13 November 2009
Los Angeles
In the month of September the Armenian public learned of a blatant case of denial of the Armenian Genocide within Armenia. A court case was initiated by the “ARARAT” Center for Strategic Research against the Yerevan-based Caucasus Institute and its director Alexander Iskandaryan for publishing and disseminating denialist literature. Unfortunately, as the initiators of this court case noted during the press-conference, this was not the only such instance of Armenian Genocide denial within Armenia. Another case of such denial transpired recently. A journalist named Emil Danielyan, a citizen and resident of Armenia, in his article about Levon Ter-Petrosyan’s speech before the Armenian National Congress leadership, intentionally refused to use the word genocide when referring to the Armenian Genocide (http://www.azatutyun.am/content/article/1875375.html). His expression of choice was the “1915 mass killings and deportations” so ubiquitous in English-language publications supportive of the Turkish denialist position. Furthermore, a news service operating in Armenia and staffed by Armenians, the Azatutyun radio station, published this article without any editing or disclaimers, assuming the responsibility of the content.
The skeptic in all of us would compel us to give the author the benefit of doubt. Perhaps the use of the term was unintentional and an honest mistake or the content of the article was revised without the author’s knowledge. Unfortunately, this is not the first time this author has denied the reality of the Armenian Genocide. Earlier in 2009 he had written another article in which he used the term “mass killings of Armenians.” A criticism that appeared on “ARARAT” Center’s Foreign Press Review provided an Armenian translation of that article and called upon the author to publicly reject the use of “mass killings”, giving him that very benefit of doubt (http://artmamul.ararat-center.org/?p=161). Yet the call rang hollow and no explanations followed. Thus, the following two assumptions can reasonably be made: either Emil Danielyan consciously thinks that the Armenian Genocide was only a mass killing of Armenians, not genocide, or he does not hold that view, but is willing to ascribe to it and even propagandize it in his own articles, if the publisher pays the right price. In either case, his use of the expression “mass killings” is a deliberate choice.
Impunity breeds insolence. Some suggest that openly trying people for denial of the Armenian Genocide in Armenia would offer fodder to Turkey to cast further doubt on the Genocide. They argue that if deniers exist even among Armenians and they are tried in Armenia, then there must really be questions about the veracity of the Armenian Genocide. Nothing could be further from the truth. We can only fool ourselves by not wanting to see that denial exists in Armenia. In fact, it is the continuous proliferation of Turkish denialist propaganda by unprincipled Armenians that will give Turkey more fodder for speculation. If some Armenians impudently doubt or even deny the Armenian Genocide, then foreign denialists will have a more potent argument in their countries. Turkey’s foreign sympathizers will argue that if Armenians question and doubt the Genocide and their government does nothing, then all historical questions must not yet be settled. Severe punishment of all such attempts will only prove to the rest of the world, including the Turks, that the Armenians and their government are unanimous in their position and there can be no ambiguity on this issue. Thus, those Armenians who falsely cast doubt on the Armenian Genocide should be prosecuted and punished as criminals, because genocide denial is a criminal offense. Denial is the final phase of genocide.
Had Emil Danielyan been called to account for his first article, he would have thought twice about insulting the Armenian nation the second time.
Stepan Sargsyan
Contributing Correspondent (Los Angeles)
ARARAT Center for Strategic Research