Analytical
APRIL 26, 2019
Disclaimer: problem that guides us
On April 24, the 104th anniversary of the Armenian Genocide, the Armenian people in different corners of the world once again paid tribute to the memory of more than one and a half million innocent victims. Like every year, the next anniversary became the period when our political thought tried not only to reinterpret what happened more than a century ago, but also to formulate the problems and outline the steps that are of political importance for Armenians in this changing world. From that point of view, it was interesting to observe whether there is a positive development process in the political assessments of the elimination of the causes of the Armenian Genocide and, especially, the elimination of its consequences.
Of course, as in the past, today too, the emotional approach to a problem naturally dominates for the majority of citizens, which, unfortunately, has become a part of the identity of the Armenian nation. However, it is obvious that now we are talking more about the need to show a more serious attitude towards the Great Genocide as a political issue. Individual experts, as well as a significant section of ordinary citizens, underestimate the importance of the process of international recognition of the Genocide in the solution of the Armenian Question (Hay Dat) and put forward demands to move in other ways and with a different logic. It is especially welcome that when addressing the causes of the crime and talking about the elimination of its consequences, its psychological prerequisites are discussed: the psychological structure of the Turkish society, the issues of our internal moral qualities and recovery, etc.
Nevertheless, it should be noted that currently, the Armenian Genocide as a political issue, regardless of the content of the solution, continues to be considered mainly in the domain of international interests. Be it the agenda of the international recognition of the Genocide or the process of making demands and compensation, many comments emphasize the thoughts of taking into account the political interests of other countries and combining the RA state interests with others. However, along with all that, today on the platform of public discussion, there are mainly issues related to the legal and political foundations and evaluations of the Armenian claim, which are not determined by international and regional interests.
These questions are asked not only and not so much to the events of 1915, but to the events with a larger temporal scope. In particular, we are talking about a ten-year period, starting from 1913. From the coup d’état carried out by the leaders of “Ittihad”, which was a seizure of power from a legal point of view, a serious crime against Armenians and other Christian peoples and the prelude to their destruction, which ended in 1923. According to the Treaty of Lausanne, when the Kemalites finally stopped the genocidal actions against the “infidels”.
The current legal and political setting of the mentioned events and raised issues completely changes the political content of the Armenian Genocide issue. Apart from being a specially organized crime by the Ottoman state against a people, the issue of Genocide acquires a greater political weight. It becomes a lasting act of genocide not only against the Armenian people, as one of the state-creating nations of the Ottoman state, by the Young Turks and Kemal Turkey, but also by the Ottoman state, the Republic of Turkey, and Bolshevik Russia in 1918-1920. Action to carry out illegal occupation of the Republic of Armenia. Therefore, the issue of the Armenian Genocide is directly related not only to the problems of compensating the moral and material (property, financial) damages caused to the Armenian people by modern Turkey and Russia, but also to the problems of returning the occupied territories of the Republic of Armenia under international law.
It should be noted that, in addition to the attitude implying coexistence, the Armenian “arsenal” has so far contained only tools implying a demonstration of abstract power: silent or active protests in front of the Turkish embassies of different countries near memorials dedicated to Yeghern, other structures and khachkars, marches with torches symbolizing a demonstration of will, burning the Turkish flag, etc. Although they were merely actions to achieve psychological self-satisfaction, they certainly left certain consequences in the public consciousness. But the maximum political result was always left to the uncertain future, to the hope of greater physical involvement, ignoring the huge legal and diplomatic potential that we have.
However, just as after the “velvet” revolution, the RA government is free to start negotiations on the international political agenda on the Artsakh issue, so in the Armenian Genocide issue, it is the right time to introduce the problem of eliminating the consequences of the Armenian Genocide into the foreign political agenda. The ability of the Armenian community to formulate a demanding political agenda is of primary importance in that matter. The “Citizen’s Day” celebrated on April 27 is the best opportunity to move from the silent coexistence of April 24th every year to national-state issues, to restore our dignity “beheaded” by the Turkish yataghan through legal and political means. In that case, the legal grounds are more than sufficient, the only thing missing is the package of public demand submitted to the government’s court.
Saro Saroyan