Case study-Armenian genocide
Written by Yulia Pavlovska
Edited by Lote Līva leimane
*This is a fact checked piece*
Just a few days ago, on the 24th of April, people around the world gathered for a solemn commemoration - the Armenian Genocide Remembrance Day. This presents an opportunity to shed light on its events and the issues surrounding it, as well as its continued relevance.
The Armenian Genocide was a campaign of mass murder and forced displacement conducted against the Armenians residing in the Ottoman Empire by the Young Turk government during World War 1. Previously, while the Armenians did not have their own state, they retained a strong sense of identity in the Ottoman Empire, as they could preserve their Armenian language and the Armenian version of orthodoxy. This was facilitated by the millet system present in the Ottoman Empire, which accorded significant independence to the non-Muslim minorities residing there. While life was far from peaceful or guaranteed for the Armenians during the 19th century (for instance, they were the subjects of mass violence several times), their situation deteriorated significantly when a new government, called the Young Turks, came to power. While a variety of factors played into the start of the genocide, with the backdrop of the First World War, the catalyst for the start of the massacre was the Ottoman defeat by Russians in a battle in 1915, for which the Armenians were made the scapegoat.
The Armenian troops that had been present there were the victims of organised murder by Ottoman soldiers, the first victims of the genocide. Civilian Armenians were then forcibly deported from their traditional places of living in Eastern Anatolia, and the people were marched to desert concentration camps in Syria. By the end of the First World War in 1918, most of the Armenians who had lived in the Ottoman Empire were gone.
The Armenian genocide presents an interesting case study of recognition and non-recognition of genocide, as this remains contentious to the present day. While many at the time recognised it as such, documenting it, it was never recognised by the Ottoman Empire. Nowadays, while the majority of scholars dealing with such issues have recognised it as a genocide, it continues to be denied. The recognition and non-recognition of the genocide is still a topic of controversy in our day, seeing as modern day Türkey, the descendant of the Ottoman Empire, and pro-Turkish organisations and governments (such as that of Azerbaijan) continue denying the occurrence, even if in the eyes of many, the historical record is clear.
What is more, the legacy of the Armenian genocide took on newfound importance in recent years. This is as, just last year, there was a new forced exodus of Armenians. This time, the fleeing was catalyzed by the conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh, a long contested region between Armenia and Azerbaijan. This is as it used to be an Armenian exclave in Azerbaijan, but is now fully in control of the latter, resulting in the forced migration of Armenians to Armenia who did not want to be under Azerbaijani rule.
A traumatic event, it has already been named an ethnic cleansing by certain scholars. What’s more, it is not just about the physical exodus of the population, but also about the destruction of its heritage, such as Armenian religious architecture.
Thus, it is vital to recognise that a genocide did occur. Because recognition of genocide ensures that it stays not just in the memory of those whom it impacted and their ancestors, but also of the international community and of international law. Only by remembering history can we minimize the risk of it repeating itself. And if we erase the memory of a people being victims of genocide, we erase their right to a crucial part of their history and their right to defend themselves against it repeating, as well as give legitimacy to those who continue to oppress.
Moreover, through remembrance, we can draw the attention and shame of the international community, as well as multiply efforts to preserve a people’s heritage.