Etchmiadzin became one of the major refugee towns in the Caucasus. And Mayor Alexander Khatisyan of Tiflis stated, “the number of refugees in Etchmiadzin is 30,000, with the daily death toll above 300. Five hundred corpses remain, that are not buried. Healthy refugees have scattered in panic,”
But there were several challenges for the dedicated local population. Because of the many problems during wartime they could not cultivate the land, and the scarcity of supply transports from Russia resulted in huge price increases of bread and basic necessities. The coming winter spelled possible death not only to the hungry and naked refugees, but also to the locals.
HUMANITARIAN CRISIS
Reports of Turkish atrocities against the Armenians and the Caucasian humanitarian crisis quickly reached the imperial Russian authorities. The Russian government as well as a number of non-governmental organizations in the Russian Empire provided humanitarian assistance to thousands of Armenian refugees, the speaker revealed.
“Russia’s joint declaration with Great Britain and France in May 1915 defined the atrocities against the Armenians in the Ottoman Empire as a crime against humanity, and promised to hold the Ottoman government and those implicated in the massacres personally responsible for those crimes.”
ARMENIAN AND RUSSIAN COMMITTEES
Two prominent Armenian organizations in the Russian Empire that addressed the Armenian refugee crisis were the Caucasus Armenian Benevolent Society with its 72 branches, and the Armenian Central Committee in Tiflis for its assistance to victims of war. Both established hospitals and feeding stations in more than a dozen cities and towns.
The Moscow Armenian Committee mainly operated in Yerevan opening a hospital, a food depot, three orphanages, and a school for 110 orphan-students in Ashtarak, and Etchmiadzin. And theCommittee of Brotherly Aid was a major institution with branches in Etchmiadzin, Alexandropol, and other major areas which was under aegis of the Catholicos of All Armenians.
With the emergency growing speedily, the Russian imperial authorities established the Special Council for Refugees to ensure the efficiency of the refugee humanitarian activities, issuing cards to all identified refugees for food and medical assistance.
They also insisted that able-bodied refugees find work in farming and workshops and help with the education of refugee children who were housed in orphanages throughout the Caucasus. Other Russian aid groups included the All-Russian Union of Townsand the Caucasus Committee.
SAVIOR OR MASTER?
The Russian motivation was complicated. Ottoman Armenians wondered whether Russia was a savior or another imperial master?
Since the late 19th century, the speaker continued, Russia had a huge Armenian population in Transcaucasia, spreading from the Kars region to the Black Sea coast and Tiflis, as well as from the Caspian Sea and Baku to the Russo-Iranian border. And after the Treaty of Berlin in 1878, Armenians saw Russia as their protector from Muslim domination and the persecutions in the Ottoman Empire.
But as in all national self-interest, Russian policy towards Armenians fluctuated depending on the economic, military, political and geographical developments in the region. According to historian Avetis Harutyunyan, “Russian imperial authorities never actually aimed at protecting Armenians.” Their relief work was just the “by-product” of Russian imperialist and colonization policies.
Historian Peter Holquist wrote that when the war was waged, “urgent military interest, rather than an anti-Armenian policy shaped those decisions.” Another historian Halit Akarca called Russian policy in Eastern Turkey during the war as “humanitarian occupation”, motivated by strategic and political concerns.
Darbinyan concluded that “the desire to help others and save lives of strangers was there and mobilized people, agencies, governments and even empires. As the providers of assistance often made, and still do make for the ‘people in distress’, help was and is based not on the actual needs and concerns of the refugees, but rather on their sometimes inaccurate perceptions of those groups.”