Author: Emil Lazarian

ecognition of the Armenian genocide is not only about the Armenians or upsetting the Turks. The “G-word” is about the fundamental role of parliaments and legislators to protect liberal democracy.

The United Nations Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide defines genocide in Article II as acts committed with the “intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group.” While genocide recognition is a political, diplomatic and legal framework, it is also an academic and normative one. The 107th Armenian genocide Memorial Day is approaching on April 24. According to the U.N. Convention, the genocide of 1915 affected the lives of not only Armenians but also Assyrians and Greeks under Ottoman rule. Over 1.5 million of the declining Ottoman Empire’s historic Christian population were murdered.

During the current war in Ukraine, Russia has committed crimes against humanity. President Joe Biden called for a war-crimes trial, and even went as far as labeling those crimes as “genocide.” Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky makes frequent references to the Holocaust and draws similarities between the current atrocities against the Ukrainian people and the European Jews. Meanwhile, the public statements of some observants, such as Josep Borrell, European Union foreign affairs chief, asserted that the war in Ukraine is “among the darkest hours of Europe since the Second World War.” It goes to show that the genocide and ethnic cleansing of Bosnian and Kosovo Muslims is still largely denied or dismissed from the West’s public memory. This also shows the extent to which partisan positions on genocide recognition are driven by ethnic/religious identity politics.

Too often, the lines between governments and parliaments are blurred. They ultimately are separate agencies within the state apparatus of each country. As such, governments usually adopt a more pragmatic approach to normative issues, namely the commemoration and recognition of a genocide. This is not a huge surprise. Governments have to conduct foreign relations, which sometimes involves doing business with authoritarian leaders while maintaining national security interests.

Rather unexpectedly, parliaments and legislators usually mirror and adopt the pragmatic approach of the executive branches and miss important opportunities to make a difference. Yet, parliaments and legislators should implement a more normative approach to these issues. Such recognition enhances the importance of protecting minorities and promotes human rights. It bolsters democracy and stabilizes checks and balances. More importantly, recognition of genocides does not have to be all or nothing. Governments and ministries of foreign affairs can say “no,” while parliaments and legislators can say “yes, it’s a genocide.”

Since 1975, numerous efforts were made in the U.S. Congress to pass an Armenian genocide bill. In a milestone vote in late 2019, both the U.S. House and Senate defied pressure from Turkey and passed a bill declaring that the killing of 1.5 million Armenians by the Ottoman Turks was, in fact, a genocide.

Demonstrators march toward the Turkish Consulate during a rally commemorating the 103rd anniversary of the Armenian genocide on April 24, 2018, in Los Angeles, Calif.MARIO TAMA/GETTY IMAGES

As expected, the Trump administration rejected Congress’ vote on the Armenian genocide. “The position of the administration has not changed,” said then-State Department spokesperson Morgan Ortagus in December 2019. “Our views are reflected in the president’s definitive statement on this issue from last April.” To recap, in April 2018, on the 103th anniversary of the Armenian genocide, Donald Trump noted that the U.S. paid tribute to the victims of “one of the worst mass atrocities of the 20th century.” The word genocide was not mentioned by Trump in 2018 and 2019. Like previous presidents, he too omitted the G-word.

In 2021, during the 106th anniversary of the genocide, Joe Biden adopted the United States’ Congress decision and stated, “Over the decades Armenian immigrants have enriched the United States in countless ways, but they have never forgotten the tragic history that brought so many of their ancestors to our shores. We honor their story.” Biden has provided Armenian survivors not only recognition of the 1915 genocide but also publicly acknowledged an important identity component of Armenian immigrants.

The U.K.’s longstanding position of successive governments supporting the denial account of Turkey is yet another important example. Since 2021, the British Parliament has been challenging this long-held position by passing the Armenian genocide bill, which will be read a second time on May 6, 2022, in the House of Commons. Certainly, the road to final recognition has a few important steps, but every step counts. As an important normative step, the U.K. should adopt a balanced stance on this issue.

If the U.K. parliament recognizes the Armenian genocide in May, it could be a wake-up call for New Zealand and Australian parliaments (the U.K.’s former dominions) that have not surprisingly aligned with the U.K.’s non-recognition policy for many years.

Ultimately, it is imperative that public debate focuses on the normative realm and parliaments, as they are major players in the genocide debate. The new global order imposed by the war in Ukraine emphasizes the deterioration of liberal democracies, as well as the emergence of a new bipolar order. Parliaments in the liberal camp should use their authority more often when it comes to the G-word. Legislators also have a fundamental responsibility to defend liberal democracy by highlighting its normative voice of the term genocide. Given the current state of the Russian invasion of Ukraine and the crimes against humanity, it is recommended that normative recognition of war crimes as genocide should not be delayed any further.

Dr. Eldad Ben-Aharon is a scholar of international relations. He is a lecturer in Middle Eastern studies at the University of Groningen and a Postdoctoral Minerva Fellow at the Institute for Peace and Conflict Research in Frankfurt (PRIF). Dr. Ben-Aharon’s first book Israeli-Turkish Relations at the End of the Cold War: The Geopolitics of Denying the Armenian Genocide will be published in 2023 by the University of Edinburgh. His Twitter is: @EldadBenAharon.

The views expressed in this article are the writer’s own.

Calling the Armenian genocide “The Sin of Ottoman Empire”, the Armenian ambassador to India again raised the voice for the millions of people who were killed around a century ago. Armenian ambassador Yuri Babakhanian, while speaking at a book launch event on Sunday, April 24, reiterated his demand to sue the country responsible for the mass killing of Armenians in 1915. He said the victims are still waiting for justice. Notably, the strong condemnation from Babakhanian came when he was speaking at the book launch of the “Armenian Genocide, The Sin of Ottoman Empire”.

The Armenian genocide was considered the systematic destruction of the Armenian people and identity in the Ottoman Empire during World War I. It was estimated that more than 1.5 million Armenians were killed during the First World War.
“…More than a century has passed since the Armenian Genocide, the deprivation of the Armenian people of their homeland and property. However, the entire Armenian people are still waiting for justice because the crime of genocide cannot have a statute of limitations,” he said. According to Yuri Babakhanian, if the first genocide of the 20th century had been recognized and condemned by the then world leaders, there would have been no subsequent genocide at all. 

Babakhanian called the genocide– “a terrible tragedy”, and added about half of the Armenians lost their homeland and their family members during the mass killings. “It is also the history of survival and struggle,” he said and added, “It was a fight in the name of life, struggle to preserve identity, struggle not to lose the memory of the nation, and the right and the opportunity to pass it on to the next generations.” He appealed to the other countries to condemn the genocide and urged the world leaders to get united in the matter in order to prevent such incidents in the future. As of now, around 33 countries including, the United States, Germany, France, Italy, Canada, Uruguay and Brazil, formally recognized the Armenian Genocide. 

Interestingly, Russia, which has escalated the brutal war against its neighbouring country, Ukraine, also recognised the incident as “genocide”.On the other hand, Turkey acknowledges that many died in that period, but it says that the death toll is inflated. It considers the deaths resulting from civil unrest. According to the Turkish government, Muslim Turks were also killed. On Sunday, US President Joe Biden also condemned the incident and used the anniversary to appeal to the leaders to lay down a set of principles for foreign policy against genocide. In a reply, Turkey’s Foreign Ministry issued a counter-statement saying, “Statements that are incompatible with historical facts and international law regarding the events of 1915 are not valid.”

The Turkish Foreign Ministry yesterday rejected US President Joe Biden’s commemoration of the 107th anniversary of the Armenian genocide when 1.5 million Armenians were killed in World War I during the era of the Ottoman Empire.

“We reject such statements and decisions to distort historical facts for political motives, and we condemn those who insist on this mistake,” the Turkish Foreign Ministry said in a statement, adding that Biden has repeated the same mistake he made last year.

Yesterday Biden commemorated the 107th anniversary of the start of the Armenian genocide, issuing a statement in memory of the 1.5 million Armenians “who were deported, massacred or marched to their deaths in a campaign of extermination”.

Last year, Biden recognised the massacres committed against the Armenians as a “genocide”, angering Turkiye.

At the time, the Turkish Foreign Ministry said: “We reject and denounce in the strongest terms the statement of the President of the US regarding the events of 1915 made under the pressure of radical Armenian circles and anti-Turkey groups.”

Historians believe about 1.5 million Armenians were victims of systematic killing during the era of the Ottoman Empire.

Turkiye, the legal successor to the Ottoman Empire, has recognised the killing of between 300,000 and 500,000 people, but refuses to describe it as “genocide”.

April 22 (Reuters) – Azerbaijan’s President Ilham Aliyev called on Friday for negotiations to take place soon on a peace treaty with Armenia, but said Yerevan would need to renounce any territorial claim against his country, the Interfax news agency reported.

Aliyev said the two former Soviet republics, which fought their last major war in 2020, could reach an agreement quickly if Armenia accepted the principles his country had set forward.

“Armenia must officially recognise the territorial integrity of Azerbaijan, as well as the fact that it does not have any territorial claims against Azerbaijan, and will not have any in the future either,” he was quoted as saying.

Otherwise, “we will not recognise the territorial integrity of Armenia, we will announce it officially,” he said.

Speaking to Armenia’s parliament after Aliyev’s comments, Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan said he would not sign any peace deal with Azerbaijan without consulting ethnic Armenians in Nagorno-Karabakh.

At least 6,500 people were killed in a six-week war in 2020, the latest flare-up of a conflict dating back to the collapse of the Soviet Union. It ended when Russia intervened and sent peacekeepers to the flashpoint region of Nagorno-Karabakh, which lies inside Azerbaijan but was home to an estimated 150,000 Armenians before the latest round of fighting.

RIA news agency quoted Pashinyan as saying: “I rule out that I would come close to signing a document that would not have undergone extensive public discussion, including with all the layers of society in Nagorno-Karabakh.”

“This is a cast-iron guarantee that the fate of Nagorno-Karabakh cannot be decided behind the backs of the people.”

Azerbaijan is in a strong negotiating position after emerging as the decisive victor, recapturing territory it had lost between 1991 and 1994. But many questions remain unresolved, including over the demarcation of borders.

The despatch of almost 2,000 peacekeepers reaffirmed Moscow’s role as policeman and chief power broker in a volatile part of the former Soviet Union where Turkey also wields increasing influence thanks to its close alliance with Azerbaijan.