armenian Datspeaking about the statements made on April 24, both by the head of the Armenian government and by world leaders.

The person in charge of the Office of the Armenian Dat refers to Pashinyan in particular in the text to the controversial claim that according to the volume of Armenian history published by the NAS History Institute, “The Great Genocide is a consequence of the practice of involving the Armenian people in international intrigues”, and to the question of whether Nikol Pashinyan is actually trying to free Turkey from the responsibility of the Armenian Genocide with similar views.

The political scientist emphasizes that Nikol Pashinyan’s political intentions are so clear and obvious that there is no need to search in the footnotes for a long time. According to Gevorg Ghukasyan, only the Armenian authorities could think of reducing Turkish guilt in the Armenian Genocide.

“Well, even if the fact of the Armenian Genocide had an international, I wouldn’t say predisposition, but a favorable situation from the point of view of international relations: it was a war, it was a mess, in popular terms, a dog did not know its master, and the Turkish state committed genocide, how much does this reduce the share of Turkish guilt?

Now, probably Pashinyan wanted to say that some international actors directed this crime, which is absurd, but I am of the opinion that, yes, the created situation of international relations was somewhat favorable for Turkey to commit war crimes, but the degree of Turkey’s responsibility does not decrease from this, on the contrary, it increases, because even in the order established by the international law of that time, back in 1949. The Geneva Conventions did not exist, but even with the existing legal regulations, the Turkish side had an obligation to protect the civilian population.

The Turkish side not only failed in this, but also systematically organized and carried out the genocide of the entire people in the territory of its state, in the Armenian people’s own homeland. Reducing the Turkish guilt here could only occur in the minds of the Armenian authorities,” commented the representative of Hay Dat.

He recommends that before expressing such controversial thoughts about the Genocide, one should get acquainted with the documentary materials related to the great crime against the Armenians – American, German, Russian, Turkish, Armenian and other countries’ archives, testimonies, and ultimately with the “Black Book” or “Black Notebook” of one of the main organizers of the Armenian Genocide, Talaat, which is one of the most valuable evidences and testimonies of the genocide.

“Taleat’s book is finally there. Taleat’s book, the so-called “Black Book”, which was published – his diaries – is a terrible book, where you read how it is that in this month, for example, so many Armenians live in Trabzon, this month so many live, from which so many were evacuated, so many were killed, so many are children, etc. It is about all of Western Armenia. To stand up on this documentary material and make such statements? I say again

The issue of recognizing the Armenian Genocide has never been an end in itself and should not be. It is not about punishing Turkey, it is not about hurting Turkey, it is not about devaluing Turkey in international relations. It is about the security of RA and the Armenian people. It is even, if you want to go further, about real Armenian-Turkish reconciliation.” says the interlocutor.

Gevorg Ghukasyan emphasizes that the recognition of the Armenian Genocide was never an end in itself and should not be, and it primarily has a security significance for the Republic of Armenia and the Armenian people, which was founded in a small part of the Armenian homeland after the Great Genocide. He also adds that the issue of recognizing the Armenian Genocide is not about punishing Turkey. Moreover, if we try to look further, it is about real Armenian-Turkish reconciliation, but first Turkey must stop the policy of denial, otherwise Turkey’s failure to give up denial means maintaining genocidal intent։

Ghukasyan claims: the Turkish genocidal threat to Armenians has not decreased։

“The international recognition of the genocide, retribution, demand in general – this struggle was never an end in itself and had different manifestations and goals. The most important of the goals is, perhaps, not to allow a new genocide, because if the genocidal party does not recognize its own guilt, then the probability of repeating the genocide is very high (this is a genocide-scientific approach), and not giving up denial on the part of Turkey means maintaining the genocidal intention, and the struggle for the international recognition of the Armenian Genocide should ultimately lead to the recognition of the genocide by Turkey, which in itself will have a security significance for the Republic of Armenia.

As a result of the events of recent years, we see that the Turkish genocidal threat to Armenians has not decreased, and we saw its implementation in Artsakh. “Erdogan has publicly accepted and admitted several times that the Turkish army was involved in military operations in Artsakh,” the interlocutor notes.

As for what happened in Artsakh in 2023, the representative of Hay Dat’s office gives an unequivocal assessment: it was, in fact, genocide, according to the UN Convention of 1948. of the provisions set forth in Article 2 of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide.

“The UN Convention presents 5 possible situations when the crime can be qualified as genocide. We see three out of five regarding Artsakh directly, we see one partially, and this set of actions is a crime on the part of Azerbaijan. It is a fact that what happened is genocide. Genocide is not only mass slaughter of people. “Genocide is displacement, making living conditions difficult for any group of people, subjecting them to psychological and physical torture, inhibiting childbirth or separating already born children from their families,” the political scientist explains.

Gevorg Ghukasyan draws a very clear conclusion from the above: all this indicates that the genocidal threat to Armenians remains, and from this point of view, the process of international recognition of the Armenian Genocide, as the head of the programs of the Central Office of Armenian Dat adds, also had a security significance.

“Let me repeat: the cessation of denial can be considered a renunciation of genocidal intentions, that is, if Turkey stops denying the Armenian Genocide, we can accept it as a cessation of genocidal intent.” As long as this is not the case, the genocidal intention as such hangs over the heads of our people like a sword of Damocles,” added Gevorg Ghukasyan.

Referring to the fact that Pashinyan condemned the burning of the Turkish flag by young people in Yerevan on the day of the torchlight procession, April 23, but did not say any condemning words about the destruction of Armenian churches in Artsakh, Gevorg Ghukasyan said:

«By his political behavior, Nikol Pashinyan has long ago deprived himself of even the theoretical possibility of protecting Armenian interests. That person, even if he wants to, can no longer protect Armenian interests, and this statement should also be viewed in this light, that it is essentially a shame when Armenian cultural heritage disappears in Artsakh, the world’s leading news media, various international organizations speak about it, but RA is silent»։

In this context, Gevorg Ghukasyan refers to the assertion of the Armenian authorities that peace has been established between Armenia and Azerbaijan, or when Nikol Pashinyan says in the same message that we have not only a state, but also peace. Gevorg Ghukasyan, as a specialist, does not see the legal act that this peace was established.

“I, as a specialist, do not see the legal act that this peace was established. Now, maybe our opponents will say, the August 8 agreement, but the August 8 agreement is only initialized, and if we look, for example, at the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Force of International Treaties. convention, then we see that the initialization there does not mean the full implementation of the contract or agreement and its mandatory legally enforceable nature.

In other words, we do not have a peace treaty in this case from a legal point of view. Moreover, not only do we not have the so-called peace treaty, but we also have the Azerbaijani demand that “if you do not change your Constitution, that treaty will not be signed.” And in addition, more than 250 square kilometers of RA is occupied by the Azerbaijani armed forces,” commented the political scientist.

Ghukasyan emphasizes: we have a village in Syunik, Nerkin Hand, whose life is directly paralyzed due to the Azerbaijani occupation, we have prisoners in Baku, Armenian cultural heritage is being destroyed in Artsakh, the top leadership of Azerbaijan continues the same militant rhetoric, full state support is provided in Baku to the so-called “Western Azerbaijan” political concept, and under these conditions, talking about peace, blunting the self-defense instincts of the Armenian society and the state it is difficult to characterize the current policy of misdirection without emotionalism.

“For the sake of internal political calculations, the state and the resistance of the state cannot be weakened so much. The peace agenda is entirely an internal political calculation. There is no peace in the classical understanding of the word,” the interlocutor adds.

Full interview in the video.

—