A Policy That Never Ended
From keghart.org [1]
By Margarita Krtikashyan [2] , Yerevan, 12 March 2025
The Armenian Genocide (1915–1923) is often framed as a historical event that concluded with the establishment of the Republic of Turkey. However, a closer examination of policies directed against the Armenian population over the past century suggests a pattern of continuity rather than closure. The forced displacement of over 100,000 Armenians from Nagorno-Karabakh in 2023 is not an isolated event but part of a broader, ongoing strategy aimed at erasing Armenian presence from territories claimed by Turkey and Azerbaijan. While the methods have changed, the fundamental objective remains the same: the removal of Armenians from their ancestral lands.
One of the defining elements of genocide, as articulated by Raphael Lemkin and codified in the 1948 Genocide Convention, is the forced removal and destruction of an indigenous population. In 1915, the Ottoman authorities justified the mass expulsion of Armenians as a wartime necessity, yet this act constituted a death march leading to extermination. Over 1.5 million Armenians were killed, and those who survived were permanently uprooted.
A similar pattern has unfolded in Nagorno-Karabakh in recent years. In 2020, Azerbaijan, with direct military and logistical support from Turkey, launched a large-scale offensive that resulted in the displacement of tens of thousands of Armenians. Those who remained were subjected to a nine-month blockade, depriving them of food, medicine, and essential supplies. The final Azerbaijani military operation in September 2023 resulted in the mass expulsion of the entire Armenian population from the region. While this modern form of ethnic cleansing did not take the shape of death marches, the combination of starvation, military aggression, and psychological coercion produced a comparable outcome.
The international response to these events has been marked by inaction. The International Court of Justice (ICJ) issued warnings regarding Azerbaijan’s treatment of Armenians, yet no preventive measures were enforced. The failure to intervene echoes the passivity of the global community during the early 20th century, when reports of the Armenian Genocide emerged but were largely ignored. The lack of accountability then, as now, has allowed such policies to persist.
Another critical aspect of genocide is cultural destruction. Following the Armenian Genocide, thousands of churches, monasteries, and historical sites in Turkey were either destroyed, repurposed, or abandoned. A 2011 report by the Armenian Patriarchate of Constantinople indicated that of the 2,500 Armenian churches that existed before 1915, only a small fraction remains standing today.
Azerbaijan has mirrored this approach in recent decades. Between 1997 and 2006, Azerbaijani authorities systematically destroyed the medieval Armenian cemetery of Julfa in Nakhichevan, eliminating thousands of khachkars (cross-stones) in what UNESCO has described as an irreversible loss of cultural heritage. Despite condemnation from the European Parliament in 2006, Azerbaijan faced no material consequences. Since the 2020 war, similar patterns of cultural erasure have been documented in Nagorno-Karabakh. The Ghazanchetsots Cathedral in Shushi was bombed twice during the conflict, and Armenian inscriptions on churches and monuments have been systematically removed. A 2023 report by Caucasus Heritage Watch identified multiple cases of Armenian cultural sites being altered or demolished. The intent behind these actions is clear: to erase Armenian heritage and, by extension, its historical claims to the region.
Turkey’s involvement in the 2020 war further underscores the continuity of these policies. During the Armenian Genocide, the Committee of Union and Progress pursued a Pan-Turkist vision that sought to create a contiguous Turkic empire, with the removal of Armenians seen as a prerequisite. In the 2020 war, Turkey provided Azerbaijan with advanced weaponry, including Bayraktar TB2 drones, and facilitated the recruitment of Syrian mercenaries, many linked to extremist groups. Reports from the United Nations and independent research institutions confirmed the presence of these mercenaries, highlighting Turkey’s active role in the conflict.
More broadly, Turkey’s ideological alignment with Azerbaijan reflects a continuation of anti-Armenian policies. Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan has openly praised Enver Pasha, one of the primary architects of the Armenian Genocide, and frequently invokes neo-Ottoman rhetoric that reinforces full support for Azerbaijan’s territorial claims. The phrase “One Nation, Two States,” regularly used by Turkish and Azerbaijani leaders, suggests that their objectives regarding Armenia. are deeply interconnected.
The response of Armenia’s current government has raised concerns about its ability to counter these existential threats. Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan’s recent statements questioning the timeline of the Armenian Genocide’s recognition echo Turkish denialist narratives. By suggesting that further research is needed to understand the “why” and “how” of the genocide, his remarks align with longstanding Turkish strategies aimed at obscuring historical responsibility. Such shifts in diplomatic rhetoric weaken Armenia’s position internationally and embolden Azerbaijan’s expansionist policies.
Azerbaijan’s ambitions extend beyond Nagorno-Karabakh. President Ilham Aliyev has repeatedly referred to southern Armenia as “Western Azerbaijan,” signaling clear territorial claims. Combined with Azerbaijan’s military buildup along Armenia’s borders, these declarations suggest that the strategy of forced displacement and territorial expansion is ongoing.
The Armenian Genocide is not merely a historical event but a policy that has adapted to contemporary geopolitical realities. Forced displacement, cultural destruction, and military aggression remain tools in an effort to erase Armenian presence from strategically significant regions. The failure of the international community to prevent the ethnic cleansing of Nagorno-Karabakh has set a dangerous precedent. Without accountability, such policies are likely to continue, placing Armenia itself under increasing threat.
The patterns observed today strongly resemble those of 1915–1923, underscoring the urgent need for academic and policy-focused discourse on the continuity of genocidal strategies. Recognizing these parallels is not only a matter of historical justice but a necessary step in preventing further escalations.
*****
Yerevan State University. Her research focuses on cultural policy, the role of music in diplomacy and politics, Armenian-Turkish relations, the issues of Armenians living in Turkey, and the Armenian Patriarchate of Constantinople. She is also interested in religion, culture, and music.