Armenians prepare to mark centenary of genocide.

Opinion: 'Controversy over the use of the term "genocide" should not hinder the solemn and dignified marking by all of one of the darkest pages in 20th century human history.'

(This is an op-ed prepared by the political editor of commonspace.eu.)

Armenians all over the world are preparing to mark the 100th anniversary of the events in Anatolia during World War 1 which resulted in the massacre of large numbers of Armenians, and the forced displacement of many others. The Armenian Genocide, as it is often referred to, was one of the darkest pages in the history of mankind in the 20th century.

Last week, the State Commission set up to commemorate the anniversary met in Yerevan for its fifth meeting under the chairmanship of the President of Armenia, Serzh Sargsyan. According to the Press Service of the Armenian President, "besides the commission members, representatives of regional centenary committees, experts, diplomatic representatives of the Republic of Armenia and leaders of the Armenian Apostolic Holy Church dioceses took part in the enlarged session. The commission members discussed the political context around the 100th anniversary of the Armenian Genocide, the issue concerning the adoption of the Pan-Armenian Declaration on the 100th Anniversary of the Armenian Genocide, as well as issues pertaining to the commemorative events and the works of compiling a package of legal claims on overcoming the consequences of the Armenian Genocide." 

The marking of the anniversary is not short of controversy. Speaking to the Commission, Armenian President Sarsyan said:

".... I sent invitations to a number state leaders and heads of key international organizations to take part in the centenary events. I would like to inform you that a series of states and organizations have accepted them. Some states have confirmed their presence through high-level delegations. Some of them have noted that they want to spend that day together with the Armenian communities of their countries. I am asking both the state commission members and the regional committees to join the diplomatic representatives of the Republic of Armenia in ensuring as broad participation as possible in the coming events and in the international media forum to be held at the end of March. It is particularly important, taking into account Turkey's short-sighted and cynical decision to edit its own history through marking the anniversary of the Gallipoli Battle on the day commemorating the 100th anniversary of the Armenian Genocide. It is said that in politics all means are good, but I think that by doing it, official Ankara did itself a disservice."

Turkey continues to reject the claim that what happened in Anatolia in 1915 was a genocide. The present Turkish government has taken some modest steps to reconciling its position with that of Armenia, but for Armenians this is not enough, and the anniversary is bound to be a divisive one. It is not only Turkey however that has a problem with the characterisation of the massacres as genocide. Most countries argue that since the term genocide was accepted as a legal term after the second world war it cannot be used in the context of events that happened thirty years earlier. The issue is not simply one of semantics, but has huge legal and financial implications, not least since a perpetrator of genocide would have to pay compensation, which in this case will amount to billions of dollars to levels which no one has as yet quantified.

These differences however should not be allowed to hinder the commemoration of the anniversary. Controversy over the use of the term "genocide" should not hinder the solemn and dignified marking, by all, of one of the darkest pages in 20th century human history. Many had hoped that the 100th anniversary will bring a closure to the controversy and some way could be found to reconcile the different positions. Clearly this has not happened. The anniversary unfortunately will be divisive, possibly creating even new divisions. This is very unfortunate. This notwithstanding however the anniversary will offer an opportunity for one and all to reflect on what happened one hundred years ago. Those who do so also need to reflect on how to go forward. How to ensure that such human tragedies do not happen again, and on how establishing peace in the Caucasus must be one of the priorities in this direction.

This op-ed was prepared by the political editor of commonspace.eu.

photo: President Serzh Sargsyan with leaders of the Armenian Aposrtolic Church at the fifth session of the State Commission on Coordination of events for commemoration of 100th anniversary of Armenian Genocide held in Yerevan on 29 January 2015. (Picture courtesy of the Press Service of the President of Armenia).

Related articles

Editor's choice
News
Landmines present to the European Union both a contradiction and a dilemma

Landmines present to the European Union both a contradiction and a dilemma

Finland’s decision to buy one million landmines creates a serious contradiction in the policy of the European Union, and is symbolic of a bigger dilemma facing European countries as they get used to the need to acquire “hard” power to face an increasing threat from Russia. Finland is seeking to acquire one million anti-personnel mines at a cost of 100 million euros. Finland, together with Poland, Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia last year abandoned the Ottawa agreement, the international framework that bans the use of anti-personnel mines, which the EU had been instrumental in establishing and supporting. All five countries cite the threat from Moscow as the reason. Colonel Riku Mikkonen of the Army Command told Finland’s national news agency STT that officials are now gathering information from suppliers regarding the deal, the AFP news agency reports. Helsinki would like domestic manufacturers to supply the mines, with contracts signed by the end of 2027 and production up and running by 2028. “It would be useful in many ways if Finnish companies produced the anti-personnel mines in Finland,” Mikkonen said. About half a dozen Finnish firms qualify, he told STT. “However, at this stage, buying the mines from abroad is not totally ruled out,” he added. LANDMINES PROVIDE THE EU WITH BOTH A CONTRADICTION, AND A DILEMMA Eliminating landmine contamination worldwide is one of the EU’s main soft power postures, and it basks in its record as the biggest funder of anti-landmine action in the world. But the fact that 5 of its 27 member states  have now left the Ottawa Treaty dents the EU moral high ground. It is a contradiction that is too big and important to be ignored. It also presents the European Union with a deeper dilemma. The threat from Russia is changing what the EU has stood for decades, namely a force for good able to mobilise its considerable soft power for the greater good of humanity. How the Union will implement this change will define its future. In the meantime landmines have not become any less lethal, benign, or unimportant. They remain in many parts of the world a major threat to life, an impediment to prosperity, and a potential trigger to further conflict. The 22 EU members states that still adhere to the Ottawa treaty must regroup, and be more assertive in their quest against anti-personnel land mines. All the reasons why they supported the Ottawa treaty in the first place still exist. The message must be clear: NO TO LANDMINES!
Editor's choice
News
Pashinyan says that he wants peace treaty with Azerbaijan by 2031

Pashinyan says that he wants peace treaty with Azerbaijan by 2031

Armenia should sign and ratify a peace treaty with Azerbaijan before 2031, Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan said. He described the objective as the top priority for his administration. Earlier, the Armenian prime minister also spoke about a possible land-swap with Azerbaijan Armenia and Azerbaijan should agree to establish a clear, conventional border without enclaves or exclaves, Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan said. Armenia controls three Azeri enclaves inside its borders while Baku controls one Armenian enclave – those could be subject to a land swap, Pashinyan announced.

Popular

Editor's choice
Interview
Thursday Interview: Murad Muradov

Thursday Interview: Murad Muradov

Today, commonspace.eu starts a new regular weekly series. THURSDAY INTERVIEW, conducted by Lauri Nikulainen, will host  persons who are thinkers, opinion shapers, and implementors in their countries and spheres. We start the series with an interview with Murad Muradov, a leading person in Azerbaijan's think tank community. He is also the first co-chair of the Action Committee for a new Armenian-Azerbaijani Dialogue. Last September he made history by being the first Azerbaijani civil society activist to visit Armenia after the 44 day war, and the start of the peace process. Speaking about this visit Murad Muradov said: "My experience was largely positive. My negative expectations luckily didn’t play out. The discussions were respectful, the panel format bringing together experts from Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Turkey was particularly valuable during the NATO Rose-Roth Seminar in Yerevan, and media coverage, while varied in tone, remained largely constructive. Some media outlets though attempted to represent me as more of a government mouthpiece than an independent expert, which was totally misleading.  Overall, I see these initiatives as important steps in rebuilding trust and normalising professional engagement. The fact that soon a larger Azerbaijani civil society visits to Armenia followed, reinforces the sense that this process is moving in the right direction." (click the image to read the interview in full)