Category: Authors

Over 40 Armenian Genocide specialists from nine countries met in Yerevan on March 22-23 to strategize on how to devise a legal framework to mitigate the consequences of the Genocide, counter Turkish denialism, and organize genocide studies programs and museum exhibits. The conference was organized by the State Commission coordinating activities leading to the 100^th Anniversary of the Armenian Genocide.

In his message to the conference, Pres. Serzh Sargsyan expressed regret that the Armenian Genocide has gone unpunished which paved the way for the Jewish Holocaust. He hoped that the 100^th anniversary would be an occasion to demonstrate Armenian unity and resolve to alleviate the consequences of the Genocide, secure restorative justice, and pass on to the next generation new methods of struggle and survival. The President welcomed the fact that more conscientious elements of Turkish society are shattering the wall of silence and denialism, and reexamining the revisionist policies of their country. The President asked conference participants to recommend suggestions to the State Commission for the commemoration of the 100^th anniversary of the Armenian Genocide.

Here is a summary of the comments made by some of the genocide experts participating in the March 22-23 conference:

Israeli scholar Yair Auron criticized the State of Israel for not recognizing the Armenian Genocide, pointing out, however, that a large segment of the Israeli public acknowledges it. Having experienced a similar tragic fate during the Holocaust, Israel should have been the first country to acknowledge the Armenian Genocide, stated Prof. Auron.

Historian Richard Hovannisian of Los Angeles urged the State Commission to plan artistic and cultural events rather than academic conferences to reach out to more people around the world. He suggested organizing a pan-Armenian philharmonic orchestra that would tour the world during the months leading to April 24, 2015. He also expressed the concern that the Turkish government is better prepared to counter the Centenary activities than Armenians are in planning them.

Hayk Demoyan, Secretary of the State Commission and Director of the Genocide Museum in Yerevan, presented to conference participants the plans for the expansion of the museum by 2015.

Prof.  Vahakn Dadrian of New York commented that when a denialist country is weak, it accepts its crimes more easily. As long as Turkey remains a powerful country, it will not recognize the Armenian Genocide, Dadrian observed.

Researcher Mihran Minassian from Aleppo, Syria, suggested that commemorative events be jointly observed with Greeks and Assyrians. He pointed out that Turkish denialists had not accused members of these two ethnic groups of joining the Russian Army or forming armed bands, yet they too became victims of mass violence and genocide.

Prof. Nikolay Hovannisyan of Yerevan explained that contrary to popular belief, the Ottoman Empire, not Uruguay, was the first country to recognize the Armenian Genocide through court verdicts in 1919-1926. Uruguay’s Parliament recognized the Armenian Genocide in 1965.

Vladimir Vardanyan, Head of International Treaties Department of Armenia’s Constitutional Court, stated that the concept of Crimes Against Humanity was first used on May 24, 1915 in a joint declaration issued by Britain, France and Russia, warning Turkish officials that they would be held responsible for the Armenian massacres. Similarly, after World War II, the Nuremberg Tribunal accused Nazi war criminals of committing Crimes Against Humanity rather than genocide. Vardanyan suggested that the Republic of Armenia set up a permanent state body that would research and develop the legal framework for the pursuit of genocide-related demands from Turkey in international courts.

Ragip Zarakolu, a prominent Turkish human rights activist from Istanbul who has been frequently jailed for publishing Armenian Genocide books, spoke about the “growing denial industry in Turkey.”  He suggested that denialism encouraged terrorism in Turkey.

As a participant in the genocide conference, I spoke about the need to pursue “justice” rather than mere “genocide recognition,” which has already been accomplished. The concept of justice comprises all Armenian demands from Turkey: moral, financial, and territorial restitution.

I also suggested that before planning any specific activities for the Genocide Centenary, Armenians worldwide first develop a single message and agreed upon set of goals. Otherwise, they would be sending mixed messages to Turkey and the international community as to what they really want and seek to accomplish on April 24, 2015.

Finally, the pursuit of Armenian demands must not end in 2015. They should persist in seeking their just demands from Turkey until they accomplish “justice” for their cause!

Shortly after Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio became Pope Francis I, Armenian and Turkish media outlets rushed to inform their audiences that the Argentinean Archbishop had acknowledged the Armenian Genocide on a number of occasions.

When Catholicos Karekin II visited Buenos Aires on April 23, 2004, Cardinal Bergoglio joined him in an ecumenical liturgy and spoke during the commemoration of the victims of the Armenian Genocide. The Cardinal stated: “We are united in grief over a genocide — the first of the 20^th century — a genocide that powerful empires seek to silence and cover up by all means.”

Last week, in his congratulatory letter to Pope Francis I, Karekin II “fondly remembered” their joint meetings and prayers in Argentina, and praised the Catholic Pontiff “as a courageous, wise, and righteous shepherd.” The Catholicos recalled Cardinal Bergoglio’s “sincere affection toward the Armenian people,” adding: “We gladly confirm that the historical relationship between our churches is marked by fraternal warmth. We greatly value the progress registered by our churches as a result of collaborative efforts undertaken during the pontificates of ourselves and our predecessors. This has been manifested during mutual visits and elaborated through a multitude of educational and charitable programs.”

On April 22, 2006, during a program commemorating the 91^st anniversary of the Armenian Genocide in Buenos Aires, Cardinal Bergoglio urged Turkey to unconditionally recognize the Armenian Genocide as the “gravest crime of Ottoman Turkey against the Armenian people and the entire humanity.”

More recently, in 2011, after an Argentinean Federal Court found Turkey guilty of committing genocide against Armenians in response to a lawsuit filed by survivor Krikor Hairabedian, Cardinal Bergoglio issued a statement condemning “the abominable crime of genocide that the Turkish state committed against the Armenian people between 1915 and 1923.”

Both Armenians and Turks are now wondering if in his new capacity Pope Francis I will repeat the words he uttered as Cardinal Bergoglio. Armenians are delighted that a close friend of their community in Argentina has been elected to lead the Catholic Church. Meanwhile, the Turkish press has expressed great concern that “the new Pope could be influenced by [Armenian] lobbying groups.”

Now that he has ascended to the highest office of the Roman Church, no one really knows what position Pope Francis would take on Armenian issues. One must remember that the Pontiff has two distinct functions as head of the Catholic Church and the sovereign city-state of Vatican. In other words, he is both a spiritual leader and head of state. Hence, depending on the issue, he may not necessarily express the views he held as Cardinal Bergoglio. At times, he may assume positions on political matters that diverge from his personal views and coincide with Vatican’s more worldly interests. As head of the Vatican state, the Pope may be forced to act as any other politician, such as Pres. Obama, who said one thing before the election and changed his tune afterward. However, as the spiritual leader of the Catholic Church and a man of strong moral values, the Pope cannot simply ignore or contradict his deeply held convictions.

Realizing that all Popes are not alike, it may be useful to review recent papal pronouncements on the Armenian Genocide. Pope John Paul II, on two occasions, used the term Armenian Genocide — on November 9, 2000 and September 27, 2001. However, unlike his predecessor, Pope Benedict XVI refrained from using that term, preferring to qualify the Genocide as “martyrdom” and “unspeakable suffering.”

In the case of Pope Francis I, there is no need for Armenians to insist that he use the term Armenian Genocide; as the Vatican has twice acknowledged the Armenian Genocide. Thus, no purpose is served by demanding that every new Pope reaffirm the facts of the Armenian Genocide all over again. It is important, however, that Pope Francis I not retreat from his earlier position on the Armenian Genocide; substitutes and euphemisms would not be appropriate.

Given the Vatican’s positive record on the Armenian Genocide, it would be best to go beyond this issue and look for other areas in which the Pontiff could be supportive, such as pressing for the security of Armenians and other Christians in Syria. Efforts should also be made to strengthen the existing amicable ties between the Armenian Apostolic and Catholic churches, and friendly relations between the Vatican State and the Republic of Armenia.