Cover 4/11/08 8:52 PM Page 1

The APRIL 26, 2008

IMAGES PERSPECTIVES RESEARCH

WWW.ARMENIANWEEKLY.COM Contributors 4/13/08 5:48 PM Page 3

The Armenian Weekly

RESEARCH PERSPECTIVES

6 Nothing but Ambiguous: The Killing of in 34 Linked Histories: The Armenian and the Turkish Discourse—By Seyhan Bayrakdar —By Eric Weitz 11 A Society Crippled by Forgetting—By Ayse Hur 38 Searching for Alternative Approaches to Reconciliation: A 14 A Glimpse into the Armenian Patriarchate Censuses of Plea for Armenian-Kurdish Dialogue—By Bilgin Ayata 1906/7 and 1913/4—By George Aghjayan 43 Thoughts on Armenian-Turkish Relations 17 A that Did Not Occur—By Hilmar Kaiser By Dennis Papazian 19 Scandinavia and the — 45 Turkish-Armenian Relations: The Civil Society Dimension By Matthias Bjornlund By Asbed Kotchikian 23 Organizing Oblivion in the Aftermath of Mass Violence 47 Thoughts from Xancepek (and Beyond)—By Ayse Gunaysu By Ugur Ungor 49 From Past Genocide to Present Perpetrator Victim Group 28 and Genocide: The Growing Engagement of Relations: A Philosophical Critique—By Henry C. Theriault —By Ara Sanjian IMAGES ON THE COVER: Sion Abajian, born 1908, 54 Photography from Julie Dermansky Photo by Ara Oshagan & Levon Parian, www.genocideproject.net 56 Photography from Alex Rivest

Editor’s Desk

Over the past few tographers who embark on a journey to shed rials worldwide, and by Rivest, of post- years, the Armenian light on the scourge of genocide, the scars of genocide Rwanda. We thank photographers Weekly, with both its denial, and the spirit of memory. Oshagan and Parian for the cover photo regular and special In papers especially written for this pub- and Koundakjian for the photo of the issues, has become a lication, Kaiser, Aghjayan, and Bjornlund Armenian Genocide Memorial in Dzidzer- forum where already look at some archival documents from the nagapert in . prominent as well as and Scandinavia; Ungor, Most pages of this publication fea- up-and-coming schol- Hur, and Gunaysu address the issue of the ture victims and survivors of the ars, , and activists from around destruction (and construction) of memory; Armenian Genocide. We found it the globe share their insight, research, and Sanjian studies the Azerbaijani dimension appropriate to remember them, to asso- analyses on issues related to history, human of genocide denial; Weitz looks at the ciate faces and names with a crime that rights, and current affairs. shared histories of and the is so often reduced to just contested Keeping true to this “young” tradition, Medz Yeghern; while Theriault, Bayrakdar, numbers of its victims and dispos- this special issue of the Weekly, titled “Com- Ayata, Papazian, and Kotchikian discuss sessed. We thank their families for sup- memorating Genocide: Images, Perspectives, Turkish-Armenian and Kurdish-Armenian porting this publication. Research” deals with genocide, memory, and relations and dynamics. We also thank the churches, organiza- denial. It brings together archival historians, This publication also features photo- tions, and individuals that made the publi- political analysts, commentators, and pho- graphs by Dermansky, of genocide memo- cation of this issue possible.

April 26, 2008 | THE ARMENIAN WEEKLY | 3 Contributors 4/13/08 5:54 PM Page 4

Contributors

George Aghjayan is a fellow of the Ayse Hur was born in Artvin, , in Society of Actuaries and author of Genocide 1956. She lived with her parents in , Denial: Denialist Rhetoric Compared: The Nazilli (Aydin), and Edirne, then moved to Armenian Genocide and The Holocaust. He is . Having completed her double- chairman of the Armenian National Com- major in 1992 from the departments of his- mittee (ANC) of Central and tory and international relations at Bogazici is a frequent contributor to the Armenian University, she joined the History Founda- Weekly. He resides in Worcester with his tion of Turkey and worked on such projects wife and three children. as the Istanbul Encyclopedia. In 2004, she completed her master’s thesis on “The ’s Policies of Reconciling with Bilgin Ayata is completing her Ph.D. at the History and the ” at the Ataturk Institute of department of political science at Johns Bogazici University. She is currently pursuing her doctorate Hopkins University, Baltimore. Her research degree at the same institution. She is a member of the editorial interests include the politics of displacement, board of Social History, and writes historical and political articles trans-nationalism, social movements, and in various newspapers and journals, including Taraf, , migration. Her dissertation examines the dis- Birikim, and . placement of in Turkey and . She currently lives in Berlin. Hilmar Kaiser received his Ph.D. from the European University Institute, Florence. Seyhan Bayraktar holds a research posi- He specializes in Ottoman social and eco- tion at the department of politics and public nomic history as well as the Armenian administration at the University of Konstanz Genocide. He has done research in more in , where she has taught masters- than 60 archives worldwide, including the level courses in comparative genocide studies Ottoman Archives in Istanbul. His pub- and European integration. She recently sub- lished works—monographs, edited vol- mitted her Ph.D. thesis, titled “Politics of umes, and articles—include “Imperialism, , and Denial: The development of the discourse Development Theories: The Construction of a Dominant about the murder of the Ottoman of 1915 in Turkey Paradigm on Ottoman Armenians,” “At the Crossroads of Der between foreign political pressure and nationalistic defense mecha- Zor: Death Survival and Humanitarian Resistance in , nisms.” Her research focuses on memory and identity politics, 1915–1917,”“The Baghdad Railway and the Armenian Genocide, nationalism, political communication, , cultural 1915–1916: A Case Study in German Resistance and aspects of political integration, and Turkey’s minority politics. Her Complicity,” “1915–1916 Ermeni Soykirimi Sirasinda Ermeni current research focuses on migration politics and the role of integra- Mulkleri, Osmanli Hukuku ve Politikalari,”“Le génocide tion and assimilation in the current migration discourse in Germany. arménien: négation à ‘l’allemande’” and “From Empire to Republic: The Continuities for Turkish Denial.” Matthias Bjornlund was born in Copenhagen, , in 1967. He is a Danish Asbed Kotchikian is the assistant direc- historian and freelance researcher specializing tor of the International Affairs Program at in the Armenian Genocide and related issues, Florida State University, where he also teaches particularly as documented in Danish archival courses on the and former Soviet sources. He is currently working on a book space. His area of research includes the for- about Denmark and the “Armenian Question” eign policies of small states; the modern from 1900–40. He has co-authored articles on political history of the post-Soviet South the concept of genocide and on aspects of the Rwandan genocide. Caucasus; and issues of national identity.

Ayse Gunaysu is a professional transla- Dennis R. Papazian is professor emer- tor, advocate, former commu- itus of history and the founding director of nist, and feminist. She has been a member of the Armenian Research Center at the the Committee Against Racism and Discrim- University of , Dearborn. He is the ination of the Human Rights Association of former president of the Society for Turkey (Istanbul branch) since 1995, and was Armenian Studies and former editor of the a columnist in a pro-Kurdish daily from Journal of the Society for Armenian Studies, 2005–07. currently serving on its editorial board.

4 | THE ARMENIAN WEEKLY | APRIL 26, 2008 Contributors 4/14/08 9:16 AM Page 5

Ara Sanjian is associate professor of Theriault currently serves as co-editor-in-chief of the peer- Armenian and Middle Eastern history and reviewed journal “Genocide Studies and Prevention.” He is also the director of the Armenian Research on the Advisory Council of the International Association of Center at the University of Michigan- Genocide Scholars. From 1999 to 2007, he was coordinator of the Dearborn. He was born in Beirut, , Worcester State College Center for the Study of Human Rights. and received his school education there. In 1991, he received his master’s degree in his- Ugur Umit Ungor was born in 1980 tory from Yerevan State University. In 1994, and studied sociology and history at the he received his Ph.D. in modern Middle Eastern history from the Universities of Groningen, Utrecht, , School of Oriental and African Studies at the University of and . His main area of interest is London. From 1996–2005, he was the chairman of the department the historical sociology of mass violence and of Armenian studies, history and political science at Haigazian nationalism in the modern world. He has University in Beirut. In fall 2003, he was the Henry S. Khanzadian published on genocide, in general, and on Kazan Visiting Professor in Armenian Studies at State the Rwandan and Armenian , in University, Fresno. His research interests focus on the post-World particular. At present, he is finishing his War I , Turkey, and the Arab states of Western Ph.D., titled “Young Turk Social Engineering: Genocide, Asia. He is the author of Turkey and Her Arab Neighbors, Nationalism, and Memory in Eastern Turkey, 1913–1950” at the 1953–1958: A Study in the Origins and Failure of the Baghdad Pact department of history of the University of Amsterdam. He is also (2001), as well as a monograph and a number of scholarly articles. a staff member at the Center for Holocaust and Genocide Studies He is currently working on a book-length project on the Armenian in Amsterdam. quest for Mountainous Karabagh under Soviet rule in 1923–87. Eric D. Weitz is Distinguished McKnight Henry Theriault is associate professor University Professor of History at the of philosophy at Worcester State College, University of Minnesota, where he also where he has taught since 1998. His research holds the Arsham and Charlotte Ohanessian focuses on genocide and human rights, with Chair in the College of Liberal Arts. He has particular emphasis on genocide denial and published A Century of Genocide: Utopias of its epistemological dimensions, the long- Race and Nation (2003) and, most term impact of genocide and other mass recently, Weimar Germany: Promise and violence, their ethical and political implica- Tragedy (2007), and edits a series, Human Rights and Crimes tions, and mass violence against women. His teaching includes against Humanity, all with Princeton University Press. Weimar courses on genocide and human rights, mass violence against Germany was included in the “Year in Books” list of the Financial women, the Armenian Genocide, ethics, political philosophy, the Times (London). A Century of Genocide was named a Choice philosophy of history, and gender/sexuality/race/class/nation. Outstanding Academic Title for 2003.

The Armenian Weekly

Commemorating Genocide: ENGLISH SECTION THE ARMENIAN WEEKLY The opinions expressed in this Images, Perspectives, Editor: Khatchig Mouradian (ISSN 0004-2374) is newspaper, other than in the edi- torial column, do not necessarily Research Copy-editor: Nayiri Arzoumanian published weekly by the Association, Inc., reflect the views of THE Art Director: Gina Poirier The Armenian Weekly 80 Bigelow Ave, ARMENIAN WEEKLY. April 26, 2008 Watertown, MA 02472. ARMENIAN SECTION TEL: 617-926-3974 Periodical postage paid in FAX: 617-926-1750 Editor: Zaven Torigian , MA and additional mail- Proofreader: Garbis Zerdelian ing offices. E-MAIL: [email protected] Art Director: Nora Mouradian USPS identification This special publication has a WEB: statement 546-180 Sales Manager: Vicky Ashjian print run of 10,000 copies. www.armenianweekly.com

April 26, 2008 | THE ARMENIAN WEEKLY | 5 1_Seyehan_5 4/13/08 9:48 PM Page 6

RESEARCH Nothingbut Ambiguous1

The Killing of Hrant Dink in Turkish Discourse

By Seyhan Bayraktar

he assassination of Hrant Dink was in several respects standing of the working mecha- nisms of discursive structures a decisive moment, for it revealed the state-of-the-art on the one hand and the inter- of Vergangenheitsbewaltigung in Turkey and ultimately play with political and societal options on the other is underde- the Turkish-Armenian reconciliation process.2 This veloped. The following analysis addresses this lacuna: It looks at papert examines how Hrant Dink’s assasination was framed in the reactions of the Turkish the Turkish discourse.3 society upon Hrant Dink’s assasination and relates these The analysis is part of the overall research agenda on the phenom- reactions to the conventional discourse structures in Turkey about enon of Turkish denial of 1915. The denial politics of Turkey has the Armenian Genocide. In doing this, the study gives an insight to not only been successful in blocking international genocide the question on how far conventional (denialist) discourse patterns acknowledgements for a long time but also in determining the about the Armenian Genocide have been reproduced, challenged, academic discourse on the Armenian Genocide. Not surprisingly, or changed in the course of reactions to the assassination of Dink. there is hardly any analysis on the Armenian history of 1915 that In essence, the analysis shows that although actors had the does not address the denial phenomenon in either way. opportunity to challenge denialist discourse patterns, they didn’t However, most studies approach the denial phenomenon in a do so and instead chose framings which ultimately reproduced rather conventional manner. Scholars either look at the Turkish and fostered the denial discourse. state’s politics and practices, or at the civil society’s increasing interest and openness for alternative readings of the history of THE CONTEXT: THE KILLING OF HRANT DINK AS A 1915.4 Such a distinction between politics and society, however, BREAKING POINT reduces the denial phenomenon to the Turkish state’s past politics. It also implies that the coming to terms with the past of the The news of Hrant Dink’s assassination shook Turkey. It turned Turkish society takes place outside the framework of the denial into a major political scandal, for it became evident that it could discourse which, as already said above, is by and large equated have been prevented if the state security institutions had taken the with the Turkish state’s political practices and defense mecha- information from the circles close to the assassin and his clients nisms against genocide charges. seriously. The dimension of carelessness if not wanton negligence However, prioritizing the Turkish state as the key actor of the and active participation of state institutions and actors in the denial discourse about the Armenian Genocide overlooks the murder is indicated by the headline “Only Hrant was not power that rests in the discourse itself.5 Put differently, the under- informed about his killing.”6

6 | THE ARMENIAN WEEKLY | APRIL 26, 2008 1_Seyehan_5 4/13/08 9:48 PM Page 7

RESEARCH

Helplessness, mourning, and shame caught especially the Common to a vast majority of the texts in both arenas was an Turkish liberal elites on the news of the killing. Thousands gathered instrumental logic and strategic thinking that ultimately had a con- spontaneously on the streets and mourned the death. The funeral cealing effect on the distinctive characteristic of the event. turned into a mass protest with tens of thousands accompanying Instrumentality, however, took a wide spectrum of manifestations Dink on his last journey, which again led to widespread relief.7 ranging from outright political calculations to more subtle forms of This solidarity, however, was accompanied by an outright reac- rational reasoning. One example of an overtly instrumental tionary discourse right from the beginning.8 Especially the slogan of approach is the very first reaction of Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan the crowds at the funeral, “We are all Armenians,” caused a contro- lamenting the timing of the killing (manidar) and alluding to the versial debate. The nationalists were quick with producing the genocide resolution that was being debated in the . counter-slogan,“We are all Turks.”The Turkish daily Hurriyet ran a Mehmet Ali Birand, a well-known liberal in Turkey, was poll for three days on its website asking the readers whether they also immediately concerned with strategic political considerations found the slogan appropriate. than condemning the assassination as such. In essence, the killing of Dink meant the breaking of a tacit soci- However, moves to immediately go back to normalcy were met etal agreement not to hurt Armenians in the open, lest to commit a partially with criticism. The editor-in-chief of Radikal, Ismet politically motivated crime. This silent consensus goes back to the Berkan, complained that “shamelessness (was) without limits in national narrative that the Turkish Republic does not discrimate this country,” where even the least bit of respect was lacking.14 among its citizens.9 With the increasing pressure on Turkey—first However, such criticism about strategic calculations and instru- through militant activism beginning in the 1970’s and later by polit- mental framing was the exception rather than the rule. ical genocide acknowledgments—to come to terms with 1915, the narra- DEJA-VU: TURKEY AS VICTIM tive of equality became particularly important. Accordingly, it was ...the assassination all of a A less overtly instrumental approach stressed that the Armenians had no sudden stopped the relative optimism to the killing was the initially pre- problems in Turkey, were content dominant presentation of the and safe regardless of the implica- of Turkish liberal circles about a grad- killing under the category “the bul- tion that this was by itself the very lets hit Turkey.”15 This framing turned indication of discrimation. From ual opening of the Turkish society with Turkey and the Turkish nation into this perspective, the killing of Hrant regard to the Armenian Question. the “real” victims of the crime. Dink—an Armenian citizen of According to this approach, the Turkey—brought to the open the assassin and his clients had obvi- blatant discrepancy between social reality and the construction of ously not been aware that they “had in fact shot Turkey.”16 Ver y few “our equal, safe and happy Armenians.” Hence, it was the breaking voices chose to give priority to Hrant Dink in terms of victimship, of this taboo that essentially constituted the societal and political as is the case in the headline “Racists’ target Hrant Dink: assassi- trauma in Turkey following the killing of Dink. nated with three bullets.”17 While the breaking of the tacit consensus by killing Dink posed The victim discourse in the mainstream media focusing on a problem that the entire society had to cope with, it had addi- Turkey and the Turkish nation neglected to talk about the socio- tional implications for the Turkish liberal elites. First of all, Dink psychological implications for the Armenian community.18 had close personal ties in a wide reaching network among Turkish Hurriyet’s editor-in-chief, Ertugrul Ozkok, for example made a intellectuals. This meant that a considerable group of leading case for the murder by stressing the societal and socio-economic Turkish media and other public representatives had hard times conditions that would lead a young man to commit such a crime.19 emotionally in individually coping with the loss of a friend. This move was an attempt for empathy with the murderer, who Secondly, the assassination all of a sudden stopped the relative was portrayed as being himself a victim of socio-structural forces. optimism of Turkish liberal circles about a gradual opening of the The concerns of the Turkish society were not forgotten on the Turkish society with regard to the Armenian Question.10 Workshop for Armenian-Turkish Scholarship (WATS) listserve either. Shortly after the assassination one of the founders of WATS, Fatma Muge Gocek, made a plea to go on with reconciliation THE TEXT: TURKISH MAINSTREAM DAILIES AND WATS efforts.20 For this to take place, she stressed the neccessity to be sen- AS DISCOURSE ARENAS sitive to the socio-psychological needs of both the Armenian and The assassination of Hrant Dink was on the front-page of the Turkish societies with regard to the term “genocide.” Dink’s usage Turkish mainstream dailies for weeks, resulting in hundreds of of the term depending on which audience he had addressed was articles and commentaries.11 Naturally, the killing also dominated portrayed as an exemplary approach for such an appropriate sen- the debate of the Workshop for Armenian Turkish Scholarship sitivity towards both societies. Accordingly, when “talking to the (WATS), a platform for academic discussions on Turkish- Turks in Turkey, he would . . . not make the employment of the Armenian issues.12 While the mainstream Turkish media reaches a term ‘genocide’ his top priority. [Instead, he] especially resisted to domestic audience, meaning Turkish society and politics, WATS exercise his freedom of expression through the specific employment has a mixed audience in several respects.13 The capacity of these of the term ‘genocide’: He ultimately was not tried and sentenced two arenas, however, is not limited to their respective audiences; for the use of that term, but ironically for his discussion of the prej- both arenas can also shape external discourses. udice as it pertained not to Turks but the .”21

April 26, 2008 | THE ARMENIAN WEEKLY | 7 1_Seyehan_5 4/13/08 9:48 PM Page 8

Bayraktar

This presentation was in several respects highly problematic. As a CONTINUITY VERSUS BREAK: THE FRAME OF key actor in the Turkish-Armenian reconciliation discourse, Gocek ‘ANOTHER JOURNALIST KILLED’ legitimized her suggestion to be sensitive in using the term “geno- cide” not only by referring to Dink but also by putting equal weight Another immediate move in the mainstream media to frame the on the needs of both societies. Under different circumstances such an event was to subsume the killing under the category of “another approach could be characterized as balanced but in this particular journalist killed” thereby stressing continuity rather than the distinc- context, where an Armenian in Turkey was murdered because he was tiveness of the killing. Hurriyet was among the forerunners of this an Armenian, the timing of the demand to be equally sensitive to the move. Already in the live-coverage of the killing, Dink was presented needs of both societies reveals the neglect to account for the unequal as the “62nd assassined journalist victim since Hasan Fehmi 1909.”26 situation in which actually live.22 From this per- The frame of “another journalist killed”was invoked by the over- spective, the balanced approach was a similar shift to the concerns of whelming majority of the commentators. It was an inclusive frame the Turkish society and Turkey as in the mainstream media.23 that provided a basis for identification. In addition, while identify- In contrast to the almost total neglect of taking the situation of ing with Dink as a journalist, commentators also reproduced the the Armenian community into account, , the wife of topos of “damage to Turkey” when relating the timing of Dink’s Hrant Dink, became the exclusive center of interest after her killing—like that of its famous precedents Ugur Mumcu in 1993 speech at her husband’s funeral. Her “Last letter to the beloved” and Ahmet Taner Kislali in 1999—to a critical moment in Turkish was published in full text in almost all the dailies under consider- domestic and foreign politics.27 ation, was translated into English on the WATS forum and led to a The construction of continuity suffered, however, from internal lot of commentaries. All of Turkey was apparently deeply impressed contradictions. One case in point is Guneri Civaoglu’s approach to by the unresentful stance that Rakel Dink revealed within few days. the killing. Civaoglu stressed the continuity of the current event in Many commentators who chose to invoke the framing that the recent history of Turkey in two articles. In the first one, he applied what happened was not good for the country also stressed in abun- the category of “another journalist victim.”28 In the second article, he dance that Dink had been a passionate “Turkey lover” (Turkiye sev- jumped to a different category of continuity when feeling obliged to dalisi).24 He had loved this country more than anything else. Not remember the victims of the attacks of ASALA on Turkish diplo- least, he had been the very symbol of reconciliation and tolerance mats.29 While Civaoglu’s take on the “other martyrs” (diger sehitleri (bir uzlasi bir hosgoru semboluydu). The underlying subtle instru- anmak) implied that he included Dink in the category of “our losses,” mental logic becomes clear when one raises the counter-factual his revival of the ASALA memory in the current context produced a question: What if he had not loved this country? Or, what if his contradiction in terms of the logic on which the construction of con- killing would not have damaged the image of Turkey?25 The same tinuity was based. Including Dink in the category of “another jour- goes for the innumerable individual accounts and personal mem- nalist killed” highlighted the professional identity and was an attempt ories about Hrant Dink that mostly stressed his strengths as a to eclipse the ethnic nature of the killing of Hrant Dink. The talk of human being along with his engagement for a democratic Turkish ASALA, however, emphasized the ethnic roots of the current event all society. Here we go again: What if he had not been an upright col- the more but put the blame, at the same time, on the Armenians. league, a courageous fellow, a dear friend? Not least, individual In the end, Civaoglu’s attempt to make Dink “one of us” by memories emphasizing almost exclusively his human qualities and including him in the list of national martyrs failed, for it suffered sensitive political style, constructing him into “a man with a heart not only due to the contradictory and in a sense mutually exclu- of gold” eclipsed the ultimate political concern of Dink about the sive logics of constructions of continuity, but also because of the still systematic and racist discrimination of the Armenian commu- effect that bringing ASALA back into the discourse about Hrant nity and other minorities in today’s Turkey. Instead of this distinct Dink had. Intentionally or not, with this blurring he put the blame political agenda of Dink’s, the emphasis was put on his passionate of the current killing ultimately on the Armenian side. engagement for a real democratic Turkey. Individual memories are legitimate in principle and are, as such, ‘OUR’ ARMENIANS VERSUS THE DIASPORA not questionable. In the current context, however, a great number of people exposing their individual experiences was problematic in sev- Empirically, the distinction between Armenians in Turkey and eral respects. First of all, remembering Dink turned into a contested diaspora Armenians is among the first and most robust instru- field in which those having had personal ties to him not only claimed ments or strategies in the Turkish discourse about the Armenian a monopoly over his legacy in terms of his ideas but also legitimized Genocide that goes back to the 1960’s.30 In the 1970’s, as the future strategies for the course of Turkish-Armenian relations in unfolding of a systematic targeting of mainly Turkish diplomats asserting that he would have thought that way—as was the case in forced Turkish society to remember 1915, the need to differentiate the reconciliation plea shown above. As a consequence, all who had between “our” Armenians, “who condemn the attack even more not known Dink personally and who mostly happened to be non- than we do”31 and the diaspora fanatics (azili Turk dusmanlari) Turks were not competitive. Therefore, the claim over Dink’s way of increased, albeit parallel to still abundant populistic anti- thinking in terms of Armenian-Turkish relations led to heated and Armenian images.32 Such a differentiation was mainly due to the controversial debates in the WATS discourse arena. Here, the claim concern not to provoke another Sept. 6–7, 1955. of having been close to Dink became a kind of conversation stopper, The construction of a dichotomy between “‘our’ Armenians a killer-argument, so to speak. Hence, the problem was not only the and the rest” ceased to play an important role in the general dis- strategic seizure of Dink’s legacy but also the underlying thinking course on the Armenian Genocide since the turn of the millen- that his alleged way of thinking was the only legitimate way. nium. Although the Turkish Foreign Ministry’s policies to counter

8 | THE ARMENIAN WEEKLY | APRIL 26, 2008 1_Seyehan_5 4/13/08 9:48 PM Page 9

RESEARCH

genocide resolutions has shifted during the last few years on put- aspect of the killing, namely, that the first Armenian in the history of ting pressure on the Armenian Republic (thinking that Armenia the republic who had ever attempted to step outside the proper place will influence the various diaspora communites in their acknowl- that was assigned to him by the dominant society had literally not edgement strategies), the blame in the overall discourse for the survived such an undertaking. Particularly telling in terms of the rel- political awakening of the “Armenian question” in Europe and ative lack of challenges to the conventional denialist Turkish dis- elsewhere has been put increasingly on the European Union. The course was that even the most liberal Turks, who at the same time revival of the “Armenian question” is seen as an indicator that the had known Hrant Dink’s political concerns, used instrumental Europeans are instrumentalizing the past of Turkey in order to framings that enforced rather than challenged the denialist struc- prevent its accession into the EU. In this process historical images tures of the Turkish discourse on the Armenian Genocide. a have also been revived. Accordingly, the Europeans are continuing their “historical anti-Turkish mission” that already had led to the ENDNOTES 33 downfall of the Ottoman Empire. 1 I want to thank Bilgin Ayata, Ayda Erbal, Ani Degirmencioglu, Khatchig In sum then, empirically the diaspora Armenians are not Mouradian, Marc Mamigonian, Anjareen Rana, and Stephanie Reulen for com- (exclusively) made responsible for the increasing international ments, proofreading and for providing me with information. 2 The German equivalent of coming to terms with the past (Vergangenheitbewalti- awareness about the Armenian Genocide since the turn of the gung) characterizes the relatively exemplary and exceptional manner of Germany’s milennium. In contrast to this overall development, that the dias- coping patterns with the Holocaust. 3 The case study is part of my dissertation thesis,“Politics of Denial: The Development pora Armenians are not playing a decisive role in the Turkish dis- of the Discourse about the Murder of the Ottoman Armenians of 1915 in Turkey course since the turn of the millennium, the dichotomy of “‘our between Foreign Political Pressure and Nationalistic Defense Mechanisms,” submit- ted to the political science department of the University of Konstanz. Armenians’ and the diasporans” has been revived all the more in 4 See among others for the first stream of denial research: Richard G. Hovannisian, the aftermath of Dink’s assasination and has taken the form of Remembrance and Denial: The Case of the Armenian Genocide (Detroit: Wayne State 34 University Press, 1999); Housepian-Dobkin, “What Genocide? What Holocaust? “pitting Hrant against diaspora Armenians.” News From Turkey, 1915–1923: A Case Study” in Toward the Understanding and What makes this development interesting is not that the frame Prevention of Genocide, edited by W. I. Charny (Boulder: Westview Press, 1984); still provides a societally accepted interpretation pattern when Charny and Daphna Fromer, “Denying the Armenian Genocide: Patterns of Thinking as Defence-Mechanisms” in “Patterns of Prejudice,” 1998, vol. 32, pp. revived. Rather, interesting are the carriers of this revival and the 39–49; Vahakn N. Dadrian, Key Elements in the Turkish Denial of the Armenian forum, since this time the revival goes back to the most commit- Genocide: A Case Study of Distortion and Falsification (Toronto: The Zoryan Institute, 1999); Hilmar Kaiser, “From Empire to Republic: The Continuities of Turkish ted actors in the improvement of Turkish-Armenian relations and Denial” in , 2003, vol. 48, pp. 1–24; John Torpey, “Dynamics of was put forward by the Turkish members of the WATS forum. A Denial. Responses to Past Atrocities in Germany, Turkey and Japan,” paper read at “Ideologies of Revolution, Nation, and Empire: Political Ideas, Parties, and Practices prominent Turkish leftist was but one of the most influential at the End of the Ottoman Empire 1878–1922,” in April 2005 in Salzburg, . actors in this revival process, who went so far as to put the blame For the second stream, see Fatma Muge Gocek, “Reconstructing the Turkish on the Armenian diaspora for the killing of Hrant Dink. Historiography on the Armenian Massacres and Deaths of 1915” in Looking Backward, Moving Forward, edited by R. G. Hovannisian (New Brunswick: This evolution of the “‘our Armenians’ and diaspora Armenians” Transaction, 2003); Aysegul Altinay, “In Search of Silenced Grandparents: Ottoman frame in the Turkish discourse shows two things: First, that there is Armenian Survivors and Their (Muslim) Grandchildren” in Der Volkermord an den Armeniern, die Turkei und Europa. The Armenian Genocide, Turkey and Europe, room for changing conventional discourse patterns that are inherently edited by H. L. Kieser and E. Plozza (Zurich: Chronos, 2003). denialist in thrust (as is the case with the construction of “good” and 5 Following Ole Waever, “Discursive Approaches” in European Integration Theory, edited by A. Wiener and T. Diez (Oxford University Press, 2004), the current analy- “bad” Armenians without asking for reasons for possible different sis softens the understanding of the relationship between discourse—broadly under- outlooks of different Armenian communities or putting the inher- stood as a set of articulations—and actors as defined in poststructuralist Foucaldian discourse analysis. While the latter assumes discourse as being prior to actors in the ently discriminatory aspects of such a distinction into question); and sense that subjects do not exist outside discourse, the theoretical assumption of this second, that there are no real actors using such rooms for putting study is that actors have at least the possibility to choose among differents sets of dis- forth new discursive approaches and challenging the denialist ones. course patterns. In other words, the existing discourse patterns (regardless of the question of carriership and origin) about the Armenian Genocide determine on the one hand the range of possibilities of how to frame a related event such as the killing of Hrant Dink. On the other hand, they are at the same time dependent on actors A NEVER-ENDING TEXT? because discourses are produced and reproduced by the choices of actors over which of the existing discourse frames to actually use and which not. It is this kind of “lin- The Turkish discourse following the killing of Hrant Dink revealed guistic structuration” that provides for the theoretical possibility for change of dis- courses, in a general sense, and in the current context the discourse about the an ambiguous picture, stemming mainly from the discrepancy Armenian Genocide in Turkey, in particular. For the concept of linguistic-structura- between the traumatic experience caused by the assassination and tion, see Diez, 1999, “Speaking ‘Europe’: the politics of integration discourse” in the the reluctance of the Turkish society and politics to face the killing as Journal of European Public Policy, vol. 6, pp. 598–613. 6 See “Oldurulecegini bir tek Hrant’a soylememisler” in Radikal, Feb. 7, 2007. an ultimate breakdown of the national narrative about the equality 7 The relief after the funeral is particularly mirrored in Hadi Uluengin’s piece,“Ciktik of all citizens of the republic regardless their ethnic origins. The alin akiyla (Finally we made it out clean),”Hurriyet, Jan. 24, 2007. For another arti- cle indicating relief—albeit in a more revanchist tone—see Oktay Eksi, “Ders veren dominant framings in the discourse were in essence hiding the racist cenaze (The lessons of a funeral)” in Hurriyet, Jan. 24, 2007. For other examples, see thrust of the killing. The emphasis on the continuities rather than the headlines “Turkiye evladini ugurladi (Turkey said farewell to her son)” in Hurriyet, Jan. 24, 2007; “Istanbul Istanbul olali boyle bir toren gorulmedi (Istanbul the distinctive aspects of the assassination was an effective strategy has never seen such a funeral since times immemorial)” in Radikal, Jan. 24, 2007; toward concealing the particularly tragic and politically relevant “Sizce Hrant Dink oldu mu? (Do you think that Hrant Dink died?)” in Milliyet, Jan.

Lousaper (Hovsepian) Arzoumanian Nazareth Arzoumanian

BORN: Yozgat; 1915 BORN: Yozgat; 1905 DIED: Beirut; 1997 DIED: Beirut; 1963

April 26, 2008 | THE ARMENIAN WEEKLY | 9 1_Seyehan_5 4/13/08 9:48 PM Page 10

Bayraktar

24, 2007; “Topragindan ayrilmadi (He did not leave his soil)” in Yeni Safak, Jan. 24, 19 Ertugrul Ozkok, “Sizce o silahi niye atmadi (Why do you think he did not throw 2007; “Buyuk Ugurlama (Grand farewell)” in Cumhuriyet, Jan. 24, 2007; and away the gun)” in Hurriyet, Jan. 23, 2007. “Butun Turkiye ugurladi (All of Turkey said farewell)” in , Jan. 24, 2007. 20 Gocek, “Hrant Dink, Reconciliation and Genocide,” Jan. 28, 2007. 8 Two telling examples are the comparison of the killing of Dink with one of the main 21 Ibidem. Hrant Dink was the only person who was actually sentenced in a series of architects of the destruction of the Ottoman Armenians, Talat , who was shot trials against intellectuals on the basis of Article 301 of the Turkish Penal Code, down in his Berlin in 1921 by an Armenian student. The author of the article which by and large punishes those who insult Turkishness. The court sentenced him argued that Talat, like Dink, had been shot down from behind and that his shoes, too, for an article in his weekly Agos, in which he in fact had criticized his fellows in the had a hole. See Murat Bardakci, “Talat Pasa cinayeti gibi (Like the murderer of Talat diaspora because of their alleged “anti-Turkish” stance and had appealed to the need Pasha)” in Sabah, Jan. 20, 2007; the second example is the heading of the ultra-nation- to get rid off such anti-Turkish sentiments in order for Armenians, too, to come to alist daily Tercuman, in which the murderer, Ogun Samast, was presented as an terms with the past. See Hrant Dink, “The ‘Turk’ of the Armenian” in Agos, Jan. 23, Armenian. See “Katil Ermeni (The murder is an Armenian)” in Tercuman, Jan. 21, 2007. 2004. The fact that he was the only one who was sentenced for having insulted 9 When former Prime Minister Tansu Ciller suggested to “expell the roughly 70,000 Turkishness as against all the other accused intellectuals who were ethnic Turks and Armenians from Turkey” as a political means to counter international genocide that the court had not even accepted reports by experts that the article did not con- acknowledgements, there was a huge public outcry as to her racist and separatist sug- tain any insult to Turkishness revealed not least the unequal treatment of his case gestion. Ciller was depicted in a Hitler-pose saying, “Well, yes. It’s an old but effective because of his ethnic affiliation. Dink expressed his deep disappointment about this method.”See Cumhuriyet, Oct. 10, 2000. For another critical example, see Oktay Eksi, blatant discrimination in one of his last articles, “Nicin Hedef Secildim (Why I have “Ciller in Kafasiyla (With Ciller’s mindset)”in Hurriyet, Oct. 8, 2000. As a result, Ciller become a target)” in Agos, Jan. 10, 2007. had to step back and make clear that she had not the Armenians of Turkey in mind 22 This neglect of Gocek, however, changed considerably with time. As the son of but the partly illegal labor force from the Armenian Republic. A similar suggestion at Hrant Dink, Arat Dink, and a key member of Agos, Sarkis Seropyan, were con- the end of 2006 by the former diplomat Sukru Elekdag with regard to genocide victed of having insulted Turkishness a few months later, Gocek strongly criticized acknowledgement in the U.S. Congress also met with criticism of discrimination. For the “blatant discrimination of Armenians in Turkey based on prejudice.” See the defense of Elekdag , see Zaman, Nov. 24, 2006. Gocek, “On the recent convictions of Serkis Seropyan and Arat Dink” online at 10 Indeed, recent years have shown a remarkable diversification in the remembering of www.cilicia.com/2007/10/hrant-dinks-son-convicted-of-same.html. For this con- the Armenian Genocide. The increasing public presence of Armenian community life siderable change, compare also the following footnote. especially since the publishing of the bi-lingual weekly Agos headed by Dink indicated 23 Another problematic aspect of the reconciliation plea —besides the timing of the a positive change in the socio-political atmosphere in Turkey with regard to the making of a case for the socio-psychology of the Turkish society—is the construction Armenian community. See Baskin Oran,“The Reconstruction of Armenian Identity in of Dink as someone having “resisted his exercise of ” to use the term Turkey and the Weekly AGOS” (2006) online at www.armenews.com/article. “genocide” as if he had done this under no constraints and by his own ultimate free php3?id_article=27696. On top of it, the Istanbul conference “Ottoman Armenians will, thereby grossly neglecting the following actual situation. At the time of Dink’s During the Decline of the Empire: Issues of Scientific Responsibility and Democracy” death—and hence at the time of the reconciliation plea of Gocek—there was a new held in 2005 against heavy protests by the far right was a landmark event, one that trial running against Dink of having insulted Turkishness on the basis of Article 301. according to the historian Halil Berktay would one day be remembered as the “fall of This time, the alleged delict of insult was exactly his actual use of the term “genocide” the Berlin Wall in the Armenian-Turkish relations” perhaps and particularly the con- in an interview for Agency on July 14, 2006. From this perspective, arguing on flict over the history. See “Erivan’da da konferans sart (Conference also necessary in the basis of the previous trial and stressing that Dink “ultimately was not tried and Yerewan)” in Radikal, Oct. 18, 2005. Finally, a number of public outings about sentenced for the use of the term” is a shortened account of the actual situation, if not Armenian family members seemed to indicate a “postnationalist discourse,”as termed outright cynical. For, as already said above, Dink was at the time of the reconciliation by Gocek (2003). While the leftist Fethiye Cetin can be considered a “usual suspect” plea and his death on trial for using that very term and did not even have the chance with regard to her public outing that her grandmother was an Armenian survivor of to utter “genocide” a second time, since he did not survive the first time. I thank Bilgin 1915, the outing of a hard-core Kemalist such as Bekir Coskun who remembered his Ayata for putting my attention on the point of a second chance. See “Retrospective on “private Armenian question” and “confessed” publicly that his stepgrandmother had Trials against Dink” in Bianet online at www.bianet.org/bianet/kategori/eng- been an Armenian survivor was a rather sensational development. See Bekir Coskun, lish/90480/retrospective-on-trials-against-hrant-dink. “Benim Ermeni meselem (My private Armenian question)”in Hurriyet, Sept. 27, 2005. 24 Derya Sazak, “Sevda guvercini (Love pigeon)” in Milliyet, Jan. 21, 2007. 11 The currents analysis is based on the editions of Hurriyet, Cumhuriyet, Zaman, 25 See also Erbal, Ayda. “We are all Oxymorons,” The Armenian Weekly, April 24, Yeni Safak, and Radikal from Feb. 19–24, 2007. 2007 who criticized one particular implication of such an approach, namely, if it is 12 The uniting element of the WATS group is an (ethical) committment to (aca- less worrisome when an Armenian who does not care so much about Turkey is demic) issues related to the Armenian-Turkish reconciliation process. Although murdered. the organizers of WATS stress the academic purpose of the group, it is inevitable 26 http://hurarsiv.hurriyet.com.tr/goster/haber.aspx?id=5806412&tarih=2007-01–19. that substantive political issues are at stake in the WATS communication. The 27 See, for example, Murat Yetkin, “Korkunc ve karanlik bir cinayet (A Frightening attempt to separate academia and politics is itself already an odd idea. In the con- and obscure Murder),” Jan. 20, 2007. text of the Armenian Genocide and the Armenian-Turkish relations that is a most 28 Guneri Civaoglu, “Rezillik (Infamousness)” in Milliyet, Jan. 20, 2007. politicized field, the idea of having an academic interchange outside the political 29 Guneri Civaoglu, “Kan Kulturu (Blood Culture)” in Milliyet, Jan. 21, 2007. Can context seems to indicate a gross cognitive discrepancy. For the substantial social Dundar, one of the leading figures of the Turkish left and a good friend of Dink and political outcomes of such discrepancies, see Kuran, Private Truths, himself, also revived the talk about the ASALA. See “Hepimiz Ermeni miyiz? (Are Public Lies. The Social Consequences of Preference Falsification (Cambridge: we all Armenians?)” in Milliyet, Jan. 30, 2007. Harvard University Press, 1995). 30 See Rifat N. Bali, 2006. Ermeni Kiyiminin 50. Yildonumunun Yansimalari. 13 Several calls to disclose the WATS list membership have not succeeded. See David Toplumsal Tarih 159 (March 2007). Davidian, “Turkish-Armenian Dialogue: A False Start” in the Armenian Weekly, 31 See, for example, the following passage in “Bir Cinayet” in Cumhuriyet, Jan. 30, April 24, 2007. One can just assume the wide range of list-serv members regarding 1973: “Bu tur cinayetler dunya kamuoyunda tiksinti yaratir. En buyuk tiksintiyi, en professional and ethnic-national affiliation from observing the email traffic. The buyuk aciyi da Ermeni yurttaslarimiz duyacaklardir. Belki hepimizden daha cok. only criteria for membership seems to be being involed in Armenian-Turkish his- (Such murderers disgust the international public. However, the most disgust and tory, politics, etc. in any way. the greatest pain will most likely be felt by our fellow Armenian citizens). ” 14 Ismet Berkan, “Caresizlik ve sessizlik (Helplessness and Silence)” in Radikal, Jan. 32 See Seyhan Bayraktar, “Der Massenmord an den Armeniern 1915/16 im Spiegel der 21, 2007. For another critique on these immediate reactions, see Yasemin Congar, turkischen Presse (The Mass Murder of the Armeniens of 1915/16 as presented in the “Manidar (Meaningful)” in Milliyet, Jan. 22, 2007. Turkish media)” in Ideologien zwischen Luge und Wahrheitsanspruch (Ideologies, Lies 15 See among others Oktay Eksi,“O kursun Turkiye’ye atildi (That gun was fired against and Authenticism), edited by S. Greschonig and C. Sing (Wiesbaden: DUV, 2004). Turkey)” in Hurriyet, Jan. 20, 2007; Mustafa Unal, “Eyvah! Turkiye vuruldu (Alas! 33 See Bayraktar, “Master Narratives of the Armenian Question in Turkish Public Turkey is shot)” in Zaman, Jan. 21 2007; Ali Bulac, “Kursun kime sikildi (Whom did Discourse,” paper read at “Ideologies of Revolution, Nation, and Empire: Political the bullets target)” in Zaman, Jan. 22, 2007; Gunseli Ozen Ocakoglu, “Hrant Dink Ideas, Parties, and Practices at the End of the Ottoman Empire 1878–1922,” in suikasti Turkiye’nin imajina zarar verdi (The assassination of Hrant Dink harmed the Salzburg. image of Turkey)” in Zaman, Jan. 22, 2007; Melih Asik, “Yine vurulduk (We are shot 34 See Ayda Erbal (2007). Bir Cinayet” in Cumhuriyet, Jan. 30, 1973: “Bu tur cinayetler again)” in Milliyet, Jan. 20, 2007; compared to these examples, Altan Oymen’s head- dunya kamuoyunda tiksinti yaratir. En buyuk tiksintiyi, en buyuk aciyi da Ermeni ing “The Murder also shot Turkey with Hrant Dink, (Katil Hrant Dink’le birlikte yurttaslarimiz duyacaklardir. Belki hepimizden daha cok. (Such murderers disgust Turkiye’yi de vurdu)” in Radikal, Jan. 20, 2007, seems to be a generous framing of the the international public. However, the most disgust and the greatest pain will most story in taking Dink as the victim of the assassination at least into consideration. likely be felt by our fellow Armenian citizens). ” 16 “Onu vuran eller Turkiye’yi vurduklarinin farkinda degiller,” Mehmet Ali Birand, 32 See Seyhan Bayraktar, “Der Massenmord an den Armeniern 1915/16 im Spiegel der “Hirant’i Turk Dusmanlari Oldurdu (Hrant was shot by the Enemies of the turkischen Presse (The Mass Murder of the Armeniens of 1915/16 as presented in the Turks)” in Hurriyet, Jan. 20, 2007. Turkish media)” in Ideologien zwischen Luge und Wahrheitsanspruch (Ideologies, Lies 17 “Irkcilarin Hedefi Hrant Dink uc kursunla katledildi (Racists’ target Dink—assas- and Authenticism), edited by S. Greschonig and C. Sing (Wiesbaden: DUV, 2004). sinated with three bullets)” in Radikal, Jan. 20, 2007. 33 See Bayraktar, “Master Narratives of the Armenian Question in Turkish Public 18 It was a member of the Armenian community of Turkey who wrote about the dev- Discourse,” paper read at “Ideologies of Revolution, Nation, and Empire: Political astating socio-psychological consequences of the killing for the community. See Ideas, Parties, and Practices at the End of the Ottoman Empire 1878–1922,” in Hayganus,“Hepiniz Ogun Samast’siniz (You are all Ogun Samast)” in Bir Gun, Jan. Salzburg. 26, 2007. 34 See Ayda Erbal (2007).

10 | THE ARMENIAN WEEKLY | APRIL 26, 2008 6_Ayse Hur_Research_3 4/13/08 6:09 PM Page 11

RESEARCH

A Society Crippled by orgetting

By Ayse Hur

fter it was clear that the Ottoman Empire lost HOSTAGES: TURKISH ARMENIANS , and until 1920, it was not as hard as it is today to talk about “what hap- News that the novel Forty Days in , by the Prague-born pened between 1915 and 1917,”which we, for Jewish intellectual , was going to be turned into a film one reason or another, cannot decide whether gave the Kemalist establishment the idea that other countries to call “deportation” or “mutual murder” or could give Turkey a hard time by “provoking Armenians.” “massacre” or “decimation” or “genocide.” In The novel attracted much attention when it was published in those years even the perpetrators accepted that it was a “massacre” in March 1933, but Turkey grasped the situation nine months ForA a “calamity.” But the nature of the discussion started to change later. On Dec. 25, 1934, an article by Falih Rifki, the leading Kemalist after 1920. Policies were implemented to erase what was done to the ideologue, that warned the German authorities of the book appeared in Armenians from the collective memory. At first, this act of “forget- Hakimiyet-i Milliye, which was regarded as the official newspaper of the ting” was a “precondition” for Turkish identity; in time it became an . On Dec. 27–28 in the same paper, journalist Burhan Asaf element of its “continuation.” Today it is its “constitutive element.” (Belge) spoke sarcastically of Werfel, saying that “it is obvious from the What is more, it was not only what happened in 1915–17 that was book that he drinks too much Armenian coffee,” and blaming him for forgotten, but the whole republican history. “wanting to rear up the Armenian horse standing on the eroded and The first stage of this process of forgetting was the adoption of the leveled Christian morality, with a Faustian roar.”Shortly after, the warn- Latin alphabet in place of the alphabet. Consequently, later ings led the Nazi propaganda minister Goebbels to announce that the generations were prevented from reading the documents written book was banned. But it was too late, for the book had already become before 1930. In this way, the connections with the past were at the very popular among German . When Werfel’s publisher convinced hands of “historians” who followed the state line. In some ways, this him to sell the rights of his book to Metro Goldwyn-Mayer, one of the became the objective cause of not remembering. The second stage was giants at the time, and when 35,000 copies of the book sold in two the introduction of the Turkish Historical Thesis, which was one of weeks and broke the record in 1934, Turkey was alarmed. The newspa- the parameters of the common ideal that the “Turkish nation” (some- pers, especially Cumhuriyet and Ulus, which expressed the views of the thing the state was trying to create) was to circle around. This odd the- leading party (RPP), emphasized that MGM was “a Jewish company” sis, according to which all societies in the world had Turkish origins, and suggested that this event was an “Armenian-Jewish conspiracy.” was aimed at both restoring the pride that was damaged by the col- When this was happening, the Armenian Community Temporal lapse of the Ottoman Empire and blocking the “non-Turkish” ele- Committee, which was kept as almost a hostage in Istanbul, was forced ments (such as the Armenians, , and Kurds) that could claim to condemn the event. On Dec. 15, 1935, a group of Armenians gath- “historical rights” on . In 1936, - Theory, ered in the Pangalti Armenian Church and burned copies of the book— according to which all human were derived from Turkish, because it was “full of slander against the Turkish nation”—while stated in the super-text that the “Turkish race is the founder of all the singing the Turkish national anthem. In 1936, after the French edition civilizations in the world, therefore it is superior,” and in the subtext of the book was published in , MGM announced that they would that “all people in Anatolia are Turkish, but because of ‘perversions’ not be making the film. It looked as if Turkey had won a war against the regarding language and religion they forgot that they were Turkish.” Armenians. This event resulted in Turkey’s having a more cautious, more suspicious, more defensive attitude against the international com- TRANSLATED FROM TURKISH BY MELIS ERDUR munity. The fear that the smallest loosening could lead to the loss of

April 26, 2008 | THE ARMENIAN WEEKLY | 11 6_Ayse Hur_Research_3 4/13/08 6:09 PM Page 12

Hur

Anatolia, which was held on to with great difficulty, was implemented Cevat Ulunay, the editor-in-chief of Milliyet, another mainstream deep in the hearts of the Kemalist elite. newspaper, wrote: “As the late Ahmet Refik [Altinay] said, [what is When accepted (with the help of Yakov Zorobian, who at issue is] the two massacres of the two committees, one Union was the secretary of the Central Committee of Armenian Supreme and Progress, the other Tashnag. Even history would not want this Soviet) the demand from a group of Armenian scientists to erect a argument again.” So the memories brought to life by the monument on the 50th anniversary of the genocide, the Armenian Armenian diaspora were being forced into dark drawers again. community in Turkey became a target. The evaluation report by Philip Clock of the U.S. Embassy described the situation as follows: THE ASALA EFFECT “Lately, an issue that is rarely mentioned in modern Turkey, and almost never in the media, started to become a subject of discus- The activities of ASALA (Armenian Secret Army for the Liberation of sion in public: the question of the Armenian minority in Turkey. Armenia; in Armenian, Hayastani Azatagrutyan Hay Gaghtni Banak) The word ‘Armenian’ usually doesn’t even occur in the media in between 1975 and 1984 caused the media to be fully involved in the long periods of time. The curriculum of state schools is inclined to ideological struggle. Thousands of articles were published along the ignore this subject entirely. The people keep saying that the struc- lines of the offical theses of the state. These articles shared the feature tures in Central and East Anatolia, which any foreign observer can of connecting ASALA’s activities to the activities of the Kurdish PKK tell that they are Armenian-made, are made by Turks or by some movement. The intelligence circles, in particular, often claimed that other group. The issue of the Armenian minority, which is thus Tin 1979–80 in Lebanon, an alliance between the PKK and ASALA ignored and apparently forgotten, was revived by the prospects of was established with the leadership of and to sabotage the conference on the fiftieth anniversary (of 1915), which will be Turkey’s policies; the ultimate aim of that alliance was to held on April 24th in Beirut.” found the “Armenian-Kurdish Federal State.” In this way, both the Indeed, Cuneyd Arcayurek, the correspondent of Kurdish and the Armenian demands were made illegitimate. Hurriyet—the “amiral ship” of the mainstream media—wrote on Since the majority of the people were in such a severe state of April 8, 1965: “It is known that in the years of World War I, during forgetfulness that they had difficulty understanding the reason various domestic activities, Armenians rebelled in various regions behind these attacks, facing the Armenian issue in this way had a and provinces, and even committed atrocities against Turks. Since very “negative” effect. More precisely, with a retrospective reading of various major problems were being faced at the time, and with the history, it helped the idea that “the Unionists were right to do away influence of on the one hand, and the ally Germany on the with this dangerous group” to settle into the unconscious of Turkish other, attempts were made to put an end to it. Turks were killed by society. Offical politicians and the media engraved the equation Armenians, and Armenians were killed during the suppression of the “Armenian = ASALA = terror” in the memory of the society. The rebellion. Some of them left or were made to leave the country. But association of the notion of terror with Armenians was so success- the fact today is this: We have around 80,000 Armenian citizens in ful that in later years, the equation “Abdullah Ocalan = terror = Turkey now and every single one of them is a member of the Turkish Armenian seed” was easily adopted by the public. nation. It is impossible for hardworking, knowledgeable, dutiful Turkish Armenians not to regret such a campaign.” In short, a hand- PARLIAMENTARY RESOLUTIONS ful of Armenians who could somehow manage to stay in the country were reminded of the fact that they were hostages to the state. Starting from 1980’s, when various countries designated April 24th That must have worked, for the next day Hurriyet would state, as “Armenian Genocide Commemoration Day,” and when parlia- under the heading “It’s our Armenian citizens’ turn,” that “Tens of ments started to pass “genocide recognition resolutions,” the thousands of Armenian citizens living in our city detest the Greek- Turkish state decided to broaden the ideological fight against the fueled commemorations on April 24th under the name ‘Armenian Armenian theses. This primarily meant a more effective use of the massacre,’ which is the exploitation of an old event. Armenians in “national education” system. Istanbul said, ‘This can only be a trick of the Greek Cypriot As we mentioned earlier, since the beginning of the republic, his- Foreign Minister Kipriyanu. Some Armenians may be exploited Story production was equated with the production of national iden- unintentionally. We, Armenians of Turkey, have forgotten the past tity, and the authoritarian state model was presented as something and are living in absolute peace and happiness.’” that was “naturally” related to the national identity, and was an What is noteworthy is that an appeal to anti-Greek sentiments extention of this national identity. The first rule was to make related to the Cyprus issue was needed for activating the masses Turkish history “clean and honorable.” The aim was to create the against Armenian nationalism. This was understandable; due to myth of a “Turkish” race that had stayed the same for almost 10,000 the systematic policies erasing the memories and in the absence of years on Anatolian lands, while all other races faded away. However, the catalyzing effect of current problems, the people might not there were two periods. Before Turkey was pressed by ASALA and have remembered what Armenians wanted from Turks, and thus the parliamentary resolutions about the genocide, Armenians were might not have understood why Armenians were to be stopped. sometimes mentioned as subjects of a distant past, and in general The Spiritual Leader of Armenians, Catholicos Bogos Kirecyan; a the language was not so negative. The capture of Ani, the capital of former member of the Republican Senate, Berc Turan; the the Armenian Kingdom of Bagrati, by the Seljuks in 1064, or the Patriarch of Armenians in Turkey, Snork Kalustyan; and Nubar battles between the Seljuks and the Armenian Kingdom of Cilicia Gulbenkyan, the son of Kalust Sarkis Gulbenkyan, also known as between the 12th and 14th centuries, were sometimes belittled, “Mr. Five Percent,” realized the extent of the danger and had to sometimes ignored, and sometimes presented as if there had been declare their loyalty once again. After these declarations, Refii no battles. In some cases, these kingdoms were presented as “small,”

12 | THE ARMENIAN WEEKLY | APRIL 26, 2008 6_Ayse Hur_Research_3 4/13/08 7:48 PM Page 13

RESEARCH

and in some cases their borders were made indistinct. Sometimes were to be educated along the lines of the new curriculum. they were located outside of Anatolia, and other times it was said Newspapers reported the decree with the heading: “The state’s that the “Oguz, Pecenek, Kipcak tribes had arrived earlier” in the position on the claims of the Armenian Genocide, the Founding lands where Armenians lived. In this way, it was suggested that of the Pontic State, and the Syriac Christian Genocide, will be laid Armenians had no historical rights over Anatolia. out in the textbooks.” This decree came into effect in 2002. In the 1960’s and 1970’s, another development that showed that What was striking in that curriculum was that all secondary the Armenian taboo was a strong adhesive among the intellectuals school students throughout the country were told to write essays on was the movement known as “Blue Anatolia.” With the help of this “The Armenian Rebellion in World War I and Armenian Activities,” fresh movement, according to which Anatolia was “ours not because which would then be evaluated in an essay competition. The appar- we conquered it, but because it is ours,” the pagan, Christian, and ent aim of this competition was to make the students narrate the Muslim histories of Anatolia were presented as the evolution of a atrocities committed by the Armenians against the Turks. What was single unit, while Turkish was presented as the successor of the 72 most deplorable was the fact that Armenian students living in languages spoken before, and “Turkishness” was presented as a ver- Turkey were also made to write these essays. Just like during the 50th sion of the humanist thought. But among these societies or civiliza- anniversary events, the Armenian citizens were treated as “hostages.” tions that constituted “us,”Armenians were not mentioned. CONCLUSION TEXTBOOKS These are just a few examples chosen from a history of 90 years. Starting from the 1980’s, a radical change occurred and the subject There are hundreds of other events that need to be discovered, of the “Armenian issue” was introduced into the textbooks. This described, examined, and interpreted. But even this much helps us part was prepared in accordance with the 1953 book The Armenian have a grasp on the state’s policies of erasing memories. We know Problem: Nine Questions, Nine Answers by Ahmet Esat Uras, who that “remembering” and “forgetting” have been important elements came from the Unionist movement and who even played a role in of the Turkish national identity. What was peculiar to these stages of the . The Turkish Foreign Ministry showed great inter- the Turkish identity was that forgetting the 1915–17 Armenian Sest in this book from the day it was published, and it was printed TMassacres was a constitutive element. The Turkish identity could over and over again, and translated into foreign languages. create itself only by refusing to remember what had happened in According to it, Armenians, who were happily living in the Ottoman 1915–17 because, for the Turkish society, Armenians symbolized times and were being “assimilated in the Turkish culture,” suddenly the most traumatic event in their history—the collapse of the adopted a hostile attitude towards Turks. In these narratives, the Ottoman Empire—and Armenians continuously reminded the 1894–96 Sasun events and 1909 events were presented as Turks of this horrible collapse. examples of Armenian hostility, and the 1915–17 deportations were As is well known, the Ottoman Empire was spread over three shown as a response to these events. continents until it entered a period of disintegration during its last The following excerpts from various secondary and high 150 years. Unending wars, defeats, and great losses of human life school textbooks may give an idea about what the young genera- gave rise to deep anxieties about the fate of the empire. In this tions in Turkey have been told: period, while every attempt to prevent the empire from collapsing failed, the ruling elite tended to blame the imperialist forces and the “Forced migration was for the security of the state. It was “minorities” that collaborated with them. In those years, the ruling never used as an instrument of genocide, threat, or oppression class of the empire thought that they were excluded from the histor- against Armenians.” ical narrative told by the West, that they were now “nobody,” and “During this migration, due to the harsh climate, diseases, that they faced a complete destruction of the state. But they found attacks by the bandits, some Armenians died. These are the consolation in the thought that it was essentially “the betrayal of the events that Armenians claim to be “genocide.”...During this people that they were the masters of” that had caused this situation. period, the number of Turks who lost their lives for the same In this atmosphere, the ruling cadres of the new state believed reasons was much greater than that of Armenians. By the that they could heal their wounds by leaving these dark pages of his- deportation law, the state secured the safety of the defenseless tory behind. The year 1923 was a new beginning for them. The civilian Turks and of its army that was in a state of war. Thus, Turkish society saw itself as a Phoenix that was reborn from the ashes. Armenians who were not near the front-lines were not moved. And it was as if Armenians symbolized the “ashes” that they were ...When Armenians started killing Turks, due to the provoca- reborn from. One other reason for not being willing to confront his- tion of the Western states, we had to defend ourselves.” torical reality is the fear of punishment. Many Turks know that if “Thus, from the middle of the 19th century to the begin- ning of the 20th century, those Armenians who were deceived they acknowledge the genocide, Turkey would have to pay compen- and tricked by the provocations of certain European states, and sation in the form of land and money for the compensation/repara- believed in the existence of an Armenian Problem, betrayed tion of the plundered wealth of the Armenian who were deported. their country and their state, casting suspicion and blame on all That was probably why Armenians had to be completely forgotten. Armenians, and thereby causing great pain and suffering for However, one must keep in mind that it is not only the decent and good-willed Armenian citizens.” Armenian Genocide but also the very recent past is almost forgot- ten. And because the Turkish society prefers to move forward On June 14, 2002, the Committee of Education that chooses without adequately addressing underlying conflicts, social ten- the textbooks to be used in schools decreed that the teachers, too, sions accumulate to the point where they become explosive. a

April 26, 2008 | THE ARMENIAN WEEKLY | 13 1_George_Research_3 4/13/08 1:07 PM Page 14

RESEARCH

A Glimpse into the Armenian Patriarchate Censuses of 1906/7 and 1913/4

By George Aghjayan

he size and composition of the population of the While scholars have made use of previously published sum- Ottoman Empire has been disputed for over 100 maries compiled from the census registers, actual registers have years.1 The primary sources used to document the never been analyzed or even been known to exist. The absence of various assertions have included Ottoman govern- detailed records has led some to question how the summary tables ment statistics, Armenian Patriarchate statistics were generated4; however, some actual registers have survived. and estimates by numerous contemporary Images 1 and 2 are pages from registers compiled in 1906/7 and observers—eachT with strengths and weaknesses. The subject of 1913/4. Both samples are records for the same houses on Khan this article will be the Armenian Patriarchate statistics. Detailed Street (Han) in the Mouhsine Khatoun (Muhsine Hatun) district records from the Patriarchate have largely been ignored to date. I aim to show that they can be used for meaningful analysis and are an indispensable resource.

BACKGROUND

The Armenian community in the Ottoman Empire maintained over 2,000 churches— the great majority Armenian Apostolic, but Catholic and Protestant as well. Baptisms, marriages and deaths were recorded, but almost all such records were destroyed dur- ing the genocide.2 In addition to the recording of vital events, the church periodically undertook the task of enumerating the Armenian popu- lation via a census. The Armenian National Constitution (1862) created a census depart- ment within the Bureau of the Patriarchate. The census was used for taxation, as well as for determining representation in the national political and religious assemblies.3

Register from the 1906/7 Armenian Patriarchate census

14 | THE ARMENIAN WEEKLY | APRIL 26, 2008 1_George_Research_3 4/13/08 1:07 PM Page 15

RESEARCH

Register from the 1913/4 Armenian Patriarchate census

ple reported births in the years immediately following the 1877/8 Russo-Turkish War. Table 2 summarizes the same sample into 5-year age groupings indicating an under- counting of children under the age of 10. Demographers have made use of stable popu- lation theory to estimate the degree of under- counting by comparing the enumerated population to standard model life tables. Extreme care is called for, though, as such methods can easily lead to the masking or removing of the impact of actual events on the age structure of the population. It cannot be emphasized enough that one must understand the history of the region under analysis before conclusions can be drawn. That one must also understand the situations where stable popula- tion theory is applicable is also self-evident. In the sample, males accounted for 51 percent of the total population. While super- ficially one might expect a 50/50 male to of Istanbul. The registers are contained in the archives of the female ratio, it is difficult to interpret such results. Yet, it is known Patriarchate and were microfilmed by the Mormon Church. that Istanbul contained a large Armenian male migrant popula- tion. Possibly the ratio was further impacted by a greater natural female life expectancy or the massacres of the late 1800’s resulting ANALYSIS in more male deaths than female. The tilt in the age structures The existence of the registers allows for a better understanding of implies greater female life expectancy; however, such conclusions how they were compiled, as well as of some of the strengths and are premature without further analysis. weaknesses inherent in the summaries. What follows is only casual Other areas open to exploration are the prevalence of certain treatment, but hopefully it is enough to pique the curiosity of occupations, the disparity in ages between spouses, the composi- other researchers. tion of households, the origin of the population by gender, etc.5 For The first item to note is that the census was not a continuous instance, a conclusion drawn from producing the above tables was register from which periodic summaries were tabulated. Each reg- that husbands were generally significantly older than their wives. ister does not appear to have been compiled simply by updating It would be fascinating to explore the population by age, gen- the previous register with the vital events occurring in the inter- der, and native city. Istanbul served as an economic center for vening years. A summary for the 1906/7 census for Pera indicates Armenians, but in the last years of the empire this may not have that the results were in fact summarized by street and district and, thus, were the foundation for aggregation. The column headings are district, street, number, first name, last TABLE 1 name, occupation, father’s name, mother’s name, native city, and year of birth (note that the years of birth are according to the hijra YEARS ENDING IN MALES FEMALES TOTAL calendar). The data and years collected correspond closely to the 0 10.3% 12.4% 11.3% Ottoman registers. This raises some interesting questions given that Ottoman registers containing Armenians have not yet come to light. 1 9.9% 10.2% 10.1% Detailed data of this kind can be analyzed for quality and con- 2 10.0% 11.2% 10.6% sistency. For instance, age misreporting is a common error found 4 6.8% 6.0% 6.4% in censuses. Slightly better results are achieved by asking for the year of birth instead of age; yet, it is still common to observe heap- 5 11.6% 10.6% 11.1% ing at years ending in certain digits. Table 1 is compiled from a 6 12.8% 12.7% 12.8% sample of 2,300 individuals in the 1913/4 census: 7 9.3% 9.8% 9.5% It is interesting to note that women displayed heaping in years ending in 0 and 6, while 5 and 6 were most common for men. 8 10.2% 10.0% 10.1% These results are not sufficient to form conclusions as the heaping 9 9.9% 9.9% 9.9% may result from actual events. For instance, a large number of peo-

April 26, 2008 | THE ARMENIAN WEEKLY | 15 1_George_Research_3 4/13/08 1:07 PM Page 16

Aghjayan

needs to be done, but from what is available thus far, it is apparent TABLE 2 that the data presented by the Armenian Patriarchate is a valuable and required resource for analyzing the Armenian population of AGES MALES FEMALES TOTAL the Ottoman Empire. 91+ 1 5 6 86–90 1 2 3 ENDNOTES 81–85 5 17 22 1 Throughout the 19th century, observers would speculate on the popula- tion of the Ottoman Empire, its changing characteristics, and prospects 76–80 18 24 42 for the future. There were, however, great disparity in the figures and a 71–75 25 38 63 general belief that an accurate accounting was impossible given the data 66–70 51 44 95 available. More recent sources of interest include Justin McCarthy, and Minorities: The Population of Ottoman Anatolia and the End 61–65 71 65 136 of the Empire (New York: New York University, 1983); Kemal H. Karpat, 56–60 66 52 118 Ottoman Population 1830–1914: Demographic and Social Characteristics 51–55 75 81 156 (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1985); Levon Marashlian, Politics and Demography: Armenians, Turks, and Kurds in the Ottoman 46–50 72 76 148 Empire (Cambridge: Zoryan Institute, 1991); Raymond H. Kevorkian 41–45 98 70 168 and Paul B. Paboudjian, Les Armeniens dans l’Empire Ottoman a la veille 36–40 76 72 148 du genocide (: Les Editions d’Art et d’Histoire ARHIS, 1992); and Robert H. Hewsen, Armenia: A Historical Atlas (Chicago: University of 31–35 114 111 225 Chicago Press, 2001). 26–30 126 89 215 2 Outside of churches in Istanbul, the only known records I have person- 21–25 85 101 186 ally worked with are the baptisms for the period 1902 through 1915 16–20 91 84 175 from the church of St. Gregory the Illuminator in Gesaria (). In addition, some tax registers from the Van region have survived from the 11–15 101 93 194 1800’s. The archives at the Armenian Patriarchate in Istanbul may con- 6–10 52 61 113 tain addition records. 0–5 49 46 95 3 H.F.B. Lynch, Armenia: Travels and Studies (New York: Armenian Prelacy, 1990), vol. 2, pp. 449–467. 4 McCarthy offers a number of criticisms, including the presumed played as great a role as other cities and countries served as eco- absence of any records (Muslims and Minorities, pp. 47–57). McCarthy nomic magnets for Armenians. is also concerned that some of the figures have been rounded and were used for political objectives. He considers some problems “insoluble,” such as that population by age and sex were not published. In sum- CONCLUSION mary, McCarthy invalidates the Armenian Patriarchate statistics prima- rily on the inaccuracy in the estimate of the Muslim population. Population figures originating from the Armenian Patriarchate McCarthy exhibits a favorable bias toward Ottoman government statis- have come under harsh criticism, particularly from those who tics that often compromises his collective works. deny the Armenian Genocide and, thus, attempt to validate a 5 An interesting study of Istanbul Muslim households was done by Alan much lower pre-genocide Armenian population. Duben and Cem Behar in Istanbul Households: Marriage, Family and That the Patriarchate underrepresented Muslims is problem- Fertility, 1880–1940 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002). atic, yet the Patriarchate had no means of counting the Muslim Duben and Behar make use of Ottoman censuses. A valuable project population. Justin McCarthy accepts that Armenians were under- would compare the results of the 1906/7 Ottoman census with the counted to a greater degree than Muslims, yet this has not dimin- 1906/7 Armenian Patriarchate census, including a comparison of the ished the value of Ottoman statistics in his analysis. While it is not registers for the same districts. Such a comparison may go a long way known how the Patriarchate arrived at the Muslim population, it in understanding the controversy in population estimates. is clear that the Patriarchate had the incentive and means to enu- 5 Justin McCarthy, Muslims and Minorities: The Population of Ottoman 6 merate the Armenian population and did so. Anatolia and the End of the Empire (New York: New York University, We now have a glimpse into the process used by the Patriarchate 1983), pp. 54–57. to compile data on the Armenian population. In addition, the 6 Souren Papazian, Odyssey of a Survivor (Maryland: Jensen Press, 2002), information available is in greater detail than previously known p. 37. Beyond the known available census and vital records, Papazian and, thus, allows for an assessment of quality and an easier com- describes his role in carrying out the 1913 census in the village of Havav parison with other sources. Much tedious and technical work in the district of Palu.

Haigaz Tevekelian Hagop Kalayjian

BORN: Malatia; April 27, 1909 BORN: Amasia; August 10, 1906 DIED: Watertown, Mass.; January 25, 1996 DIED: New York; October 19, 1982

16 | THE ARMENIAN WEEKLY | APRIL 26, 2008 3_Kaiser_RESEARC2.qxd 4/12/08 1:41 PM Page 17

RESEARCH A Deportation That Did Not Occur

By Hilmar Kaiser

arlier arguments employ models that resemble older shows that while deporting studies of the Holocaust. These studies claim that the Armenians was a crucial gov- ernment goal, using available Armenian Genocide was decided long before World War resources taken from the depor- I. The war simply afforded the ruling regime an “oppor- tees for settling Muslim refugees or immigrants was equally rele- tunity” to commit the crime. This interpretation stands vant. Thus, the Armenian Geno- somewhat at odds with the thesis that in March 1915, cide was not simply a program leaders of the ruling Committee of Union and Progress of eliminating Armenian popu- lation concentrations; it was a (CUP) held a conference in Constantinople during which they decided to deport campaign to replace Armenians the Ottoman Armenians and ultimately commit genocide. with Muslim settlers who were E considered to be reliable.3 But Interestingly, claims that the German ally had suggested the when exactly did demographic planning become a dominant con- deportations stand in contradiction to these assumptions. The sideration for the Ottoman government? apparent contradiction would have been by and large resolved if The Ottoman Armenians were not the only non-Muslims that assertions that the CUP had coordinated its March 1915 decision lived in strategically sensitive locations. Greeks, Zionists, and with the German ally were true. However, this claim is based on a Syrian Christians inhabited similarly important districts. The misrepresentation of a key source and is thereby untenable.1 Other Ministry of Interior coordinated the demographic policies and, authors argue that the CUP decided on the Armenian Genocide most importantly, the deportations. Thus, the ministry’s files pro- several months later. In other words, the war was not the long vide some insight into how these groups were targeted. Not sur- awaited “opportunity” to commit genocide but an unforeseen dis- prisingly, at times the same officials who had dealt with other aster that created the environment for the decision and execution non-Muslim groups played a crucial role during the Armenian of the genocide.2 Genocide. Thus, the evolving population policy can be partly A relatively new addition to the debate is the issue of Ottoman reconstructed, but some caution appears to be in place. Funda- population policies. Recent scholarship on the Armenian Genocide mental differences in the treatment of Armenians and other groups suggests that the crime has to be studied within the context of gen- suggest that the government had singled out the Armenians for eral Ottoman policies. The policies addressed competing claims to particularly cruel repression leading to large-scale annihilation. sovereignty primarily over Ottoman border areas. These claims The Nestorian case is a good example for such considerations. were based on the presence of large non-Muslim and non-Turkish The Ottoman Nestorian communities inhabited the Central populations. Such potential threats to Ottoman territorial integrity Kurdish Taurus Mountains, today largely identical with the Turkish could have been effectively overcome if it were possible to ethni- province of Hakkari and the Iraqi Amadiya district. They lived in cally homogenize the whole empire or at least important strategic remote valleys and earned their livelihood through subsistence agri- areas. Key Ottoman documentation on the Armenian Genocide culture and sheep and goat breeding. The isolated region facilitated

April 26, 2008 | THE ARMENIAN WEEKLY | 17 3_Kaiser_RESEARC2.qxd 4/12/08 1:41 PM Page 18

Kaiser

their efforts to maintain a comparably large degree of autonomy and around the district of present-day Hakkari city. However, the from government interference in communal affairs. Throughout provincial authorities had advised the government that they lacked 1914, the Ministry of Interior grew increasingly worried about the necessary forces to execute the order. In response, the central Russian interest in local matters in the region. Agha Petros, a former government was forced to postpone the deportations. Instead, it Ottoman Nestorian agent, had gone over to the Russians and was ordered the close surveillance of the Nestorians until the latter promoting Russian interests in the mountains.4 In June 1914, some could be deported.10 By Nov. 5, 1914, the anticipated Nestorian Nestorians had approached Russian representatives in and unrest had not materialized. Thus, Talat postponed the deporta- requested arms in return for Nestorian military support.5 The tions until a time when military necessity would render the meas- Ottomans were aware of these contacts. On June 16, 1914, the ure imperative. Until that time, the government deemed it sufficient Ministry of Interior warned the authorities at Van, Mosul, and to keep the situation under surveillance.11 In other words, the Erzerum about the activities of a Russian officer who was working deportation did not take place. The plan had been an ad-hoc secu- together with Agha Petros. Both men were active in the central rity measure. It was shelved once it became clear to the Ottoman Kurdish Taurus, one as a member of and the other as an interpreter central authorities that their worst fear had been unfounded. In for the international commission for the demarcation of the Iranian- 1915, however, the persecution of Nestorians took more brutal Ottoman border. The men were allegedly working among the Kurds forms during the Ottoman retreat from Iran when Nestorians were and Nestorians against the Ottoman government. The authorities massacred alongside Kurdish suspects. were advised to take counter-measures and obstruct their activities.6 The episode demonstrates that by 1914, deportation was again a potential tool for repressive policies. Such deportations would be lim- he situation deteriorated rapidly after the start of the ited in scale. However, military concerns were paramount and the re- war in Europe in August 1914. Now, the Ottoman direction of front line troops was not acceptable. Therefore, the authorities began displacing Nestorian villages in the Nestorian deportation plan was postponed and not taken up again. Bashkale region. Brutalities against Nestorians triggered During the Armenian Genocide, deportation was a primary policy revenge attacks on Muslim villages across the border in object that justified the deployment of resources that could have been TIran. The result was a wave of displacements affecting Christian and used for front-line or other service. While documentation from Muslims villages on both sides of the border. Christians were forced Ottoman archival sources is still limited and incomplete, a careful to leave for Iran, while Kurds were expelled to Ottoman territory.7 review of the available evidence is indispensable. Otherwise, authors But worse was to come. run the danger of creating trajectories of events that are incorrect. a Taner Akcam observed that military objectives were, among oth- ers, one reason for the deportations. An example was “the forced ENDNOTES of Nestorians and Assyrians from the Van region at the end of 1914.”Stating that, for “example, in September 1914, from the 1 Taner Akcam, A Shameful Act. The Armenian Genocide and the Question areas closest to Iran, ‘the Nestorians who were ripe for provocation of Turkish Responsibility, translated by Paul Bessemer (New York, N.Y.: Metropolitan Books, 2006), p.152. The author incorrectly summarized Halil from outside’ were settled into Ankara and . In order to pre- Mentese’s memoirs in this instance. vent them from creating a community in their new locations, they 2 The Great Game of Genocide. Imperialism, Nationalism, and the Destruction were settled in Muslim-dominated areas with strict orders that their of the Ottoman Armenians (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005). settlements must not exceed twenty residences in number.”8 In other 3 Hilmar Kaiser, “Armenian Property, Ottoman Law and Nationality Policies words, the security concerns that had led to what was believed to be During the Armenian Genocide, 1915-1916,” in Olaf Farschild, Manfred Kropp, Stephan Dahne, eds., The First Word War as Remembered in the preemptive attacks on Nestorian villages along the Iranian border Countries of the Eastern Mediterranean, Wurzburg, Ergon Verlag (Beiruter had turned into the full-scale deportation of a community. Texte und Studien, 2006), vol. 99, pp. 46-71. David Gaunt studied the episode in more detail and gives the 4 Michael A. Reynolds, “The Ottoman-Russian Struggle for Easter Anatolia right date for the deportation decision, namely, Oct. 26, 1914, and and the Caucasus, 1908-1918: Identity, Ideology, and the Geopolitics of not September 1914. Clearly, the decision has to be seen in close World Order,” dissertation, Princeton University, 2003, p.143. connection with the pending Ottoman attack on Russia that 5 Ibid., pp. 201-202. 6 DH.SFR 42-44, Minister to Mosul, Van, Erzerum provinces, June 16, 1914, occurred on Oct. 29, 1914. Having provided a correct context, Special Dept. 255, 241, 32. Gaunt argues that the “Ottoman government was disturbed by 7 David Gaunt, Massacres, Resistance, Protectors: Muslim-Christian Relations doubts about Nestorians’ loyalty and was concerned over the possi- in Eastern Anatolia During World War I (Piscataway, N.J.: Gorgias Press, bility that more of them would move into Iran and join the self- 2006), p. 95. defense units established by the Russians.”Therefore, the Nestorians 8 Taner Akcam, “The Ottoman Documents and the Genocidal Policies of the were deported to Minor. Gaunt rightly stresses that the Committee for Union and Progress (Ittihat ve Terakki) toward the Armenians in 1915” in Genocide Studies and Prevention I, 2 (2006), p. 135. plan intended the assimilation of the Nestorians and thereby the 9 DH.SFR 46-78, Talat to , Oct. 26, 1914, EUM Spec. 104. 9 destruction of their culture. Three days later, another document 10 DH.SFR 46-102, Minister to Van province, Oct. 29, 1914, EUM Spec. 107. showed that the order had been extended to the Nestorians living in 11 DH.SFR 46-195, Talat to Van province, Nov. 5, 1914, EUM Spec. 113.

Hagop Jamgotchian Nevart (Antreassian) Demirdjian

BORN: Gurun; 1905 BORN: Bakr Maden DIED: New ; 2002 DIED: Providence, R.I.; March 2, 1977

18 | THE ARMENIAN WEEKLY | APRIL 26, 2008 4_Bjornlund_Research_4 4/13/08 1:28 PM Page 19

RESEARCH SCANDINAVIA and the Armenian Genocide

By Matthias Bjornlund

candinavian sources make up a fairly rich reservoir of reports and other end of the spectrum, Danish eyewitness accounts of the Armenian Genocide and other aspects bishop and Minister of Cultural Affairs H. V. Styhr in 1897 de- of CUP (Young Turk) attempts at group destruction. This essay nounced Abdulhamid’s “holy war aims at giving a brief, preliminary, and in no way exhaustive of extermination.” Shortly after 1900, Ottoman intellectuals Pierre overview of such sources to the destruction of the Ottoman Anmeghian and Ali Nouri Bey (a Armenians: What were the backgrounds and experiences of Swedish convert and Ottoman ex- Danish, Norwegian, and Swedish witnesses in the Ottoman Empire? To what extent diplomat Gustaf Noring), friends united in opposition to Abdulha- Swas the genocide known, and how was it viewed, in their respective neutral home mid’s autocratic rule, set up base countries? While studies of the Armenian Genocide and related issues based on and published books in Denmark 3 Danish archival material have been published recently,1 few such studies have been and . In Norway, the paper “Nordlands Avis,” published on 2 based on Norwegian or Swedish archival material. The essay is thus mainly based Oct. 4, 1900, would sarcastically on Danish sources; also, for the sake of brevity, it focuses on rather than sum up the feelings of quite a few Scandinavians on what was seen diplomatic and other sources. For further studies, I refer to the references as well as as Western indifference to the suf- to Swedish and Norwegian archives in particular. There is a lot of work to be done. ferings of Armenians:

Like elsewhere in the Western world, the 1890’s massacres, “Who, then, should help, and who would spend a dime on a peo- forced Islamization, and displacement of hundreds of thousands ple that cannot be profited from. We are far from the jubilant of Ottoman Armenians during the reign of Sultan Abdulhamid II time of the 20s, when philhellenism forced the Turkish murder- had a significant impact on public opinion in Scandinavia. Some ers to release the Greek from his bloodstained fingers. . . . The would defend the Sultan and deny or downplay the events, often Russian torments the Finn and the Turk murders the by using anti-Armenian stereotypes. But condemnation of the Armenian. . . . No one complains except for the oppressed. The massacres, whether based on notions of Christian solidarity or Holy Alliance is yet again in place between the mighty in human rights, seems to have been more widespread. Papers and Europe, the alliance that allows each to eat his people and public figures raised awareness of the atrocities and their human where no one must disturb the other while he eats. The con- and political implications, laying the foundation for the substan- science in Europe is dead. Long live imperialism. Long live tial missionary and relief work that would last through the nationalism. Hurrah for greed, and woe to those who oppose Armenian Genocide and its immediate and long-term aftermath. the Stock Exchange Committee of the bourse.” To name a few examples: Secular, Danish-Jewish intellectuals Georg Brandes and Age Meyer Benedictsen decried European Some, especially women , went further. The most indifference to the sufferings of Armenians and founded Danske important Scandinavian missionary effort directed at aiding and Armeniervenner (Danish Friends of Armenians or DA). From the proselytizing among Ottoman Armenians was in fact to a large

April 26, 2008 | THE ARMENIAN WEEKLY | 19 4_Bjornlund_Research_4 4/13/08 1:28 PM Page 20

Bjornlund

degree coordinated between the Danish, Norwegian, and her whole school work destroyed and all of her pupils take leave, Swedish Women Missionary Workers (in Danish: Kvindelige wailing and crying, to depart with the expellees.”14 Missions Arbejdere or KMA). Founded in Sweden in 1894, KMA A third Danish KMA missionary, Karen Marie Petersen, ran branched out to Denmark in 1900 and Norway in 1902. Though “Emaus” in Mezreh. She collected survivor testimonies from 1915 run as independent, national NGOs, the branches widely shared onward, and witnessed death marches and an area littered with values (like “women working for women”), goals, mission fields, the remains of Armenians.15 The fourth Danish KMA missionary educational facilities, etc., and they usually relied on cooperation in the region, Jenny Jensen, ran the DH orphanage “Elim” in with similar U.S. and German organizations. The first KMA Mezreh. She left the empire in 1918 after the Ottoman authorities orphanage, “Emaus,” was established 1903. It was run mainly by had requisitioned “Elim” to use as a military hospital, meaning , but the orphans were sponsored by individuals and that she had to rent five houses to shelter the 200 girls that were groups from all of Scandinavia and . A rather unique fig- supposedly under German protection.16 Jensen had severe difficul- ure in this context is Danish teacher and relief worker Karen ties in getting permission to leave the empire, which was made Jeppe, DA’s only “field worker,”who would witness the execution even harder as she tried to bring with her an orphan, Margarit of the genocide in Urfa. Jeppe and DA were critical of the ideol- Atamjan, the sole survivor of the genocide in her family.17 In 1916, ogy of organizations like KMA, focused exclusively on aid and Marcher had similar problems as the Ottoman military authori- education to Armenians, and did not attempt to convert ties were unwilling to let persons from “the inner provinces” leave Ottoman Muslims or Christians. the country or even go to the capital.18 This was a general problem.19 In a February 1919 report, Carl Ellis Wandel, a Danish diplomatic minister at Constantinople, WITNESSING GENOCIDE: THE VIEW describes the difficulties he had with assisting Danes: FROM ANATOLIA hen the empire joined World War I, some “Of Danish missionaries and nurses in Asiatic Turkey there are Scandinavians were willing and able to stay in now only two left [Jacobsen and Petersen]. During 1918 two Anatolia. Here, missionaries were in ideal posi- left for Denmark [Jensen and Jeppe]. But it was only after con- tions to witness the execution of the genocide, siderable difficulties that the legation succeeded in getting Wrescue survivors from massacres, death marches, and forced them the necessary travel permits from the Turkish police as it assimilation,4 and gather survivor testimonies.5 Perhaps the best- seems like they had received orders from the military authori- known Scandinavian account of such events is the diaries of Maria ties not to visa the two Danish ladies’ passports until they had Jacobsen, a Danish KMA missionary nurse posted in the region of spent some months in Constantinople. It might also have Mamouret-ul-Aziz (Kharpert/Harput).6 During World War I, she played a certain role that both of the ladies came from Armenia also wrote a series of letters to KMA’s Armenia Committee. Due to where they had witnessed events that [the Ottoman authori- censorship, Westerners could usually not state outright what they ties] did not want to be known in Europe.”20 witnessed.7 Instead, they used code and euphemisms, like when Jacobsen wrote that “The gates of Heaven are wide open and many Jacobsen and Petersen decided to stay to the end. They, and are entering,” and referred to the first plague of Egypt—the water their organization, believed that if they left, the Armenians they of the river Nile turning into blood—to explain why missionaries protected would probably not survive. A further problem for could not go to Lake Goljuk, a large massacre site in 1915, as they those wanting to publicize the destruction of the Armenians was used to in the summer.8 At one point she did manage, with that monitoring was not confined to mail sent from the empire. At German help, to smuggle out uncensored letters in Danish a March 1917 meeting, Professor Nyholm, chairman of the Danish describing in detail the horrible conditions for surviving Eastern Mission (Osterlandsmissionen or OM), advised Danish Armenians in the Mezreh and Kharpert towns.9 KMA’s Armenia Committee not to go public with pleas for funds Hansine Marcher, Danish KMA, worked directly for the German to missionaries and Armenian survivors in the Kharpert region. “Deutsche Hulfsbund” (DH) as leader of a girl school in Mezreh, This would direct attention to “our Sisters over there.” OM had and was used as a source for the Bryce-Toynbee report.10 She wrote learned that their journal was known and read by the Ottoman a book in 1919 that includes survivor testimonies and an account of authorities, and they feared that public statements about events in the period from March 1916 when she left the empire with German the empire would make the continuation of missionary work dif- missionary Klara Pfeiffer11 via Diyarbekir, Urfa, Aleppo, and ficult after the war.21 Constantinople. Here, Marcher describes how they passed through At an earlier stage, on Feb. 1, 1916, DH director Friedrich the area around Lake Goljuk, seeing countless skeletons, bones, Schuchardt had likewise warned Danish KMA against going pub- skulls, and pieces of clothing from Armenian deportees—men, lic with their knowledge of the genocide. Schuchardt had just women and children—massacred there.12 In Diyarbekir, the only returned from Constantinople, describing how he had tried in Armenians she saw were children who were servants or slaves of vain to gain access to and other leading figures to local Turks, were given Turkish names, and forced to speak only speak on behalf of the Armenians, and how he was constantly Turkish. She also witnessed how the Armenian Apostolic cathedral monitored. He had talked to German senior officers who stated had been turned into an auction room for stolen Armenian goods.13 that “if the public knew even one tenth of what they knew of what At a KMA meeting after her return, it was said about her that ”per- had been going on it would generate general terror, but unfortu- haps none of our Sisters over there have suffered more from the sys- nately it turned out over and over again that as soon as public tematic extermination of the [Armenian] people, as she has seen protests were raised in Europe against the actions of the Turks, this

20 | THE ARMENIAN WEEKLY | APRIL 26, 2008 4_Bjornlund_Research_4 4/13/08 1:28 PM Page 21

RESEARCH

only spurred them on to commit new atrocities and to seek even world’—it emphasizes that compared to the number of 800.000 more to exterminate the whole of the miserable people.”22 murdered Armenians,‘the other horrors of the World War pale in Wandel had already in January 1915 reported on how he was comparison.’ But shortly after, the paper makes light of the hor- pressured to make the Danish press be more favorable to the empire: ror by stating that ‘the impression left, though, is still less deep, less lasting’ than when Gladstone revealed the massacres during “In the course of a conversation I had yesterday with the acting the reign of Abdul Hamid. Because, says Politiken, ‘the scale has Turkish Foreign Minister, Grand Vizier Prince Said Halim, His been unsettled, the concepts are confused’—‘the war brutalizes Highness complained about the unfriendliness that is being imperceptibly but surely.’ And to emphasize this conclusion the expressed in the Danish press toward the government here. article ends with the following lines: ‘We are moved and upset for ‘Clippings from Danish papers are being sent to me,’ said the a moment until the process of brutalization continues.’ By such Grand Vizier, ‘wherefrom it appears that many unpleasant expressions ‘the best paper’ airs its indignation! This is what a things are being said about us by you [Denmark].’ I answered Danish paper offers its readers! If Politiken had written some- that I had not noticed anything like that, and that I found the thing along the lines of this: ‘Do not mind, you, who are respon- tone in the Danish papers that I read so neutral and impartial sible for the extermination of the Armenian people—we forget that I could not even find in these any expression of either quickly’—then it would in fact be said in few words what the arti- antipathy against or excessive sympathy for any of the warring cle’s many words say in reality.” parties. There could not be said to be any ill will against Turkey in Denmark. I have not been able to find out from where the Incidentally, Danes also had direct access to an account of the clippings that His Highness mentions originate.”23 rationale behind the CUP’s xenophobic ideology by Djevad Bey, the Ottoman diplomatic minister in Copenhagen and a career Thus, even returning Westerners could not speak freely, like diplomat closely connected to the CUP. In a February 1916 inter- some Scandinavian and U.S. missionaries coming from the empire view in “Politiken,” he stated among other things that “[w]e have to or via Denmark who reported directly to KMA’s Armenia now introduced the in Turkey. This is the first Committee in Copenhagen. The minutes of the oral report of result of a national awakening: Turkey for the Turks.”26 Egan, the Norwegian KMA missionary Thora von Wedel-Jarlsberg, dated U.S. diplomatic minister in Copenhagen, would write about Oct. 16, 1915, describe how Armenians from Erzinjan or further Djevad and his successor in Denmark that “[t]he Turkish to the north were massacred—shot or thrown from the moun- Ministers were more French than German in their sympathies, but tains into the river—by Turks and Kurds in the nearby Euphrates to them the Armenians were deadly parasites. They looked on Valley. Six orphan boys that Wedel-Jarlsberg and her German col- them as the Russian Junker looked on the lower class of Jews.”27 league Eva Elvers tried to protect were taken by Turkish soldiers and shot. After the missionaries had been forced out of Erzinjan THE VIEW FROM CONSTANTINOPLE by the authorities and were on their way to Constantinople, they witnessed daily what Wedel-Jarlsberg describes as “new horrors” n the Ottoman capital, Wandel was kept informed of the and “one group after the other led from the villages to be killed.”24 destruction of the Armenians by other diplomats; members Similarly, on Dec. 7, 1915, Swedish KMA missionary Alma of the Ottoman establishment;28 Western eyewitnesses;29 and Johansson related the experiences of herself and Norwegian KMA Ottoman Christian circles. He also witnessed local persecu- colleague Bodil Biorn a report published in a confidential seven- Itions of Armenians, as stated in a September 1915 report: “Even page booklet that was distributed among Danish KMA members. here in Constantinople Armenians are kidnapped and sent to The booklet explicitly mentions the mass killings of Armenians Asia, and it is not possible to get information of their where- they witnessed in Mush and the Kharpert region where they abouts.”30 That same month, whatever doubt he had concerning stayed with the Danish missionaries after having been expelled the ultimate goal of the CUP had disappeared, as can be seen in from Mush, killings that were part of the “complete extermina- his detailed report on “the cruel intent of the Turks, to exterminate tion” of the Armenians. The fear of endangering missionaries, sur- the Armenian people.”31 His Swedish colleague, Anckarsvard, viving Armenians, and what was envisioned as the continued expressed a similar view in a July 6, 1915 report: work after the war was so great that even in a confidential booklet only the initials of the missionaries’ first names were used.25 “The persecutions of the Armenians have taken on appalling But the Scandinavian public did receive information on the fate proportions, and everything points toward the idea that the of the Armenians, from press reports and comments from the late have wanted to take advantage of the opportunity summer and fall of 1915. For instance, on Oct. 9, 1915, the Danish where, for various reasons, no effective pressure from the out- daily “Kristeligt Dagblad” (Christian Daily) decried the indifference side needs to be feared to once and for all terminate the of neutral countries like Denmark to the ongoing extermination: Armenian question. The method is simple enough and consists of the extermination of the Armenian nation.”32 “If one wants a typical expression of this state of things, one should read the editorial remarks the main organ of the govern- Another Swedish diplomat, military attaché Einar af Wirsen, ment in Denmark [the liberal daily ‘Politiken’] yesterday attached recalled in his 1942 memoires a conversation he had with Talat to the reports on the Armenian massacres. The paper does call the Pasha in October 1915, during which the CUP leader had com- Turks’‘extermination policy’ (‘policy’ is sublime in this context) a mented on a report that 800,000 Armenians had been killed, saying, ‘heartlessness and a cruelty which is unique in the history of the “I assure you, this is not true, it was only 600.000.”33

April 26, 2008 | THE ARMENIAN WEEKLY | 21 4_Bjornlund_Research_4 4/13/08 1:28 PM Page 22

Bjornlund

Wandel also received reports from eyewitnesses (kept anony- 7 e.g., KMA, 10.360, “1912–1921,”intro. to 1915 meetings; ibid., March 3, mous in his reports) of the continuation of the genocide in 1916 1916. through massacre, disease, and the starvation of hundreds of thou- 8 KMA, 10.360, pk. 15,“Armeniermissionen, korrespondance til og fra Frk. Marie [sic] Jacobsen (1912-1919),” 1915–16,” Jacobsen to Collet, July 8, sands of Armenians. “A Hungarian gentleman” reported that he 1916. had travelled through large stretches covered with Armenian bod- 9 KMA, 10.360, pk. 13,“1917,”especially Jacobsen to Blæædel, Feb. 11, 1917. ies, estimating that more than 300,000 Armenians had been killed 10 James Bryce and Arnold Toynbee, The Treatment of Armenians in the in . And a German priest who had just arrived in Ottoman Empire, 1915–1916, uncensored ed., ed. and intr. by Ara Constantinople from had witnessed “incredible hor- Sarafian (Princeton, N.J.: , 2000 (1916)), p. 289. rors,” stating that a large part of the deported Armenians died of 11 Re. Pfeiffer: Wolfgang Gust, ed., Der Volkermord an den Armeniern starvation as they were sent to areas where no food was available 1915/16: Dokumente aus dem Politischen Archiv des deutschen and left to their own fate.34 Auswartigen Amts, (zu Klampen, 2005), pp. 34, 466–68. Many Scandinavian figures and accounts deserving mention 12 Hansine Marcher, Oplevelser Derovrefra, (Copenhagen: KMA, 1919), have been left out of this brief overview. But it should be clear that pp. 10–12. 13 Ibid., pp. 16–17. the Armenian genocide was widely reported and condemned in 14 KMA, 10.360, “1912-1921,” June 15, 1916. Scandinavia as the event unfolded. To conceptualize the destruc- 15 Elise Bockelund, En Tjenergerning Blandt Martyrfolket–Kvindelige tion, Swedish politician Hjalmar Branting (1917) and Danish Missions Arbejdere 1900–1930 (KMA, 1932), p. 47. scholar Age Meyer Benedictsen (1925) would even use the term 16 KMA, 10.360, pk. 42, “1912–1921,” March 1, 1917. “folkmord/folkemord” (“the murder of a people”), a term used 17 Margarit was later brought to Denmark by Jeppe. today to denote or translate the later term “genocide.”35 a 18 UM, 2-0355, Kopibog 1914–1921, 1916 03 06–1919 09 22, Wandel to Scavenius, April 17, 1916. No. 158.“Danske Rejsende i Tyrkiet. Ges. Nr. 151 af 13. April 1916.” ENDNOTES 19 e.g., Hilmar Kaiser, At the Crossroads of Der Zor—Death, Survival, and 1 Matthias Bjornlund, “‘When the Cannons Talk, the Diplomats Must Be Humanitarian Resistance in Aleppo, 1915-1917 (Princeton & London: Silent’: A Danish Diplomat in Constantinople during the Armenian Gomidas, 2002), p. 36. Genocide,” Genocide Studies and Prevention, vol. 1, no. 2, fall 2006; idem, 20 UM, 2-0355, “Konstantinopel/Istanbul, diplomatisk reprææsentation. “The 1914 Cleansing of Aegean Greeks as a Case of Violent ,” 1914–1922. Noter og indberetninger om den politiske udvikling,” Journal of Genocide Research, vol. 10, no. 1, 2008; idem,“‘A fate worse than “Verdenskrigen. Indberetninger og avisudklip, juni 1914-marts 1919,” dying’: sexual violence during the Armenian genocide,” in Dagmar Feb. 17, 1919, pp. 2–3. Herzog, ed., Brutality and Desire: War and Sexuality in Europe’s Twentieth 21 KMA, 10.360, pk. 42, “1912–1921,” March 1, 1917. Century, Palgrave Macmillan, forthcoming; idem, “Karen Jeppe, Aage 22 KMA, 10.360,“1912–1921,”Feb. 1, 1916. Underlining in original text. On Meyer Benedictsen, and the Ottoman Armenians: National survival in Schuchardt in Constantinople, see also Kaiser, 2002, pp. 31–37. imperial and colonial settings,” Haigazian Armenological Review,forth- 23 UM, 2-0355, Konstantinopel/Istanbul, diplomatisk reprææsentation, coming; idem, “Before the Armenian Genocide: Danish Missionary and Kopibog 1914–1921, 1914 06 4-1916 03 06, no. IV, Jan. 5, 1915. Rescue Operations in the Ottoman Empire, 1900–1914,” Haigazian 24 KMA, 10.360, pk. 42, “1912-1921,” Oct. 16, 1915. Armenological Review, vol. 26, 2006. For a brief background, see 25 Fra Armenien, KMA, no date (1916). www.ermenisoykirimi.net/ (Turkish and Danish). 26 UM, 4. F. 2,“Tyrkiet: Gesandtskabet her.”Oprettelse, 1916. Djevad Bey, 2 For a partial exception, see Bertil Bengtsson, Svardets Ar: Om Folkmordet 22/2-15/12 1916. Extrakt-Afskrift af Privatbrev Nr. 24 fra pa de kristne I Turkiet 1894–1922 (Sodertalje: Syrianska Riksforbundet Ministerresident C. E. Wandel til Udenrigsminister Scavenius. 2004) on the Christian genocides. See also Alma Johansson, Ett folk i Konstantinopel, 5/11 1915. landsflykt: Ett ar ur armeniernas historia (: KMA 1930); 27 Maurice Francis Egan, Ten Years near the German Frontier: A Retrospect www.statsarkivet.no/webfelles/armenia/english.html. and a Warning (New York: George H. Doran Co., 1919), p. 312. 3 Pierre Anmeghian, Visions Scandinaves (Copenhagen: Hoost & Soon, 28 UM, 139. D. 1., “Tyrkiet-Indre Forhold,” Pk. Jan. 2, 1917–Jan. 1, 1919, 1903); Ali Nouri Bey, Abdul-Hamid i Karikatur: Interioorer fra Yildiz- Kiosk (Copenhagen: V.Pio’s Boghandel, 1903). The former is a collection nr. IV, 6/1 1917; nr. CXVII, 28/7 1917. of poems in French, many dedicated to Scandinavians with an interest in 29 e.g., information on the genocide in Kharpert in letters written by the “Armenian cause” and critical of Abdulhamid’s rule, e.g., Norwegian Danish missionaries, and delivered by a German physician: UM, 139. Bjoornstjerne Bjoornson. The latter is a collection of caricature and verse N. 1., “Armenien,” [unnumbered], April 10, 1917. ridiculing Abdulhamid and condemning, e.g., the Armenian massacres. 30 UM, 139. D. 1., “Tyrkiet-Indre Forhold,” Pk. 1, until Dec. 31, 1916, nr. 4 e.g., protocol of Armenian women and children taken in at “Emaus” CXIII, 4/9 1915. during the genocide: KMA, 10.360, pk. 112, “Protokol over Plejeboorn 31 Ibid. i Bornehjemmet ‘Emaus’ i Mezreh. 1909–17.” 32 Quoted in Bengtsson, 2004, p. 118. 5 e.g., Bjornlund, “A fate . . .” 33 Ibid., p. 80. 6 Maria Jacobsen, Maria Jacobsens Diary 1907–1919, Kharput–Turkey 34 UM, 139. N. 1., no. LIV, March 10, 1916. (Antelias, Lebanon: Armenian Catholicosate, 1979 (Armenian and 35 Bengtsson, 2004, p. 124; Age Meyer Benedictsen, Armenien–Et Danish)); idem, Diaries of a Danish Missionary–Harpoot, 1907–1919,ed. Folks Liv og Kamp Gennem To Aartusinder, (Copenhagen: De Danske by (Princeton, N.J.: Gomidas Institute Books, 2001 (English)). Armeniervenner, 1925), p. 242.

Hrant Minassian Nelly (Dadikozian) Minassian

BORN: Constantinople; 1901 BORN: Rodosto; 1909 DIED: Lexington, Mass.; 1995 DIED: Lexington, Mass; 2005

22 | THE ARMENIAN WEEKLY | APRIL 26, 2008 5_Ungor_Research_5 4/13/08 8:23 PM Page 23

RESEARCH Organizing Oblivion in the Aftermath of Mass Violence If the Party could thrust its hand into the past and say of this or that event, it never happened—that, surely, was more terrifying than mere torture and death.1

By Ugur Umit Ungor

ver the last decades, there has been an upsurge in the study of tem of official propaganda including the denial and cover-up of the memory. Scholars have studied how memory, especially historical regime’s atrocities. The famous works of George Orwell, Primo narrative, is produced, consumed, transformed, and transmitted Levi, and Milan Kundera are but three examples of literary repre- by social groups. This burgeoning field of research has yielded a sentation of memory control under and communism.5 large amount of knowledge about the nature of memory and The decade from 1912 to 1922 saw unprecedented levels of mass mass violence.2 In the context of mass violence, memory bears violence in the Ottoman Empire. War, genocide, forced migration, special significance as perpetrating regimes always seek to con- famine, flight and displacement had deeply affected the fabric of trol, destroy, and prohibit a range of memorial practices related society and scarred the memory of all participants and witnesses. to the violence. One commentator on the relationship between After so much violence in the Ottoman territories, it was only logi- memory and mass violence is Tzvetan Todorov, who identified at cal that hundreds of thousands of people were physically wounded Oleast two strategies that totalitarian dictatorships have used to and psychologically traumatized. Demobilized soldiers came home manage and control memory: the erasure of the traces of the with frightening stories of mass death, entire neighborhoods had crimes and the intimidation of the population. Both of these been emptied, families had lost their male populations, widows policies include the control over knowledge, for example the pro- were begging by the roadside, miserable orphans were roaming the hibition of collecting and spreading information.3 Paul streets naked. Despite the self-healing ability of families and com- Connerton’s analysis of how totalitarian regimes have used mem- munities, the violence had caused severe lasting damage to the psy- ory as a tool of power is noteworthy: chological development of the region and society at large. But in comparison to Nazi Germany (1933–1945) and Stalinist Russia “The attempt to break definitively with an older social order (1924–1953), the study of their contemporary, the Young Turk dic- encounters a kind of historical deposit and threatens to founder tatorship (1913–1950), has lagged behind in empirical treatment, upon it. The more total the aspirations of the new regime, the theoretical analyses, and normative assessment. Research on Young more imperiously will it seek to introduce an era of forced for- Turk memorial practices are no exception to this rule.6 This article getting...A particularly extreme case of such interaction occurs will draw on examples from Diyarbekir province in an attempt to when a state apparatus is used in a systematic way to deprive its problematize the memory-scape of the Young Turk regime and citizens of their memory. All totalitarianisms behave in this way; argue that it is characterized by silencing—not only of their perpe- the mental enslavement of the subjects of a totalitarian regime tration of mass violence but also of their victimization. begins when their memories are taken away.”4 DESTRUCTION OF MEMORY In totalitarian dictatorships, undoubtedly the most violent regimes throughout the 20th century, the democratic dissemina- How did the Young Turk dictatorship deal with their legacy of vio- tion of narratives and the free exercise of memorial practices is lence? First of all, it needs to be understood that their policies prohibited. Instead, the population is enveloped in a cognitive sys- regarding memory was not static but fluctuated. A poignant

April 26, 2008 | THE ARMENIAN WEEKLY | 23 5_Ungor_Research_5 4/13/08 8:23 PM Page 24

Ungor

illustration of the vicissitudes of Young Turk memory politics was one of his speeches in parliament, Interior Minister Sukru Kaya the representation of the Greco-Turkish war. In March 1922, (1883–1959) asserted that: Mustafa Kemal denounced the “atrocities” of the “Greek princes and generals, who take particular pleasure in having women “.. . it has been the livelihood of certain politicians to foster the raped.” The general continued to decry these acts of “destruction notion that there is an eternal enmity between Turks and and aggression” that he considered “irreconcilable with humanity” Armenians...Turks and Armenians, forced to pursue their and most of all “impossible to cover up and deny.”7 But after the true and natural interests, again instinctively felt friendliness establishment of the Republic, the tide turned and the accusatory towards each other. This is the truth of the matter...From our tone of moral indignation was dropped. The 1930’s saw a diplo- perspective the cordiality expressed by the Armenian nation matic rapprochement between Turkey and Greece as relations towards us has not diminished.”14 improved with the signature of several agreements and conven- tions. By the time the Greek Premier Panagis Tsaldaris Such an assessment of Turkish-Armenian relations in the wake (1868–1936) visited Turkey in September 1933, the same Mustafa of the genocide (nota bene by one of its organizers) was to be Kemal now spoke of the Greeks as “esteemed guests” with whom expected only from a political elite pursuing a distinct memorial the contact had been “amicable and cordial.”8 Throughout the agenda. Ever since its rise to power, the Kemalist dictatorship con- interbellum, the Turkish and Greek nations were portrayed as tinued the CUP policy of suppressing all information on the 1915 having coexisted perennially in mutual respect and eternal peace.9 genocide. When the regime caught wind of the memoirs of Friendly inter-state relations in the service of Turkey’s acceptance Karabet Tapikyan, subtitled “What we saw during the deportation and stabilization into the nation-state system had gained prece- from Sivas to Aleppo” (Boston: Hairenik, 1924) the book was pro- dence over old griefs, without any serious process of closure or hibited from entering Turkey for “containing very harmful writ- reconciliation in between. ings.”15 Marie Sarrafian Banker, a graduate of the Izmir American College, had written her memoirs in 1936.16 Her book, too, was acking statehood, the Armenians and Syriacs were prohibited entry to the country. All existing copies were ordered not accorded the same treatment as Greece. They confiscated and destroyed for containing “harmful texts.”17 When were either deeply traumatized survivors living in Armen Anoosh, an Armenian survivor living in Aleppo, wrote his wretched refugee camps or terrified individuals memoirs titled The history of a ruined city: Urfa, the volume was keeping a low profile in ruined villages. The prohibited from entry and existing copies that had found their Kemalist regime continued the CUP policy of effac- way into the country were ordered confiscated.18 ing physical traces of Armenian existence on all fronts: At times the policy extended beyond the prohibition of genocide L 10 Architecture was defaced, destroyed, and rid of engravings. memoirs and included “normal” history books. When Turkish cus- Although the Armenians were gone, in a sense they were still toms intercepted Arshak Alboyajian’s classic two-volume History of deemed too visible. In Diyarbekir city, an important stage of the Armenian Kayseri (1937), sent from Syria to Istanbul by surface mail, erasure of memory was the razing of its Armenian cemeteries. it was ordered confiscated, destroyed, and prohibited.19 An One of the main men who were responsible for the destruction Armenian-language book published in Cairo in 1940 on the small of the local Armenians, Muftuzade Abdurrahman Seref Ulug town of Bahcecik was prohibited simply for the fact that it produced (1892–1976), who had become mayor after 1923, ordered the a history of a region that fell under Turkish national jurisdiction.20 erasure of one of the city’s last vanishing Armenian landmarks What is striking about these prohibitions is that they generally lim- two decades after the genocide.11 That this was not merely a ited themselves to the Turkish Republic. For the regime it did not function of “urban modernization” but a willful expunction of matter much that Armenians wrote and circulated memoirs among the Other’s memory appeared from the fact that not only on the themselves—as long as memory was produced and consumed west side (where “modernization” was carried out) but also on within an Armenian milieu and did not trickle back into Turkey. the east side of town, Armenian cemeteries were either willfully One of the exceptions to this rule was the September 1935 incident neglected into oblivion, outright flattened, or used as paving between the United States and Turkey over plans by Metro- stones for floors or roads. Obviously, no relative ever had a say in Goldwyn-Mayer to film Franz Werfel’s novel The Forty Days of Musa this process, since most deportees and survivors were peasants Dagh. After strong diplomatic pressure from the Turkish embassy, living undercover or in Syria. Another critical event that marked the idea was abandoned.21 The Young Turks had already officially the erasure of memory was the collapse of the church, Sourp prohibited the book itself in January 1935,22 a year after the Nazis.23 Giragos. In the 1960’s, the roof collapsed into the deserted build- The same fate befell Paul du Véou’s less fictional book on the Musa ing and in subsequent decades the structure languished, was Dagh Armenians on the eve of the Turkish annexation of Hatay stripped of its assets, and neglected into misery.12 province.24 That book, too, was blacklisted and barred from entry to For the same reasons, the Diyarbekir Armenians had no the country.25 The regime did not want these narratives to enter local chance of writing and publishing memoirs. Thus, the produc- history and memory, on which they claimed a strict monopoly. tion of memory among them did not take off until much later or All in all, the mass violence of the first decades of the 20th cen- until the next generation(s). The killing and displacement tury was repressed and ousted from public memory through silence, brought by Young Turk rule created an archipelago of nuggets of amnesia, and repression, rather than reflection, discussion, process- memory spread across the world.13 Well before groups of sur- ing, and memorialization. What is striking about this process is the vivors could formulate narratives about what had happened, a fact that the violence that was repressed was not only that in which master narrative was being constructed by the perpetrators. In the Young Turks had been perpetrators, but also that in which they

24 | THE ARMENIAN WEEKLY | APRIL 26, 2008 5_Ungor_Research_5 4/13/08 8:23 PM Page 25

RESEARCH

had been victims. A whole century of Ottoman-Muslim victimiza- have eked out a civilized existence in the Diyarbekir area is the tion in the Balkans, in particular during the severely traumatizing Turkish nation.” He did not deviate from the party line when por- Balkan wars, was dismissed and forgotten in favor of “looking traying the myths of origin: “Despite temporary invasions and towards the future”and amicable inter-state relations with neighbor- destructions by the Assyrian, Persian, Greek, and Roman regimes, ing countries. The Young Turks assumed that society and man him- the great Turkish race has always lived in this country.”32 Through self are completely malleable, that no crums of memories remain the lens of this particular foundational myth, the origin of Turkish after shock and trauma, and that people can and will forget. After all, culture was located so early in history that it was lost in the mists they themselves had tried to bury the unpleasant memories that of not real but mythic time, which symbolized the timelessness of would come to haunt Turkey decades later. Those minorities who the nation. Under the title “Stories about the foundation of this were victimized by their regime, such as the Armenians, Kurds, and city,” Gunkut reviewed nine historical narratives about the “ori- Syriacs, did not have a chance at healing their wounds or memorial- gins” of the city: the Akkadian, Persian, Assyrian, Arab, Parthian, izing their losses. The new memory of the nation did not permit Greek, Armenian, Hittite, and Turkish theses. The author evaluated cracks, nuances, shades, subtleties, or any difference for that matter. all myths and dismissed, with increasing severity, disapproval, and Much like the new identity, it was total, absolute, and unitary. contempt, one by one, the first eight theories. For example, accord- ing to Gunkut, “the claim that Amid was founded by can be nothing else than a lie, a ludicrous fabrication by arabs and CONSTRUCTION OF MEMORY arabophiles.” Out of disdain, the names of non-Turkish ethnic he Turkish nation-state that was constructed after groups were consciously and consistently written not with a capi- 1913 needed, as all nation-states, national myths.26 tal but with a small letter: The literature spoke not of Kurds, Arabs, According to Ana Maria Alonso, “power and mem- and Armenians, but of kurds, arabs, and armenians. As a grand ory are most intimately embraced in the represen- finale, Gunkut repeated the Young Turk mantra: “Diyarbekir city tations of official histories which are central to the has never lost its Turkishness, its National Existence and has always production and reproduction of hegemony.”27 remained Turkish.”33 These official histories are prepared for “creating a usable past, After ignoring six centuries of Ottoman history, Gunkut lept T 28 which is a hallmark for collective memory.” Nationalist political straight to the first decades of the 20th century. His historical por- elites in particular have used official histories to craft the nation- trayal of the Young Turk era of violence is most striking. In a state’s memory to their desire as historians are often appointed by region in which more than 100,000 Armenians were destroyed, the regime to this end.29 this author pioneered the denial of the genocide: “In the Great The function of these new histories is the construction of a War, this region was saved from Russian invasions and armenian logic of a “national narrative,”of which Victor Roudometof defines massacres and arson.” With the massacres of the 1925 Kurdish four characteristics: First, the narrative is a “quest for origins” conflict only a decade ago, Gunkut’s narrative on that episode of according to which the researcher’s task is to trace the beginnings mass violence was more elaborate. The Kurdish resistance to the of a people as far back in history as possible. Second, it aims to con- regime was almost exclusively attributed to conspiracies from out- struct continuity among the different historical periods, thereby side: Its leader Shaikh Said (1865–1925) was portrayed not as a showing the preservation of the culture, tradition, and mentality of member of the Kurdish intelligentsia or elite but as “an extremely the nation. Third, it seeks to identify periods of glory and decline, ignorant fanatic...who became the tool of foreigners...with sev- including moral judgements regarding the actions of other collec- eral other uncultured vagabonds.” The narrative then took a turn tivities vis-à-vis the nation. Finally, narratives are always a quest for towards misinformation as Gunkut argued that the Kurds had meaning and purpose, the identification of the nation’s destiny “committed bloodcurdling atrocious acts in Lice and Silvan,” revealed in the progression of history.30 While silencing certain where they had purportedly “monstrously dismembered young memories and narratives, the Young Turk regime produced other Turkish patriots.”34 In this remarkable reversal of the historical memories and narratives. During this process of defining and fine- account, all violence in Diyarbekir had been committed by the tuning national memory, again the violent past was muted. Armenians and Kurds against the Turks. Misrepresentation could One of the most exemplary history books ordered to be written only be called so if there was a body of knowledge to counteract it. by the Young Turk regime was prepared by the regime propagan- Whatever counter-narratives were being produced abroad in any dist Bedri Gunkut. It was unimaginatively titled The History of language, the Young Turks did not allow them to compete for con- Diyarbekir and was published by the Diyarbekir People’s House. In sumption by the population. Especially when it came to the vio- his study, Gunkut ascribes a universal Turkishness to all of the lence, the dictatorship held hegemony over memory politics and regions of Diyarbekir province, harking back to the Assyrian era. debates over the past. But unlike previous books, Gunkut’s study went to far greater With its obviously varied architecture, Diyarbekir needed sym- lengths to identify “Turkishness” and erase all non-Turkish cultures bolization and discourse for the retrospective “Turkification” of its from Diyarbekir history. His book is worth examining it in some cityscape as well. Gunkut went on to claim that no other culture detail. The second chapter was titled “History” and “began” history than the Turkish one had ever contributed to Diyarbekir’s architec- with the Sumerian era: “The Turkish nation, which was living the tural . Writing about the Behram Pasha mosque, he denied: world’s most civilized life even in Prehistory, fled westwards 9 to “Nowadays whether in or on the building there is no single trace of 10,000 years ago due to natural and inescapable reasons and persian and arab work,” accusing anybody claiming “that Behram undoubtedly also passed through Mesopotamia and the vicinity of Pasha was an arab” of “fabricating this from scratch.” The author Diyarbekir. . .”31 Gunkut went on to state that “the nation to first then explored the architectural history of the Great Mosque, an

April 26, 2008 | THE ARMENIAN WEEKLY | 25 5_Ungor_Research_5 4/13/08 8:23 PM Page 26

Ungor

Orthodox church which was converted to a mosque following the ethnic background. Then, according to the paradigm of national- Muslim capture of Diyarbekir in 639 AD. He attacked noted ism, any deviation from the official memory automatically implies Ottoman historians, observers, and travelers such as Evliya Celebi a deviation from the identity, which in its turn disturbs social clo- for noting that the minaret had been a bell tower, concluding, “In sure in the group. A conflict of absolutely exclusive memories has short, no matter how one interprets this, it is not likely but expanded to a conflict of absolutely exclusive identities.38 absolutely certain that this mosque was built by the Turks.”35 “Turkey denies the Armenian Genocide” goes a jingle in geno- Although Gunkut simply ignored the Syrian Orthodox and cide studies.39 Indeed, the Turkish Republic’s memory politics Chaldean churches, and Jewish synagogues of Diyarbekir, his towards the Armenian Genocide was and is characterized by depiction of Armenian heritage was most radical: “Above all, I can denial. But, not unlike the genocide itself this too was part of a state with absolute certainty that nowhere in the entire city there is larger campaign, namely to exorcise all violence from the memory even a single trace of armenianness to be found.”36 of society. This imposition of collective amnesia on Turkish soci- ety was a double-edged sword. The Young Turks never commem- orated and memorialized the massive tragedy of their expulsion DISCUSSION from the Balkans but chose to move on and look towards the his article discussed how the Young Turks silenced future. Here, too, silences were imposed on society: no sane Turk the violence in the politics of memory they pursued would dare to call Mustafa Kemal a refugee from Salonica, which during their dictatorship. By meting out a new iden- he was nevertheless. Moreover, Turks do not perceive Macedonia tity for the country, the Young Turks also needed to or Epirus as the Germans view Prussia or Silesia. There is relatively mete out a new memory for it. During the 1920’s and little nostalgic tourism and in principle especially 1930’s, the Young Turk treatment of the excludes claims on territories beyond the borders of the Republic. Tpast ranged from the organization of oblivion regarding the trau- It remains a challenge to describe this process of amnesia and matic past and construction of an official narrative that included explain why this was the case, but one can sketch at least one omi- heroic and eternalized images of the nation. All throughout the nous scenario of counter-factual history with reference to this country, but particularly in the eastern provinces, orders were given issue. The call for Turkey to remember the past, captured in to write new local histories. These official textbooks, nationalist Santayana’s now hackneyed dictum that those who forget the past canons, and city histories did not only impose broad silences on crit- are condemned to repeat it, needs to be uttered with care. It might ical historical issues, but they banished all ethnic minorities out of be argued that Turkey’s interwar burial of the past was a blessing (regional) histories. The significance of Young Turk hegemony in in disguise that facilitated neutrality during World War II. The memory politics cannot be overestimated. In a peasant society where example of Germany, another country that had lost territories as illiteracy figures were as high as 80 percent, the official texts were not a result of losing World War I, could have easily found a pendant only the first ones the population would read, they were also the only in a bitter and vindictive Turkish-nationalist offensive on the ones available to the population. The organization of a hegemonic Balkans, the Caucasus, or the Middle East—depending on what canon through exclusion and inclusion aimed at the formation of a side Turkey would be on. In the age of total war and mass violence “closed circuit of knowledge.” This act precluded the possibilities of against civilians, this is a sequence of events that was fortunately a participatory memory and identity formation, especially in the spared the population of those regions. eastern provinces. The regime warded off both external penetration The most powerful symbol of the silences imposed on the mass and internal criticism of their belief system by banning and destroy- violence of the Young Turk era must be the strongly fortified ing texts on a scale perhaps only matched by the Soviet dictatorship. citadel in the northeastern corner of Diyarbekir city. Many urban- “Turkishness” was measured by the level of exposure to that body of ites and neighboring peasants revere this ancient redoubt as one of knowledge as subsequent studies of cities and regions were to quote the most important historical monuments of their country. The the “classics” of Young Turk historiography in order to be “scientific” stronghold stands on a small elevation overlooking a meander in enough to be allowed to be published. the River. It is impressive if only because of its position: Memory is closely linked to identity as every identity requires both the Ottoman Empire and the Turkish Republic built their a memory. By mass educating several generations of citizens, the state apparatus in the compound to instill a long lasting deference. memory that the regime instilled in official Turkish identity Anyone who comes here, enticed by one or another historical nar- became relatively solidified. A “recivilizing process” of unlearning rative, is at least vaguely familiar with Diyarbekir’s record of vio- Young Turk culture and memory such as in Germany never took lence and assumes history to be dormant within these dark, place after the Young Turk dictatorship lost power in 1950.37 crumbling walls. The compound shelters the governorship, the Therefore, the Armenian-Turkish conflict is very much a conflict provincial court, and most notably the infamous Diyarbekir of memory: Armenians wish to remember a history that Turks prison. The latter building might be considered as the single land- would like to forget. This would not have been a problem if mem- mark of mass violence in Diyarbekir: In it, Bulgarian revolution- ory was not a core component of identity. Therefore, loss of mem- aries were incarcerated in the late 19th century, Armenian elites ory entails a loss of identity, something fundamentally were tortured and murdered in 1915, Shaikh Said and his men problematic for many people. Since these constructed memories were sentenced and executed in 1925, various left-wing activists are a prime component of group identity, both Armenians and and Kurdish nationalists were kept and subjected to torture dur- Turks experience any deviation of that memory as a direct attack ing the junta regime following the 1980 military coup, and PKK on their very identity. Turks who express a sincere, agnostic inter- members were tortured and frequently killed in the 1990’s. Up to est in history are accused of having a dubious (read: Armenian) the year 2000, it housed the security forces of the Turkish war

26 | THE ARMENIAN WEEKLY | APRIL 26, 2008 5_Ungor_Research_5 4/13/08 8:23 PM Page 27

RESEARCH

machine including gendarmerie intelligence operatives and spe- 19 BCA, 030.18.01/127.95.11, Prime Ministry decree, Dec. 31, 1951. cial counter-guerrilla militias. 20 BCA, 030.18.01.02/95.60.3, Prime Ministry decree, July 10, 1941. This sad account of Diyarbekir’s central prison reflects the city’s 21 Donald Bloxham, The Great Game of Genocide: Imperialism, Nationalism, and the Destruction of the Ottoman Armenians (Oxford: century of violence, during which at no time was any of the violence Oxford University Press, 2005), p. 204. commemorated in any way at any of the sites. In the summer of 22 BCA, 030.18.01.02/51.3.2, Prime Ministry decree, Jan. 13, 1935. 2007, the area had been cleared of security forces—and was being 23 Saul Friedlander, Nazi-Duitsland en de joden (Utrecht: Het Spectrum, converted by the Ministry of Culture and Tourism to an open-air 1998), vol. 1: De jaren van vervolging, 1933–1939,p.26. “Ataturk Museum.” The future of the past remains silent. a 24 Paul du Véou, Chrétiens en péril au Moussadagh!: Enquête au Sandjak d'Alexandrette (Paris: Baudinière, 1939). 25 BCA, 030.18.01.02/90.12.7, Prime Ministry decree, Jan. 25, 1940. ENDNOTES 26 Anthony D. Smith, Myths and memories of the nation (Oxford: Oxford 1 George Orwell, Nineteen Eighty-Four (London: Secker & Warburg, University Press, 1999). 1949), p. 35. 27 Ana Maria Alonso, “The effects of truth: re-presentations of the past 2 For two comparative volumes dealing with these themes, see David E. and the imagining of community,”in Journal of Historical Sociology, vol. Lorey & William E. Beezley (eds.), Genocide, Collective Violence, and 1, no.1 (1988), pp. 33–57. Popular Memory: The Politics of Remembrance in the Twentieth Century 28 James V. Wertsch, Voices of collective remembering (Cambridge: (Wilmington, Del.: Scholarly Resources, 2002); Nanci Adler et al. (eds.), Cambridge University Press, 2002), p. 70. Memories of Mass Repression (New Brunswick, N.J.: Transaction 29 Dennis Deletant & Harry Hanak (eds.), Historians as Nation-Builders: Publishers, 2008, forthcoming). Central and South-East Europe (Basingstoke: Macmillan, 1988); 3 Tzvetan Todorov, Mémoire du mal, tentation du bien: enquête sur le siècle Anthony D. Smith, “Nationalism and the Historians,” in Id. (ed.), (Paris: Laffont, 2000), chapter 3. Ethnicity and Nationalism (Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1992), pp. 58–80. 4 Paul Connerton, How societies remember (Cambridge: Cambridge 30 Victor Roudometof, Collective memory, national identity, and ethnic University Press, 1989); cf. Patrick J. Geary, Phantoms of Remembrance: conflict: Greece, , and the Macedonian question (Westport, memory and oblivion at the end of the first millennium (Princeton, N.J.: Conn.: Praeger, 2002). Princeton University Press, 1994), p. 26. 31 Bedri Gunkut, Diyarbekir Tarihi (Diyarbakir: Diyarbekir Halkevi, 5 Primo Levi, I sommersi e i salvati (Torino: Einaudi, 1986); Milan Kundera, 1937), p. 26. Kniha smichu a zapomneni (Toronto: Sixty-Eight Publishers, 1981). 32 Ibid., p. 27. 6 A recent volume dealing with this subject, although a notable exception, 33 Ibid., p. 45. does not deal with the treatment of memory by the Young Turk regime 34 Ibid., pp. 144–5. itself: Esra Ozyurek (ed.), The Politics of Public Memory in Turkey 35 Ibid., pp. 122, 133–5, 141. (Syracuse, N.Y.: Syracuse University Press, 2006). 36 Ibid., p. 156. This discourse of total denial of anything Armenian was 7 Nimet Arsan (ed.), Ataturk’un Soylev ve Demecleri (Ankara: Turk Tarih reproduced in Kemalist texts on the districts of Diyarbekir as well. One Kurumu, 1959–1964), vol. I, p. 241. author wrote that Armenian existence in Ergani “had not had the slight- 8 Cumhuriyet, Sept. 6 and 9, 1933; Ari Inan, Dusunceleriyle Ataturk est significance.” Muhtar Korukcu, “Ergani’nin Zulkuf Dag,” in (Ankara: Turk Tarih Kurumu, 1991), p. 162. Karacadag, vol. VII, no. 85–86 (December/January 1945–1946). 9 For a study of Turkish-Greek rapprochement after 1923, see Damla 37 Konrad H. Jarausch, After Hitler: Recivilizing Germans, 1945–1995 (New Demirozu, Savastan Barisa Giden Yol: Ataturk-Venizelos Donemi York: Oxford University Press, 2006). Turkiye-Yunanistan Iliskileri (Istanbul: Iletisim, 2007). 38 For an excellent discussion of a similar conflict of memory, see Ilan 10 Anush Hovannisian, “Turkey: A Cultural Genocide,”in Levon Chorbajian Gur-Ze’ev, “The Production of Self and Destruction of the Other’s & George Shirinian (eds.), Studies in Comparative Genocide (New York: St. Memory and Identity in Israeli/Palestinian Education on the Holocaust/ Martin’s Press, 1998), pp. 147–56. This was not different in Diyarbekir’s Nakbah,” in Studies in Philosophy and Education, vol. 20 (2001), pp. districts. For the example of Ergani, see Muslum Uzulmez, Cayonunden 255–66. Erganiye Uzun Bir Yuruyut (Istanbul: n.p., 2005), chapter 4. 39 For a list of English-language publications, see Roger W. Smith, “Denial 11 Bedri Gunkut, Diyarbekir Tarihi (Diyarbakir: Diyarbekir Halkevi, of the Armenian Genocide,” in W. Charny (red.), Genocide: A 1937), pp. 150–1. 12 For a website commemorating Sourp Giragos, see www.surpgiragos.com. Critical Bibliographical Review, deel 2 (New York: Facts on File, 1991), 13 For similar process of dislocated memory, see Pamela Ballinger, History pp. 63–85; Vahakn N. Dadrian, “Ottoman Archives and Denial of the in exile: memory and identity at the borders of the Balkans (Princeton, Armenian Genocide,” in Richard G. Hovannisian (red.), The Armenian N.J.: Princeton University Press, 2003); Lubomyr Y. Luciuk, Searching Genocide: History, Politics, Ethics (Basingstoke: Macmillan, 1992), pp. For Place: Ukrainian Displaced Persons, , and the Migration of 280–310; Id., The key elements in the Turkish denial of the Armenian Memory (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2000). genocide: a case study of distortion and falsification (Toronto: Zoryan 14 Turkiye Buyuk Millet Meclisi Zabit Ceridesi, vol. 17, period V, session 45 Institute, 1999); Richard G. Hovannisian,“The Armenian Genocide and (1937), April 7, 1937, p. 26. Patterns of Denials,” in Richard G. Hovannisian (red.), The Armenian 15 Basbakanlik Cumhuriyet Arsivi (Republican Archives, Ankara, hereafter Genocide in Perspective (New Brunswick: Transaction Books, 1986), pp. BCA), 030.18.01.02/46.49.5, Prime Ministry decree, June 10, 1934. 111–33; Israel W. Charny & Daphna Fromer, “Denying the Armenian 16 Marie Sarrafian Banker, My beloved Armenia: a thrilling testimony Genocide: Patterns of Thinking as Defence-Mechanisms,” in Patterns of (Chicago: The Bible Institute Colportage Associationn, 1936). Prejudice, vol. 32, no. 1 (1998), pp. 39–49; Stanley Cohen, States of 17 BCA, 030.18.01.02/79.82.14, Prime Ministry decree, Sept. 28, 1937. denial: knowing about atrocities and suffering (Cambridge: Polity, 2001), 18 BCA, 030.18.01.02/118.98.20, Prime Ministry decree, Feb. 10, 1949. pp. 134–5.

Nigoghos Mazadoorian Yegsa Aharonian Mazadoorian

BORN: Ichme, Kharpert; 1904 BORN: Yegheki, Kharpert; 1912 DIED: New Britain, Conn.; 1997 DIED: New Britain, Conn.; 2008

April 26, 2008 | THE ARMENIAN WEEKLY | 27 2_SANJIAN_RESEARCH_spread 4/13/08 6:14 PM Page 28

RESEARCH ARMENIA and GENOCIDE The Growing Engagement of Azerbaijan1

By Ara Sanjian

hile the continuing struggle between Armenian and Turkish officials and activists for or against the international recogni- tion of the Armenian Genocide of 1915 shows no sign of abating, and while its dynamics are becoming largely pre- Wdictable, a new actor is increasingly attracting attention for its willingness to join this “game.” It is Azerbaijan, which has—since 1988—been engaged in at times lethal conflict with Armenians over Mountainous Karabagh.

In modern times, Armenians have often found it difficult to while allocating Nakhichevan and Mountainous Karabagh to decide whether they should view the Turks (of Turkey) and the Azerbaijan. This arrangement satisfied neither side. A low-intensity as two separate ethnic groups—and thus apply two Armenian-Azerbaijani struggle persisted during the next decades mutually independent policies towards them—or whether they within the limits permitted by the Soviet system. Repeated Armenian should approach them as only two of the many branches of a sin- attempts to detach Mountainous Karabagh from Azerbaijan were gle, pan-Turkic entity, pursuing a common, long-term political its most visible manifestation. objective, which would—if successful—end up with the annihila- At the time, Turkey was outside of Soviet control and formed tion of Armenians in their historical homeland. part of a rival bloc in the post-World War II international order. The Indeed, almost at the same time that the Armenian Question in difference in the type of relations Armenia had with Turkey and the Ottoman Empire was attracting worldwide attention, extensive Azerbaijan during the Soviet era partly dictated the dissimilar ways clashes between Armenians and Azerbaijanis first occurred in the memories of genocide and inter-ethnic violence were tackled by Transcaucasia in 1905. Clashes—accompanied, on this occasion, Soviet Armenian historians until 1988. Benefiting from Moscow’s with attempts at —resumed with heightened inten- more permissive attitude from the mid-1950’s, Soviet Armenian sity after the collapse of tsarism in 1917. They were suppressed only historians, backed implicitly by the country’s communist leader- in 1921, by the Russian-dominated communist regime, which ship, openly accused the Turks of genocide, but made no parallels reasserted control over Transaucasia, forced Armenia, Azerbaijan between the circumstances under which Armenians had been killed and to join the , and imposed itself as the in the Ottoman Empire or during clashes with Azerbaijanis earlier judge in the territorial disputes that had plagued these nations. The in the 20th century. Getting Moscow’s acquiescence, especially if communists eventually endorsed Zangezur as part of Armenia, their works would be published in Moscow and/or in Russian, was

28 | THE ARMENIAN WEEKLY | APRIL 26, 2008 2_SANJIAN_RESEARCH_spread 4/13/08 6:14 PM Page 29

RESEARCH

not easy for Armenians. However, Soviet Armenian historians were, ther investigated. These two positions can be reconciled only if the at the same time, “protected” from challenges by Turkish state-sup- outcome of the proposed additional research is pre-determined, ported revisionism (or, as others describe it, negationism), which whereby the proponents of the genocide explanation would even- was suppressed even more firmly within the Soviet Union. tually concede that they had been wrong all along. Indeed, Hence, it is still difficult to know what Soviet Azerbaijani histori- Azerbaijanis try to show that Armenians are avoiding such a ans thought about the Armenian Genocide of 1915: Were they more debate because they fear that they will lose the argument. sympathetic to arguments produced by Soviet Armenian historians Azerbaijanis argue that Armenians want to convince the world or those who had the blessing of the authorities in Ankara? The that they were subjected to genocide because they plan to take polemic between Soviet Armenian and Soviet Azerbaijani historians advantage of this to push forward their sinister aims. They warn centered from the mid-1960’s on the legacy of Caucasian Albania. A that, after achieving international recognition of the genocide, theory developed in Soviet Azerbaijan assumed that the once Armenians will demand compensation and raise territorial claims Christian Caucasian Albanians were the ancestors of the modern-day against Turkey. Moreover, Azerbaijanis maintain that Armenians, Muslim Azerbaijanis. Thereafter, all Christian monuments in Soviet by pursuing the issue of genocide recognition, are seeking to divert Azerbaijan and Nakhichevan (including all medieval Armenian international attention from their continuing aggression against churches, monasteries and cross-stones, which constituted the vast Azerbaijan, including the occupation of Mountainous Karabagh. majority of these monuments) were declared to be Caucasian Moreover, any prominence given to the Armenian Genocide claims Albanian and, hence, Azerbaijani. Medieval Armenians were openly may—according to Azerbaijanis—also aggravate prejudice and accused of forcibly assimilating the Caucasian Albanians and laying hatred in the South Caucasus, make it difficult to maintain peace, claim to their architectural monuments and works of literature. This and further delay the just regulation of the Karabagh conflict, was probably the closest that Soviet Azerbaijanis came—in print—to which—they argue—is already being hindered because of Armenian formally accusing the Armenians of committing genocide against intransigence and arrogance. The Azerbaijanis claim that by recog- their (Caucasian Albanian) ancestors.2 nizing the Armenian Genocide, foreign countries will show them- Since 1988, however, as the Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict over selves “to be in cooperation and solidarity with aggressor Mountainous Karabagh has gotten bloodier and increasingly Armenia.”3 They will also justify the actions of Armenia, which— intractable, the Azerbaijani positions on both negating the for Azerbaijan—is a country that encourages terrorism. They will Armenian Genocide of 1915 and also become an instrument in accusing Armenians of having the hands of (Armenian) insti- themselves committed a geno- Azerbaijanis argue that gators trying to stir up enmity cide against the Azerbaijanis have among these countries, Turkey, become more pronounced and Armenians want to convince the Azerbaijan, and even the entire now receive full backing from all Turkic and Islamic world. state institutions, including the world that they were subjected to In the specific cases of both country’s last two presidents, the United States and France, Heydar and . genocide because they plan to which are heavily involved in Azerbaijani officials, politicians, attempts to regulate the and wide sections of civil society, take advantage of this to push Karabagh conflict, recognizing including the head of the forward their sinister aims. the Armenian Genocide will— Spiritual Board of Muslims of argue Azerbaijani sources—cast the Caucasus, Sheikh ul-Islam a shadow on their reputation as Haji Allahshukur Pashazada, as bastions of justice and old dem- well as numerous associations in the Azerbaijani diaspora, now ocratic traditions. It will also weaken their role in the Caucasus and fully identify themselves with Turkey’s official position that the perhaps in the whole world. Reacting to French deliberations to Armenian Genocide is simply a lie, intentionally fabricated in pur- penalize the denial of the Armenian Genocide, Azerbaijanis argued suit of sinister political goals. Even representatives of the that this would curtail free speech. In and Georgia, local Georgian, Jewish, and Udi ethnic communities in Azerbaijan have Azerbaijani organizations have argued that the formal commemo- joined the effort. Unlike in Turkey, there is not yet a visible minor- ration of the genocide may lead to a conflict between the Armenian ity in Azerbaijan that openly disagrees with their government’s and Azerbaijani communities living in those countries. stand on this issue. This probably explains the absence of the Commenting on the discussion of the Armenian Genocide issue in Azerbaijani judiciary in the campaign to deny the 1915 genocide. the French legislature, an Azerbaijani deputy stated that the adop- If there are officials or intellectuals who remain unconvinced with tion of that bill might result in all Turks and Azerbaijanis having to this theory propagated by their government, it seems that they still leave France. Indeed, some Azerbaijanis have gone so far as to argue prefer to keep a very low profile. that pursuing the genocide recognition campaign is not helpful to The Azerbaijani position depicts the same ambiguity as Armenia either; such resolutions would further isolate Armenia in Ankara’s. On the one hand, repeating almost verbatim the argu- the Caucasus, while only leaders of Armenian diaspora organiza- ments in mainstream Turkish historiography, they flatly deny that tions would benefit. In fact, those Armenians whose relatives died what happened to Armenians was genocide. At the same time, in 1915 should—according to Azerbaijani analysts—be saddened they frequently contend that this historical issue remains contro- by such manipulation of their families’ tragedy in exchange for versial to this day and that these genocide claims need to be fur- some political gains today.

April 26, 2008 | THE ARMENIAN WEEKLY | 29 2_SANJIAN_RESEARCH_spread 4/13/08 6:14 PM Page 30

Sanjian

Nevertheless, Azerbaijanis admit that the current Armenian Television and a number of private television stations stopped strategy has had some success in convincing third parties that showing films and clips produced in France. Finally, hackers from there was a genocide in 1915. Azerbaijanis attribute this success to Azerbaijan continually attack Armenian sites with messages deny- a number of factors: the prevailing ignorance in the West regard- ing the Armenian Genocide. ing the real situation in the Caucasus; the strength of the lobbying Azerbaijani expatriates have also been active. On April 24, in efforts of the Armenian diaspora; and the prevailing anti-Turkic both 2002 and 2003, Azerbaijani deputies in the Georgian parlia- and anti-Islamic bias in the “Christian” West. ment attempted to block suggestions by their Armenian colleagues Because Armenian Genocide resolutions are usually pushed by to pay homage to the memory of Armenian Genocide victims. legislators and opposed by the executive branches of various gov- Azerbaijani expatriates of lesser standing have, in turn, often held ernments, the Azerbaijanis differ in their explanation of this trend. demonstrations, issued statements, held press conferences, and Some put the blame solely on ignorant, selfish, and short-sighted organized books and photograph exhibitions in various countries legislators, while others argue that the executive branch is also where they reside. In the United States, the Azeris’ Union of involved in these efforts. Vafa Quluzada, a former high-ranking America reported on March 15, 2006 that it had “distributed more Azerbaijani diplomat and presidential adviser, claimed that George than 600 statements and letters denouncing Armenian lies among Bush and Condoleezza Rice stood behind the resolution passed by American congressmen and senators.”5 Azerbaijanis in America the House International Relations Committee on Oct. 10, 2007. also reportedly earned the gratitude of Douglas Frantz, the “The Armenian lobby was cre- managing editor of the Los ated by the U.S. administration,” Angeles Times, by sending hun- he said.“If otherwise, who would “The Armenian lobby was created dreds of letters to the newspa- allow the Armenian Assembly by the U.S. administration. If per in his support, after he was to sit in the building of the criticized for preventing the Congress?” Quluzada claimed otherwise, who would allow the publication of an article on the that the “Americans established genocide by Mark .6 The [the Armenian lobby] and sup- Armenian Assembly to sit in the State Committee on Work with port it in order to cover up their Azerbaijanis Living Abroad expansion in the world.”4 building of the Congress?” –Quluzada seems to be the conduit of much Within the context of their of the information on such campaign against the interna- activities in the Azerbaijani dias- tional recognition of the Armenian Genocide, Azerbaijanis pora. There is also evidence that the Azerbaijani embassies are often repeat the official Turkish argument that evaluating the often directly involved in organizing some of the said demonstra- events of 1915 is more a job for historians than politicians. tions by Azerbaijani expatriates. Azerbaijani officials and parliamentarians have publicly objected Among the books distributed by Azerbaijani activists in order to the laying of wreaths by foreign dignitaries at the Armenian to propagate their own views to foreigners are some of the publi- Genocide Memorial in Yerevan, the possible use of the term “geno- cations that have been printed in since 1990 in Azerbaijani, cide” in the annual U.S. presidential addresses on April 24, and the Russian and English. Some of these works are authored by discussion of this issue in national parliaments or by international Azerbaijanis; others are Russian-language translations (and, in organizations. Azerbaijani deputies have established direct contact one case, a Romanian translation) of works by George de with foreign parliamentarians to explain their viewpoint. At the Maleville and Erich Feigl, and of Armenian Allegations: Myth and same time, Azerbaijani politicians, pundits, and news agencies con- Reality: A Handbook of Facts and Documents, compiled by the sistently downplay the political weight of foreign parliamentarians Assembly of Turkish American Associations—all acclaimed by the who raise the genocide issue in their respective legislatures. supporters of the Turkish state-approved thesis regarding the 1915 Moreover, organizations of Azerbaijani civil society have deportations. In June 2001, Baku State University invited Feigl to organized pickets and demonstrations in front of the embassies of Azerbaijan. He was later awarded the Order of Honor by President states in Baku, which were feared to be taking steps towards recog- Ilham Aliyev. In August 2002, Samuel A. Weems, the author of nizing the Armenian Genocide. Azerbaijani television stations Armenia: Secrets of a Christian Terrorist State, also visited Baku at have also filmed documentaries on location in Turkey recording the invitation of the Sahil Information and Research Center. what they describe as acts of Armenian tyranny in Ottoman times. Former and serving Turkish diplomats, as well as Turkish and A Russian television station, which is transmitted regularly in Azerbaijani parliamentarians, have repeatedly called for further Azerbaijan, was temporarily taken off the air when it showed cooperation and the development of a common strategy—both at ’s film “Ararat.” In October 2006, when the French the official and civil society levels—to foil Armenian lobbying National Assembly was debating the passage of the bill criminaliz- efforts. Part of this cooperation is within the realm of Turkish and ing the denial of the Armenian Genocide, Azerbaijani Public Azerbaijani academia; conferences dedicated fully to the Armenian

Pailoon (Demirdjian) Aghjayan Malikof Aghjayan

BORN: Dikranagerd; February 24, 1912 BORN: Burun Kishla, Yozgat; August 15, 1893 DIED: Boston, Mass.; June 24, 1938 DIED: Boston Mass.; March 30, 1974

30 | THE ARMENIAN WEEKLY | APRIL 26, 2008 2_SANJIAN_RESEARCH_spread 4/13/08 6:14 PM Page 31

RESEARCH

issue or panels on this topic their viewpoint regarding the within the confines of broader Armenian Genocide claims. In academic gatherings—with the The Azerbaijanis argue that Jews August 2007, he commented that participation of Azerbaijani, “one or two Jews can recognize Turkish, and sometimes other should join their efforts to foil [the] Armenian genocide. That experts—have taken place fre- Armenian attempts at genocide will be the result of Armenian quently in Baku, Istanbul, lobby’s impact. However, that Erzerum, and other locations. recognition because there was does not mean that Jews residing Among the longer-term proj- in the United States and the ects, one may point out that the also a genocide perpetrated by organizations functioning there Turkish Historical Society, Baku also recognize the genocide.” He State University, the Institute of Armenians against Jews . . . explained that because expendi- Azerbaijani History, and the tures for election to the U.S. Association of Businessmen of Congress are high, some Jewish Azerbaijan-Turkey established a joint working group on May 15, candidates receive contributions from the Armenian lobby and, in 2006 to make the international community aware of the return, have to meet the interests of this lobby. According to Armenian issue. It would meet once every three months, alternat- Abramov, “except [for the] Holocaust, Jews do not recognize any ing between Baku and Ankara. The following year, the League of [other] event as genocide.”8 Investigating Journalists in Azerbaijan launched a Center for Azerbaijani arguments that Armenians perpetrated a genocide Armenology, where five specialists, mostly immigrants from against Azerbaijanis and Jews in the early 20th century have Armenia, would work. This center has reportedly established ties received little attention outside Azerbaijani circles. However, when with Erzerum University, which already has a center on what it the issue was touched upon in a contribution to the Jerusalem describes as the “alleged Armenian Genocide.” Post by Lenny Ben-David, a former Israeli adviser to the Turkish Turkish-Azerbaijani cooperation against the Armenian Embassy in Washington, D.C. on Sept. 4, 2007, his article was also Genocide recognition campaign is also evident among the Turkish quickly distributed by the Azeri Press Agency. Ben-David called on and Azerbaijani expatriate communities in Europe and the United Israel and Jewish-Americans to be careful regarding Armenian States. Indeed, some of the demonstrations mentioned above as the claims against Turkey. He listed a number of instances when—he activities of the Azerbaijani diaspora were organized in conjunction believed—Armenians had massacred hundreds of thousands of with local Turkish organizations. Within Turkey, among the Igdir, Turkish Muslims and thousands of Jews.“Recently, , and Erzerum residents, who consider themselves victims of an in Azerbaijan requested assistance in building a monument to Armenian-perpetrated genocide, and who filed a lawsuit against the 3,000 Azeri Jews killed by Armenians in 1918 in a pogrom about novelist in June 2006, were also ethnic Azerbaijanis; which little is known,” he wrote.9 their ancestors had moved from territories now part of Armenia. Even if the official Turkish and Azerbaijani positions are in Azerbaijanis, like Turks, are very interested in having the Jews total agreement regarding the denial of the Armenian Genocide, as allies in their struggle against the Armenian Genocide recogni- some tactical differences can be discerned when analyzing tion campaign. Like Turks, Azerbaijanis do not question the Azerbaijani news reports in recent years. For example, Azerbaijani Holocaust. However, they liken the Armenians to its perpetra- calls to impose sanctions against states whose legislatures have tors—the Nazis—and not its victims—the Jews—as is the case recognized the Armenian Genocide have never gone beyond the among Holocaust and genocide scholars. The Azerbaijanis argue rhetoric. In 2001, they were openly condemned by President that Jews should join their efforts to foil Armenian attempts at Heydar Aliyev. On a few other occasions, suspicions, not to say genocide recognition because there was also a genocide perpe- fears, can also be noticed, when one of the two parties becomes trated by Armenians against Jews in Azerbaijan, at the time of the anxious that the other partner may desert the common cause and genocide against Azerbaijanis in the early 20th century. They appease the Armenian side at its own expense. repeatedly state that several thousand Jews died then because of Most of these Azerbaijani efforts to correct what they perceive Armenian cruelty. The support of Jewish residents of Ujun as purposefully distorted history are directed toward audiences in (Germany) to public events organized by the local Azerbaijanis third countries, not in Armenia. For Armenians, on the other hand, was attributed to their being provided with documents that listed the chief opponents in their quest for the international recognition 87 Jews murdered by Armenians in Guba (Azerbaijan) in 1918.7 of the Armenian Genocide remain the Turkish state and those seg- Yevda Abramov, currently the only Jewish member of the ments of Turkish society, evidently the majority, which have inter- Azerbaijani parliament, is prominent in pushing for such joint nalized the official viewpoint. For most Armenians, the support Azerbaijani-Jewish efforts. He consistently seeks to show to his eth- this standpoint is increasingly receiving from Azerbaijan is still at nic Azerbaijani compatriots that Israel and Jews worldwide share most a sideshow. They still seem unaware of the growing

Giragos DerManuelian Vahan Dadoyan

BORN: Sakrat, Palu; 1907 BORN: Dikranagerd; September 15, 1915 DIED: Providence, R.I.; November 22, 1985 DIED: ; October 13, 2001

April 26, 2008 | THE ARMENIAN WEEKLY | 31 2_SANJIAN_RESEARCH_spread 4/13/08 6:14 PM Page 32

Sanjian

Azerbaijani engagement in this issue. The “war of words” between munist support—in Baku beginning on March 31, 1918. (This is Armenian and Azerbaijani officials remain largely confined to the symbolic date chosen to commemorate all acts of violence mutual accusations of destroying historical monuments. On cer- against the Azerbaijanis.) Azerbaijanis see a third major episode of tain occasions, one side or the other dubs the mixture of acts of this Armenian policy of genocide in what they describe as the mass neglect and vandalism by the other as “Cultural Genocide,”while at deportation of thousands of Azerbaijanis from Soviet Armenia the same time denying that their own side has any case to answer. from 1948-53. Finally, the last intensive stage of Armenian persecu- However, mutual accusations of the destruction of monu- tion coincides with the most recent phase of the Karabagh conflict, ments are just the tip of the iceberg in a larger interpretation of which began in 1988. demographic processes in Transcaucasia in the last 200 years as Since 1998, a series of annual rituals has been developed in one, continual process of ethnic cleansing. Within this context, the Azerbaijan to mark the Genocide Day, including a special address term “genocide” is often used as shorthand to indicate slow, but by the Azerbaijani president, the lowering of national flags all over continuing ethnic cleansing, punctuated with moments of height- the country, and a procession by officials, diplomats, and scores of ened violence also serving the same purpose. Indeed, where the ordinary citizens to Baku’s Alley of Martyrs. Ceremonies are also contemporary Azerbaijani attitude toward Armenia departs from held in other parts of the country, along with classes dedicated to Turkey’s is now the official standpoint in Baku that the Armenians the Genocide Day in educational institutions and exhibitions. have pursued a policy of genocide against the Azerbaijanis during Memorials have already been erected in Guba, Nakhichevan, the past two centuries. Shamakha, and Lankaran. Relevant events are also organized in While the Turkish state and dominant Turkish elites vehemently Azerbaijani embassies abroad. object to the use of the term “genocide” to describe the Armenian Outside the confines of Azerbaijani state structures, Sheikh ul- deportations of 1915, and while some Turkish historians, politi- Islam Pashazada also appealed to the world in 2002 to recognize cians, and a few municipal authorities have accused the Armenians the events of March 31, 1918 as genocide. Azerbaijani scholars and themselves of having committed genocide against the Ottoman politicians have propagated this new thesis during conferences in Muslims/Turks—in their replies to what they say are Armenian Turkey. On April 24, 2003, a group of writers and journalists set up “allegations”—this line of accusation has never been officially an organization called “31 March” to compensate for what they adopted, to date at least, by the highest authorities. It has not thought were the feeble activities of the state structures and pub- become a part of state-sponsored lobbying in foreign countries. lic organizations in this sphere. Action in this regard is also grad- However, Azerbaijani efforts have taken a different direction ually spreading to the Azerbaijani diaspora and involving Turkish over the past few years. Azerbaijani officials—even those of the expatriates living in Europe. highest rank—now assert repeatedly that Armenians have com- Among all instances of mass murder specified in the Azerbaijani mitted “the real genocide,”resulting in the death or deportation of presidential decree on genocide, the massacre in the village of up to two million Azerbaijanis in the last 200 years. Armenians, Khojaly in Mountainous Karabagh on Feb. 26, 1992 is given the they say, invaded Azerbaijan’s historical lands, ousted its popula- most prominence. Its anniversary is now observed annually with tion, created an Armenian state, and falsified history through the rallies and speeches—in addition to the annual Genocide Day on destruction or “Armenianization” of historical Azerbaijani monu- March 31. In 1994, four years before the formal adoption of the ments and changing geographical names. Azerbaijan has even Genocide Day, the Azerbaijani National Assembly had already rec- made a few timid, and so far unsuccessful, attempts to have the ognized the events in Khojaly as genocide and requested parlia- Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) ments throughout the world to recognize it as such. Similar requests approve a document adopting this viewpoint. In March 2007, Iosif have been repeated since, both by the country’s successive presi- Shagal, the head of the Israel-Azerbaijan inter-parliamentary asso- dents and other public figures. The massacre/genocide of Khojaly ciation, acknowledged that the Knesset had received documents also comes up regularly—and in its own right—in joint academic about the genocide committed against Azerbaijanis. and educational activities by Turkish and Azerbaijani scholars. In 1998, President Heydar Aliyev decreed March 31 as Genocide These Azerbaijani arguments that they continue to be the target Day—an annual day of national mourning in Azerbaijan. It marks of a genocidal campaign by Armenians is going hand in hand these all episodes of genocide against Azerbaijanis by Armenians since the days with the historical thesis that Armenians are newcomers to the turn of the 20th century. Four specific timeframes were highlighted territories they are now living on, and that they have taken control of as periods of intense Armenian persecution and massacres. The first these territories through a premeditated campaign of genocide and was 1905-07, when Azerbaijanis say that tens of thousands of civil- ethnic cleansing. The origins of this modern Azerbaijani interpreta- ians were killed in Yerevan, Vedibasar, Zangezur, and Karabagh, tion of Armenian history go back at least to the territorial claims that while hundreds of settlements were razed to the ground. Then, fol- the Azerbaijanis presented at the Paris Peace Conference in 1919. It lowing the Communist Revolution in 1917, the Azerbaijani people also manifested itself in part during the above-mentioned “paper reportedly faced a new series of calamities over a period of a year wars” between Soviet Armenian and Azerbaijani historians from the and a half. Tens of thousands were killed by Armenians—with com- mid-1960’s. Modern-day Azerbaijanis put the beginning of their

Mamigon Apigian Khoren Apigian

BORN: Dzrmag, Keghi; 1899 BORN: Dzrmag, Keghi; 1889 DIED: Pontiac, Mich.; 1972 DIED: Niagara Falls, N.Y.; 1964

32 | THE ARMENIAN WEEKLY | APRIL 26, 2008 2_SANJIAN_RESEARCH_spread 4/13/08 6:14 PM Page 33

RESEARCH

woes with the Russian occupation of Transcaucasia in the early 19th This study also indicates that the increasingly politicized use of century. They consider the districts of Yerevan, Zangezur, and the the term “genocide” among Armenians, Turks, and Azerbaijanis is Lake Sevan basin as being, until then, historic regions of Azerbaijan; leading (perhaps unconsciously) to the trivialization of this con- but the Russian conquerors deported their cept, whereby its relatively strict definition provided for in the 1948 and settled in their stead Armenian migrants from the Ottoman Convention is being replaced by a looser meaning. Empire and Iran. Azerbaijanis also argue that Yerevan was an The word “genocide” often becomes, in the context described in this Azerbaijani city until it was granted to Armenia in 1918. The article, a synonym for “ethnic cleansing” or even smaller-scale and Bolsheviks are accused of having given additional territories to ethnically motivated massacre or murder. The frequent use of the Armenia when the Soviet regime was installed. And, finally, it is term “genocide” by Armenians to describe the pogrom in Sumgait pointed out that Armenians have conquered further territories dur- (Azerbaijan) in February 1988 is also indicative of this trend. While ing the recent war and that they still harbor irredentist designs it is beyond doubt that the murder of individuals, massacres, and toward Nakhichevan. acts of ethnic cleansing deserve punishment as criminal offences no Within the context of this recent historical interpretation, it is less than a crime of genocide, maintaining a healthy respect towards becoming more frequent in Azerbaijan to describe the territories the distinctions, which scholarship has devised over decades to of present-day Armenia as Western Azerbaijan, and the ethnic define the various types of mass slaughter, appears to be necessary Azerbaijanis, who lived in Armenia until 1988, as Western more than ever in order to have a more accurate understanding of Azerbaijanis. There exists a non-governmental organization called the peculiarities of various episodes in history and similar occur- the Western Azerbaijani Liberation Movement, established in rences in the world today. 2005, which aims to protect the interests of the Western Finally, the enthusiasm shown by Azerbaijan in denying the Azerbaijani emigrants, including their right to return to their Armenian Genocide (when modern-day Armenians do not usu- original places of residence. Other related demands go further, ally hold it responsible for committing the crime) brings to atten- from giving these Western Azerbaijanis—after their return—a sta- tion the fact that denial is not necessarily only “the last phase of tus of an enclave within Armenia to the outright annexation of genocide”; genocide can also be denied by groups other than the Yerevan, Zangezur, and other “Azeri territories” in today’s perpetrators and/or their biological or ideological heirs. Genocide Armenia to Azerbaijan. can be denied by the new foes of the (old) victims, and again the Most issues discussed in this article are of direct relevance to Armenian case is not unique and can become the topic of yet the future of Armenian-Turkish and Armenian-Azerbaijani rela- another comparative study. a tions. Any Armenian-Turkish or Armenian-Azerbaijani efforts to overcome the existing, respective antagonisms should necessarily ENDNOTES address these Azerbaijani (and similar Turkish and Armenian) convictions and attitudes. For, understanding them will in all like- 1 This article is an abridged version of the paper “My Genocide, Not Yours: The Introduction of the ‘Genocide’ Paradigm to the Armeno-Azerbaijani ‘War of lihood open the way to a better grasp of the problematic situation Words,’” which the author presented at the Sixth Workshop on Armenian in Eastern Asia Minor and Transcaucasia, and may lead to those Turkish Scholarship in Geneva on March 1, 2008. involved in conflict resolution to delve deeper into issues of iden- 2 This theory has continued to flourish in Azerbaijan after the collapse of the tity, fears, irredentist aspirations, and prejudices, which have Soviet system and now often covers all Christian monuments on the territory become an accepted part of the respective public discourses in of the Republic of Armenia, as we shall see toward the end of this article. these countries and their respective educational systems. 3 Rafig, “A genuine genocide was committed in Khojaly: The Spiritual Board To escape the existing pattern of mutual accusations, additional of Muslims of the Caucasus hails the present position of the US Congress,” Yeni Musavat, Baku, Oct. 23, 2000. research appears to be necessary to write a historical narrative accept- 4 “Azeri analyst sees pro-Armenian US move as assault on Islam,” Day., able to specialists on both sides of the political divide, which is based Oct. 13, 2007. not only on a comprehensive and scientific study of the available 5 E. Abdullayev,“Azeri: Meeting to Denounce Lies on Armenian Genocide to facts, but which also addresses the various social, political, and ideo- Be Held in New York April 22,” Trend, March 15, 2006. logical concerns of all the protagonists involved. The Azerbaijani atti- 6 “Los Angeles Times’ Armenian Journalist Leaves Newspaper for Biased tudes described here are comparable not only to positions taken in Article about Alleged Armenian Genocide,” Azeri Press Agency, June 20, 2007. Turkey, but also to some of the prevalent attitudes among Armenians 7 J. Shakhverdiyev, “Germans of Jewish Descent Protest Faked Armenian vis-à-vis their Turkish and Azerbaijani neighbors. Limitations of Genocide,” Trend, April 24, 2006. space forced us to avoid this dimension altogether within this partic- 8 I. Alizadeh, “Jews Recognize no Event as Genocide except Holocaust,” Trend, ular article. However, comparative studies of the Armenian and Aug. 24, 2007. This statement by Abramov that Jews recognize only the Holocaust as a genocide contradicts his use of phrases like “the genocide of Azerbaijani historical narratives may be useful in separating histor- Azerbaijani Jews perpetrated by the Armenians” or his reference that the ical facts from ideological statements and may provide an intellec- massacres at Khojaly in 1992 constituted genocide. tual climate whereby the future coexistence of these two nations as 9 “Israeli Diplomat Lenny Ben-David: Armenians Massacred Hundreds of Thou- non-antagonistic neighbors can be contemplated and discussed. sands of Muslims and Thousands of Jews,” Azeri Press Agency, Sept. 6, 2007.

Nazar (Gendimian) Attarian Margaret (Garabedian) DerManuelian

BORN: Aintab; 1902 BORN: Uzunova Mezre, Palu; January 3, 1909 DIED: Aleppo; May 1959 DIED: March 25, 2002

April 26, 2008 | THE ARMENIAN WEEKLY | 33 1_Weitz_Per_4 copy 1 4/13/08 10:48 AM Page 34

PERSPECTIVES

LINKED HISTORIES The Armenian Genocide

By Eric D. Weitz

mong the great atrocities of the modern era, the Armenian Genocide comes quickly to mind. It was not, historically, the first genocide of the 20th century, as is often stated. That unfortunate distinction belongs to the Herero and Nama of German Southwest Africa (present-day Namibia), against whom the German armyA carried out a clear campaign of annihilation between 1904 and 1908. Probably 60–80 percent of the Herero and 40–60 percent of the Nama died after they revolted against German colonial role. They died as a result of direct killings by the German army and German settlers; by being deliberately forced into the Omaheke Desert, where German officers knew they would die of thirst and starvation; and by the horrendous conditions in concentration camps, where the mortality rate was 45 percent according to official military statis- tics (and probably in fact higher).

Even more than the tragic fate of the Herero and Nama, the an entire population had occurred in the very heart of Europe was a Armenian Genocide and the Holocaust share many characteristics. product of Western civilization itself. They were not, to be sure, identical—no historical events ever are. The Nazi genocide of the Jews had its particular features, to be But by looking at them comparatively, we can see some common sure, and they had everything to do with Germany’s highly devel- features that may also help us identify warning signs for the future. oped bureaucratic and military culture, which enabled the Nazis, Some powerful voices exist in the scholarly and public realms once they had seized the organs of the state, to implement policies that continue to argue that no event in history is comparable to the in a highly systematic manner. The other important particularity Nazi drive to annihilate Jews. But “uniqueness” is, at best, a theo- was Germany’s great power status, which contributed to huge ter- logical argument, not a position subject to normal scholarly and ritorial ambitions in Europe, much grander than most other geno- political debate. Or it is a mundane point—all events are histori- cidal regimes of the 20th century. But “particular” is not quite the cally unique in the sense that they occur in a particular time and same thing as “unique.” place and are not replicable. In both the late Ottoman Empire under the Young Turks and in Instead, the thrust of recent research and writing lies clearly in the Nazi Germany, Armenians and Jews were categorized as the consum- comparative direction. Every reputable historian, political scientist, mate “other.” In both societies, long-standing prejudices, based on or sociologist recognizes the enormous atrocity that the Nazis com- traditional religious differences, had existed for centuries. Yet mitted against Jews. The result was the greatest tragedy in Jewish his- Armenians were also known as the “most loyal millet” and Jewish tory; moreover, the complacency about Western moral and cultural life had indeed flourished in Germany. But around the turn into

superiority shattered amid the revelations that the drive to annihilate the 20th century, the prejudices against both groups hardened and JULIE DERMANSKY PHOTO:

34 | THE ARMENIAN WEEKLY | APRIL 26, 2008 1_Weitz_Per_4 copy 1 4/14/08 1:29 PM Page 35

e and the Holocaust PHOTO: HARRYPHOTO: KOUNDAKJIAN

turned uglier. For everyone adversely affected by the modern world, the Armenians were a troublesome group and worse. Their nation- by the surge in commercial activity, education, social advancement, alist strivings threatened the integrity of the empire, and their and mobility, Armenians and Jews became the target because both commercial occupations made them the Jews of the Orient, not groups had, in fact, contributed to and benefited from these changes. exactly a positive attribute in German eyes. The German archives At least some Armenians and some Jews became more prosperous are full of negative references to Greeks and Armenians, who are over the course of the 19th century and moved easily among well-off often characterized as even more adept merchants and money and educated counterparts in France, Britain, and the , lenders than Jews. Baron Marschall von Biberstein, who served as even while most Armenians and Jews maintained more traditional German ambassador in Istanbul from the mid-1890’s to 1913, and sometimes impoverished lives in eastern Anatolia and eastern commented that “all Orientals are involved in intrigues. The Europe. The obvious well-being of some Armenians and Jews, their Armenians and Greeks are masters of the trade.” As a result, there commercial, professional, and educational success in urban centers was little place for anti-Semitism in Turkey. “The economic activ- like Istanbul and Berlin, made them easy targets for those who ity, which elsewhere the Jews perform, namely the exploitation of resented their prosperity and social status. the poorer, popular classes through usury and similar manipula- German officials, businessmen, and intellectuals who were tions, is here performed exclusively by Armenians and Greeks. The active in the Ottoman Empire sometimes contributed to the esca- Spanish Jews who settled here cannot make any headway against lating prejudices against Armenians. Some defined Armenians and them.” German textile manufacturers and German efforts to con- Turks in racial terms, despite the absurdity, at least by today’s stan- trol transport represented serious competition to some Armenians dards, of turning ethnic or religious groups into races. Academics and Greeks, both of whom, according to one German company, like Ernst Jackh strongly supported close ties between Germany instituted all sorts of intrigues against German interests. and the Ottoman Empire, whether it was governed by the sultan or Lurking behind such sentiments was also the notion that the Committee of Union and Progress (CUP). They viewed the Armenians were “a problem” because Germany prized, above all Turks in racial terms as the Prussians of the East, a disciplined, mil- else, stability so that it could exercise predominant influence in the itaristic people that could successfully impose its ways on lesser Ottoman Empire. That meant support for an iron-fisted state, populations. Among those lesser groups were the Armenians and even when it committed atrocities. As a result, official Germans Greeks, about whom many German officials had decidedly mixed were willing to countenance the Young Turk deportations and attitudes, at best. For some Germans, Armenians were the broth- massacres of Armenians. erly Christians who suffered under Muslim Turkish oppression. At home, many Germans began to see Jews as a problem. Their But for many Germans committed to the relationship with Turkey, success in German society became a source of resentment, and by

April 26, 2008 | THE ARMENIAN WEEKLY | 35 1_Weitz_Per_4 copy 1 4/13/08 10:48 AM Page 36

Weitz

the turn into the 20th century, conservative-minded people in all contiguous empire through the Caucasus and beyond. The Nazis the major institutions—business, academia, Catholic and also had grandiose ambitions, a German imperium from the Protestant churches, officer corps, state bureaucracy—claimed Atlantic to the Urals and beyond. The Jews (in Nazi eyes) were the that Jewish influence had become too great, even though Jews rep- great threat to this vision, their lack of a state, their diasporic pres- resented only three-quarters of one percent of the population. ence all over the continent a sign of the grave danger they pre- After World War I and the Russian Revolution, Adolf Hitler sented to the Nazi vision. The fortunes of war deci- sively shaped the timing and The fortunes of war decisively shaped the timing and implementation of the geno- cides. In both instances, among implementation of the genocides. In both instances, among both Young Turks and Nazis, we can see at work the “euphoria both Young Turks and Nazis, we can see at work the of victory” (a term coined by the historian of the Holocaust “euphoria of victory” and the fear of defeat. Christopher Browning) and the fear of defeat. The disastrous defeat of Ottoman forces by the proved uniquely adept at propagating the myth of “Judaeo- Russians at Sarikamesh early in 1915 inspired a crisis atmosphere Bolshevism,” an identification of Jews with communism and the among the Ottoman elite, which was only heightened by the British Soviet Union even while he railed against supposed Jewish domi- and Commonwealth approach to Istanbul at the . But nation of the financial markets. In Nazi eyes, Jews constituted an there, the Ottoman army held off the most powerful navy in the existential threat to German life, and the attack on the Soviet world, touching off a sense of euphoria. It is no accident that the Union was designed to eliminate that threat once and for all. As CUP launched the genocide of the Armenians at precisely this the historian Saul Friedlander has written, the Nazis adopted a moment marked by both great insecurity and euphoria. Now the “redemptive anti-Semitism,” the belief that German life could Young Turks felt they could and should eliminate the Armenian flourish only through the destruction of Jews. population they viewed as the greatest internal threat and take a But the move from prejudice, discrimination, and persecution major step toward creating the new empire they envisaged. to genocide is a huge step. It does not happen naturally or The Nazis launched the Holocaust at a similar moment. Within inevitably. Many and societies discriminate against weeks of the invasion of the Soviet Union on June 22, 1941, but do not kill populations in their midst. For both the late German officers were talking about the war lasting just 14 or 21 Ottoman Empire under the Young Turks and Germany under the more days—to us today an astounding, barely comprehensible Nazis, war provided all the essential conditions that led them to miscalculation. But the German army was used to the rapid move- escalate their hostilities against, respectively, Armenians and Jews ment of its forces and quick victory. In this context, some Nazis, to mass killings. In wartime, both states could impose emergency like the head of the SS, Heinrich Himmler, intensified the killing conditions that gave officials the freedom to act in ways they of Jews that had already begun with the entry of German forces would not dare venture in peacetime. The upheavals of war also into the Soviet Union. For Himmler and others, eliminating Jews heightened the sense of insecurity, leading to calls for swift and was the expression of their euphoria and the belief that now, forceful actions to remove those who were seen as dangers to the finally, the Nazis could accomplish what they really wanted to do, national cause or to the creation of the new society. At the same kill Jews. But by late August the invasion was slowing down and in time, wars opened up vistas of pleasure in the future and pre- October the Soviets held off the Germans before Moscow. Other sented great opportunities for vast restructurings of societies and Nazis, including, most probably, Hitler, now turned on the Jews in populations. Wars by definition are also violent acts; they create fury. Hitler sought to make good on his comments to the cultures of violence and killing. Reichstag in January 1939, when he proclaimed, in a bone-chilling For the Young Turks, World War I followed quickly on the fantasy, that if the Jews should start another world war, the result humiliating defeats of the Balkan Wars and the loss of so much would be not the defeat of Germany but the destruction of the Ottoman territory and population. Their German ally promised Jews. As in the Ottoman Empire in 1915, the euphoria of victory them the restoration (and more) of their losses, but the Young and the dread fear of defeat ran together, leading each regime to Turks began thinking in even more grandiose terms, of extending opt for the mass displacement and killing of the population it had the territory into Central Asia, of reconstructing the empire inter- defined as its greatest threat. nally to guarantee the unquestioned predominance of Turks. The Armenian Genocide and the Holocaust were the result of Armenians sat in the middle of this grand vision, their ancestral state policies. The CUP government and the Third Reich initi- settlement in eastern Anatolia threatening (in Young Turk eyes) a ated, organized, and implemented the massacres. But both

Anush Meneshian Aristakes Meneshian

BORN: Sepastia, Sepastia; 1895 BORN: Govdoon, Sepastia; 1888 DIED: Jerusalem; 1945 DIED: Chicago, Ill.; 1981

36 | THE ARMENIAN WEEKLY | APRIL 26, 2008 1_Weitz_Per_4 copy 1 4/13/08 10:48 AM Page 37

PERSPECTIVES

events, like virtually every other genocide in the 20th century, dictatorial regime can ever win complete compliance of its pop- also involved mass participation. The literal reshaping of the pop- ulation. Some people, however few in number, will find their ulation, the systematic violence against Armenians and Jews, moral core and protest or protect their endangered neighbors, at could not simply be decreed and could not happen over night. It great risk to themselves. We know that there were such Germans, had to be created by the hard work of thousands and thousands , and others in occupied Europe. And now, from the research of people, those who actually carried out, by gunpoint, the depor- of Taner Akcam, Richard Hovannisian, and others, we also know tations; kept trains moving (of Armenian as well as Jewish that there were such Turks who tried to protect Armenians. Those deportees); guarded victims in makeshift gathering points or are the people from whom we take sustenance, upon whom we concentration camps; pulled the triggers, raised the swords, or can envisage a more humane future despite the enormous threw in the gas; and moved into the farms, homes, and apart- tragedies that befell both Armenians and Jews. ments, seized the furnishings and the businesses, of those who Armin Wegner and Raphael Lemkin were two such individ- were eliminated. In this way, the larger society became complicit uals. The Armenian Genocide and the Holocaust are linked in the act of genocide, and that is why in both instances, the post- through their biographies. Wegner was a medic in the German genocidal society remains haunted by the past. army during World War I, posted to the Ottoman Empire. He was But herein lies one of the very great differences between these outraged at the atrocities committed against Armenians. The events. After World War II, Germany assumed legal, moral, and photographic record we have of the Armenian Genocide is to a economic obligations to the Jewish survivors of the Holocaust, very great extent a result of the pictures he secretly shot and and now, finally, to other victims of Nazi crimes. None of this smuggled out of Anatolia and the Middle East. Twenty years later, happened easily or without resentment. The payments to sur- he protested, in a letter to Adolf Hitler no less, the rapidly escalat- vivors were always insufficient and, ultimately, nothing could ing persecution of Jews, an act for which he was interned for a really recompense Jews for the loss of loved ones. But starting time in a concentration camp. Raphael Lemkin, a Polish Jew, with the 1952 reparations agreement between Germany and coined the word “genocide.” As a young man he had been deeply Israel, Germany has assumed its obligations. With extensive affected by the atrocities committed against Armenians. He was school curricula about the Nazi period and the Holocaust, in Germany as a law student in 1921 when Soghomon Tehlirian memorials, monuments, and museums all over the country and assassinated Talat Pasha, the main architect of the Armenian Genocide. Tehlirian was put on trial but acquitted by a German Germany has become a model for how a country comes to court. Through these events, Lemkin sought to learn more terms with and moves beyond the commission of atrocities in about what had happened to the name of its people. In stark contrast, the present-day Armenians and began his intel- lectual and political quest that Turkish state is a model for denying the past and refusing to culminated, in 1944, in his invention of the word “geno- recognize any of the injustices perpetrated by its predecessor. cide” and, in 1948, in the adop- tion by the United Nations of the “Convention on the Prevention not just in Berlin, Germany has become a model for how a and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide.” Lemkin’s valiant country comes to terms with and moves beyond the commis- project was driven by his deep revulsion against the atrocities sion of atrocities in the name of its people. In stark contrast, the committed against both Armenians and Jews. Although he had present-day Turkish state is a model for denying the past and suffered very personally from the Holocaust—he learned after refusing to recognize any of the injustices perpetrated by its the war that 49 members of his family had been killed by the predecessor. Nazis—his humanitarian sensibility extended far beyond the Finally, the Armenian Genocide and the Holocaust are linked tragic fate of his own people and included, especially, Armenians by one other feature, one that gives us hope for the future: by the as well. And he hoped that by inventing and defining a new word, humanitarians who protested the atrocities unfolding before he could better convey the enormity of the crimes and, hopefully, their eyes and who sought to protect their neighbors. In forestall their repetition against other peoples. Eichmann in Jerusalem, Hannah Arendt’s report and analysis of The humanitarianism of Wegner and Lemkin and the many the trial of SS bureaucrat , who was responsible individuals, their names often unknown to us, who tried to pro- for transporting Jews to the extermination camps, Arendt wrote tect Armenians or Jews show us another way that the Armenian that even if only one or two Germans refused to follow Nazi Genocide and the Holocaust are linked events—and enable us to orders to kill Jews, that suffices to show us that no murderous and have hope for the future despite the tragedies of the past. a

Berjouhe Tateosian Caprielian Minas Caprielian

BORN: Khouylou (Telgatin), Kharpert; 1911 BORN: Havhav, Palou; 1904 DIED: ; 1997 DIED: New York City; 1993

April 26, 2008 | THE ARMENIAN WEEKLY | 37 2_Ayata_Per_5 4/13/08 6:25 PM Page 38

PERSPECTIVES

SEARCHING FOR ALTERNATIVE APPROAC A Plea Armenian–

By Bilgin Ayata

n the summer of 2004, I visited the village Kursunlu near Diyarbekir (Amed/Dikranagerd) as part of my field research on the internal displacement of Kurds in Turkey.2 This village had been forcibly evacuated in 1993 by Turkish security forces upon the refusal of its inhabitants to become village guards. Since the most recent example of through in this region has not received much attention neither inside nor outside of Turkey, allow me to summarize briefly.3 From 1990–98, the rural areas in southeast Turkey were system- atically depopulated and large parts were destroyed during armed Iclashes between the PKK and the Turkish military. As part of the Turkish military strategy of “low-intensity conflict,” a system of vil- lage guards had been introduced in 1985 that offered weapons and a salary to Kurdish villagers to join the military in fighting the PKK. The idea of creating a local militia to pit the population against each other was certainly not new to the region: About a century ago, members of Sunni Kurdish tribes were recruited into the Hamidiye Light Cavalry, which became a major force employed to terrorize and massacre the non-Muslim population.4 This time, however, the creation of the village guard system proved to be more difficult than the Hamidiye, since it was set up against a Kurdish organization that was rapidly increasing its base among the . The PKK denounced as traitors those villages that accepted the weapons

Arpiar Missakian, born 1894, ; Photo by Ara Oshagan

38 | THE ARMENIAN WEEKLY | APRIL 26, 2008 2_Ayata_Per_5 4/13/08 6:25 PM Page 39

ACHES TO RECONCILIATION: a for –Kurdish Dialogue1

of the state, and carried out violent attacks against those villages.5 heightened tension in the region due to the recent military incur- The military, on the other hand, regarded the villages refusing to set sions into northern Iraq and the resurgence of the armed clashes up village guards as traitors to the state and raided them in order to between the PKK and the Turkish army since 2006. In the absence “empty” them. Hamlets at strategic locations in remote rural areas of a political solution to the Kurdish conflict and a political will to were also evacuated and destroyed to cut off logistic support for the confront state crimes of the past and present, state practices such PKK. It is estimated that out of 5,000 villages and hamlets, over 3,400 as displacement can always resurge. were evacuated and at least one million Kurdish villagers were dis- Allow me to go back to my visit at the Kursunlu village in 2004. placed. Accounts from the displaced say that the implementation of Several petitions from the villagers to return had been declined by the displacement was often carried out with brutality and violence. the gendarme for security reasons. However, the Diyarbekir branch It deprived the displaced Kurds not only of their homes but of their of the Human Rights Association (IHD) knew that a few elderly way of life, along with their sources of income. Today, the majority Kurds had returned to the village for the summer despite the prohi- of the displaced villagers live impoverished and marginalized in bition, living in tents and little huts surrounded by landmines that urban centers in the southeast or in shantytowns of western metrop- were still around the village. Together with a colleague, we joined a olises in Turkey, disregarded by the state and the general public. small delegation of the IHD making our way up to the village, anx- For more then a decade, the Turkish state denied the existence ious not to step on any mines. Once a prosperous village with over of a strategy of forced displacement, and conceded merely to the 150 families, what we encountered resembled more a skeleton of the existence of 378,000 “migrants” whose villages were “evacuated for former village: some remainders of walls of houses, wild growing security reasons.”6 Since the lifting of the emergency rule in 2002 plants and trees with the rusted metal of farm equipments lying (which had been in place since 1987 in 13 overwhelmingly around. The only intact building was the mosque, where the imam Kurdish-populated provinces), displaced villagers have petitioned of the village welcomed us. He and a few old men and women the state to return to their villages. Officially, the government now insisted on living in this ghost village mainly for three reasons: to allows the return of displaced Kurds, yet its unwillingness to clear look after their fields, to be close to the graves of their relatives, and the landmines in the region, its expansion (not abandonment) of to spend their remaining days in the village where they were born. the village guards system, and its effort to redesign the region In this eerie setting of a destroyed habitat, where it was not diffi- according to state security considerations poses major obstacles cult to imagine how lively it might have looked before the displace- for the return of the displaced villagers. The prospects for recon- ment strategy, I was overwhelmed and humbled by the painful struction and resettlement are even further dimmed by the experiences of these old people sitting in dignity among ruins and

April 26, 2008 | THE ARMENIAN WEEKLY | 39 2_Ayata_Per_5 4/13/08 6:25 PM Page 40

Ayata

landmines, just to be near their memories and graveyards. I did not years, was sitting silently under an almond tree. She had returned to ask some questions that went beyond the visible destruction of the the village because of her son, who was buried in the village ceme- village. For instance, I could have asked the imam when the mosque tery. In 1993, he was shot dead by security forces when the military was actually built, since it looked rather new. I could have asked raided the village. Soon after, her family and the entire village had to about the fields that he has been tilling all his life and which had been leave, taking only a few items with them. She moved with her nine unlawfully taken away from him by village guards after his displace- children and many grandchildren first to Diyarbekir, where living ment. I could have asked who they had belonged to before becom- costs were too expensive, then to Ergani (Argheny), and then came ing his. When one of the elders mentioned that the Kurdish name of back by herself to her village. In the meantime, the case of the mur- “I want this state to apologize for killing my son. My son was a shepherd; they took him away and gave me his dead body. I want them to apologize for what they took away from me. I want justice before I die.”

Kursunlu is “Pirejman,”I could have asked if it also had an Armenian der of her son made it to the European Court of Human Rights. The name, or, more directly, if he knew where Armenians used to live Turkish government had offered the family 17,000 pounds for a before they were killed and deported almost a hundred years ago. I friendly settlement to close the case. Despite the three teeth remain- could have asked if there were any Armenian villages nearby that are ing in her mouth, despite her children and grandchildren living in today known as Kurdish villages. But how much room is there for a dire poverty, and with no prospects for an improvement of their liv- ferociously suppressed history when the knowledge of the presence ing conditions in sight, she declined the government’s financial was already so suppressed, divided, and contentious? offer for a friendly settlement. “I want this state to apologize for killing my son. My son was a shepherd; they took him away and n that very moment in Kursunlu, my main concern was gave me his dead body. I want them to apologize for what they took to understand the scope of the destruction that hap- away from me. I want justice before I die.” Who else could better pened a decade ago, since this was as obscured to the relate to this desire for justice than readers of the Armenian Weekly? public as was the Armenian Genocide. The majority of Who else could better understand the sorrow and desire for justice the population in Turkey even now is completely igno- than Armenians, who survived the genocide or grew up with the Irant and unaware of the destruction and violence that the region memories of it? And who else should better understand Armenian experienced in the course of the displacement process. Apart from demands for justice and recognition than these displaced Kurds? As the activities of a few human rights organizations and individuals, I stated in the beginning, I did not raise this issue in Kursunlu. But the majority of scholars and intellectuals from Turkey remained over the past few years, I have followed the discussions among silent during the 1990-98 period, when the massive displacement Kurdish activists and intellectuals on the Kurdish responsibility and happened. What separates Kurds in Turkey today from the major- the need for a proactive Kurdish confrontation about their roles ity of the population is no longer just a difference in language and before, during, and after the Armenian Genocide.7 culture, but the very difference in collective memory based on the knowledge and experiences such as that of the displacement. Yet, learly, this is not an easy topic, yet some positive experiences that put a deep rift on one level can open paths for steps can already be noted. A growing number of reconciliation on another, if the opportunity is taken. There is a Kurdish intellectuals, activists, and politicians have strong case to be made if one takes the relationship between publicly either apologized for or acknowledged Armenians and Kurds. Before elaborating further, let me go back Kurdish participation in the genocide. Kurdish to the Kursunlu village, to an encounter that struck me the most. Cintellectuals (such as Eren Keskin, Naci Kutlay, Canip Yildirim, One elderly woman, who appeared much more aged than her 63 Amir Hassanpour, and Recep Marasli) have addressed the differ-

Nver Kinossian Nadossian Garabet Cimen

BORN: Yalova; 1894 BORN: Efkere; 1900 DIED: New Jersey; 1986 DIED: Istanbul; 1973

40 | THE ARMENIAN WEEKLY | APRIL 26, 2008 2_Ayata_Per_5 4/13/08 6:25 PM Page 41

PERSPECTIVES

ent aspects of the genocide, and pushed for further debates. There After the transition from empire to republic, the Kurds experi- is even an entry on Wikipedia on “Kurdish recognition of the enced a transition themselves from “perpetrator” to “victim,” to Armenian Genocide” which lists declarations of numerous put it in crude terms. Having displaced and dispossessed the non- Kurdish organizations.8 Furthermore, Kurdish media outlets have Muslim population in east Anatolia, the Kurds soon became sub- become a valuable site in articulating views and providing infor- ject to massive state violence themselves in the early years of the mation in relation to the genocide. Lastly, personal knowledge and republic. Their resistance to the Turkification policies rendered orally transmitted memories of Kurdish involvement in the them hostile elements to the nation-state that was still in the mak- Armenian Genocide or questions on the Kurdish-Armenian rela- ing. After an excessive use of violence (including bombs and air tionship are no longer restricted to “internal debates” among dif- raids) that reached its peak in the Dersim massacres of 1937–38 ferent Kurdish communities, but are increasingly voiced publicly.9 and resulted in the deaths and massive displacement of tens of thousands, the very existence of the Kurds was categorically denied. hile these and other steps are good begin- Yet despite the denial, the use of force, and a massive ideological nings, they are certainly far from being suffi- apparatus, the efforts of the Turkish state to assimilate the Kurdish cient. This insufficiency notwithstanding, population were only partially successful. With the emergence of however, they carry a promising potential for the PKK, a large Kurdish mobilization was initiated that chal- reconciliation if expanded to a systematic lenged the state’s denial politics by demanding acknowledgement. Wengagement that confronts the issue in an open dialogue with Today, the term “Mountain Turk” may appear as a description Armenians. Unlike the Armenian-Turkish dialogue, which—as so from the Stone Age for the younger generation, but the losses, suf- forcefully analyzed by Henry Theriault and David Davidian in last ferings, and damages accompanying the Kurdish struggle for year’s special April 24 insert of the Armenian Weekly—suffers from recognition are still fresh in the memories of many Kurds, and get an unequal power relationship that has not only effectively cur- revived with ongoing discrimination and violence. In relation tailed the scope of discussion but also traversed “dialogue” to a with these experiences, one demand frequently articulated among synonym for domination, an Armenian-Kurdish dialogue carries Kurdish politicians in recent years is to establish a truth commis- the potential for an empowering alliance. It is exactly because of sion for the investigation of human rights violations during the this potential for empowering alliance that the isolation and internal war from 1984–99. Clearly, such demands will get a much compartmentalization of the “Armenian Question,” the “Kurdish different force and credibility if Kurds themselves enter a process Question,” and other questions in Turkish politics and intellectual to engage in truth-seeking regarding their own role in the debates exists in the first place. This compartmentalization is cer- Armenian Genocide. As stated before, the increasing articulation tainly not accidental and can be seen as a continuation of divide of Kurds regarding their participation in the genocide is a good and rule, benefiting what Theriault called the “imperial domina- step in the right direction. Yet there are some important inconsis- tion” of Turkish scholars in the intellectual discourse.10 tencies at stake when other political demands are articulated. Unfortunately, so far both Armenian and Kurdish intellectu- als have reinforced this compartmentalization by not seeking an or instance, some leading Kurdish politicians such intensified dialogue with each other. The nationalist demagogy as Ahmet Turk—who in a recent visit to Germany in Turkish politics—that seeks to prove that Abdullah Ocalan is apologized for the participation of Kurds in the geno- a traitor by ascribing Armenian ancestry to him—certainly had cide—like to point out that the Turkish Republic was a negative effect on both communities. Some may fear that such founded by Turks and Kurds together and therefore an empowering alliance could be portrayed by Turkish national- demandF a revision of the Turkish constitution that acknowledges ists as a union of the enemies of Turkey to demand land, com- Kurds as founding elements of the nation-state. While the inten- pensation, etc. It’s time to leave such fears behind. A mind-set tion of this political demand is to challenge the nationalist emphasis that investigates the ethnic-religious affiliation of a person to of the Turkish Republic, it inadvertently—and quite haplessly— disprove his or her integrity is a racist one. And a dialogue that confirms the Kurdish complicity in the horrific crime that laid the does not allow one to even think about issues of land and com- grounds for a religiously more or less homogenous nation-state. pensation is dishonest, at best. Taking the current borders of the In light of the pressure of the Turkish media, intellectuals, and Turkish nation-state as the ultimate (and indisputable) reference military, the current trend in Kurdish politics is to prove their point while criticizing the nationalist foundations of Turkey is commitment to the current borders of the Turkish state and their not a post-nationalist but rather a soft-nationalist stance. For a loyalty to the sovereignty of the Turkish Republic.11 While this is genuine dialogue, we need to contest these discursive limitations not surprising given the unilateral conditionality that only Kurds instead of trying to appease and navigate within them. I believe and Armenians are exposed to (that they have no territorial claims, that an Armenian-Kurdish engagement has the potential to that they want to live in peaceful co-existence, that they disavow supersede such limitations and engage in such genuine dialogue. the PKK, ASALA, or any use of violence), and while Turkish politi- Let me explain why. cians and scholars never have to pass this test for proper liberal

Agop Gigiyan Maryam Yildiz Gigiyan

BORN: Gigi, Kayseri; 1918 BORN: Gigi, Kayseri; 1920 DIED: Boston, Mass.; 2002 DIED: Boston, Mass.; 2002

April 26, 2008 | THE ARMENIAN WEEKLY | 41 2_Ayata_Per_5 4/13/08 8:37 PM Page 42

Ayata As scholars of displacement know the answer to the question “When does displacement end?” has not yet been determined.13

conduct, it is imperative for Kurds to understand what kind of ENDNOTES memories get revoked in Armenians with such professions to the 1 I would like to express my deep gratitude to Banu Karaca and Seyhan founding of the nation-state and the Turkish-Kurdish bond. Bayraktar for their valuable comments and insights. In an Armenian-Kurdish dialogue, such inconsistencies could 2 This was part of a research project I carried out with Deniz Yukseker. be debated, yet I have not seen Armenian intellectuals responding 3 For an extensive analysis, see Ayata, B., and Yukseker, D., “A Belated to or engaging Kurdish efforts to address the issue. Their attention Awakening: National and International Responses to the Internal seems to be solely devoted to their Turkish counterparts, which Displacement of Kurds in Turkey,” in “New Perspectives on Turkey,” inevitably reinforces the Turkish normality. However, in the com- no. 32, fall 2005, pp. 5-42. See also, TESEV, “Coming to Terms with mon experience of displacement, dispossession, and denial, an Forced Migration: Post Displacement Restitution of Citizenship open engagement of Armenians and Kurds about history, justice, Rights in Turkey,” 2007. and reconciliation on the territory they once lived on together may 4 For a brief overview, see Robert Olson (1989) and Martin van enable a language and political possibilities on what coexistence Bruinessen (1992). and plurality really could mean. 5 See David McDowall, 2004. 6 In 2004, the Turkish government revised this policy of denial by entering et me end with one example of a political possibility. into an international dialogue with the EU, UN, and other international Since 2002, Turkey has entered into an international dia- bodies on the Return and Resettlement of IDPs. For a critical analysis of logue with the UN, EU, World Bank, and other organi- this process and its political implications, see Ayata, B. (2006), “From zations on the problem of internal displacement. Turkey Denial to Dialogue? An Analysis of Recent International and National has officially committed to engage in the issue of reset- Policies to the Problem of Internal Displacement in Turkey,” paper pre- Ltlement and reconstruction, while the EU has signaled that is inter- sented at the International Symposium “Internal Displacement in Turkey ested in providing financial support for such efforts due to their and Abroad: International Principles, Experiences and Policy Proposals” interest in regional development. For instance, a pilot project on the at the Turkish Foundation for Economic and Social Studies in Istanbul, integration and resettlement of displaced peoples has been carried Dec. 4-5, 2006, available at www.tesev.org. out by the UNDP and the governorship of Van.12 While it is unreal- 7 A discussion of what the multiple roles of Kurds were exceeds the istic to expect any sincere efforts by the Turkish state to undertake scope of this paper. Yet, there has not been sufficient research carried out on this issue. The Kurds themselves are not a monolithic commu- actions for the return of those who it displaced in the first place, it is nity, and local, religious, and political differences have resulted in important to be aware that such a debate exists at the policy level. complex relationships. For instance, research on Armenians and Alevis Armenian-Kurdish dialogue can explore how the region could and in Dersim point out the respectful coexistence of both communities should look like when taking the Armenian expulsion into consider- and their refusal to join the massacres of the Armenians (see Hayreni, ation. As scholars of displacement know, the answer to the question Hovsep (1969), Ermeni Kirimlari ve Dersim). 13 “When does displacement end?” has not yet been determined. In 8 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kurdish_recognition_of_the_Armenian_genocide. this sense, there is no reason one should not brainstorm about 9 Two recent examples: The latest documentary, “Close-up ,” how—at the very minimum—one could integrate memories of the by Kurdish director Yuksel Yavuz contains a brief segment on the pre-genocide Armenian reality in the region. Certainly, such a dis- Armenian Genocide; witness accounts of the genocide by Kurds, cussion would raise uncomfortable issues for Kurds regarding the printed in the Armenian Weekly, March 29 and April 5, 2008. seizure of Armenian property and the Kurdification of entire vil- 10 Henry Theriault, “Post-Genocide Imperial Domination,” The lages, but there is no way around these volatile questions if the quest Armenian Weekly, April 24, 2007 for reconciliation is sincere. An apology that has no consequences for 11 See e.g. the article “Sevr travmasi ve Kurtlerin empatisi” by Kurdish the future is at best a soothing act. The most critical task for anybody MP Aysel Tugluk in the Turkish daily Radikal, May 27, 2007. that sincerely condemns the genocide of the Armenians is to take it 12 www.undp.org.tr/Gozlem2.aspx?WebSayfaNo=24. from the safe and distant location of the past and situate it as a chal- 13 See e.g. Special Issue on this topic in the Forced Migration Review, lenge of and for the present. a May 2003.

Markrid Hagop Apamian Magarian Angele Hovhannes Magarian

BORN: Bandirma; January 6, 1869 BORN: Bandirma; March 8, 1899 DIED: Boston, Mass.; December 13, 1952 DIED: Boston, Mass.; October 26, 1987

42 | THE ARMENIAN WEEKLY | APRIL 26, 2008 3_Papazian_PER_2 4/12/08 2:49 PM Page 43

PERSPECTIVES

Thoughts on Armenian-Turkish Relations It is no secret that Turkey is currently going through a major crisis, a struggle between the secular-nationalist elites and the patriotic-reforming, slightly religiously inclined, democratically elected government in place.

By Dennis R. Papazian

he hard-line secular-nationalists have can only hope that the situation will change for the better, that of the moderates will be gone so far as to bring a court case against heard once more amid the clamor of the struggle. Secondly, I believe the Erdogan government the government accusing it of betraying has been trying to appease the so-called “deep Turkey’s secular heritage and seeking to state,” the elite reactionary forces, by carrying on a fruitless but intensive campaign against the haveT it outlawed under certain esoteric provisions in recognition of the Armenian Genocide and by allowing the military to make incursions into Turkey’s constitution. This is a wild and unexpected northern Iraq against so-called “Kurdish rebels.”I turn of events. had been hoping that the government was appeasing the reactionary nationalists until it These radical machinations are a fight for Turkey’s soul, and solidified its position in power, and that then, at the appropriate the fight is growing ugly. I would not have imagined such a crisis time, it would attempt to bring peace between Turks and Kurds, even a few years ago. It shows that Turkey has a long way to go to and Turks and Armenians. That would be a clever political move becoming a truly democratic and multi-ethnic state. This internal worthy of Erdogan. crisis has thrown off my expectations of Turkish-Armenian recon- I am sure that the vast majority of the Turkish establishment ciliation in the not too distant future; but in any case I will realizes that the Young Turk government did, indeed, carry out a describe what could be the best possible scenario under the pres- policy intended to uproot the Armenians from their traditional ent circumstances. One can always hope against hope. homeland and exterminate them by sending them on lethal death First, I still have hope that Turkish civil society is growing marches into the burning deserts of Syria. As Talat Pasha said to strong enough to make a difference. The evidence so far is cer- Henry Morgenthau, the U.S. Ambassador to the Ottoman Empire, tainly inconclusive. The secular-nationalists are making their last “I have done more to solve the Armenian question in one year stand and apparently will stop at nothing. In cases where the than Abdul Hamid II did in a lifetime.” That is a clear sign of pre- extremists are at war, the moderates are no longer listened to. One meditation, indeed.

April 26, 2008 | THE ARMENIAN WEEKLY | 43 3_Papazian_PER_2 4/12/08 2:49 PM Page 44

Papazian

I also see that many independent-thinking Turks, including second-guess the Armenian public is stepping out on a slippery many prominent Turkish scholars, are trying to educate the Turkish slope. No matter what they might advise, there is no question that population on the realities of Turkish history, which includes the they will be subject to heated and bitter criticism from one quar- unjust lethal treatment of Armenians. Many of these scholars, how- ter or another. I certainly would never consider going down that ever, are disinclined to use the G-word (genocide) for fear of alien- road. It would be public suicide. ating the Turkish masses and closing their minds to new thinking I will take a different approach, however, and explain what I before it can take root. I think Armenians should work with such think the Turkish government will be willing to give to put this high-minded people, whom I personally admire, although politi- nagging problem behind it. First, I don’t believe they would be will- cally speaking it is not enough. Nevertheless, it is these scholars and ing to give up land under public pressure. No state historically has educators who are preparing the ground for political change by willingly done this kind of thing. Even Great Britain will not give building a fresh constituency in Turkey for recognition. up Gibraltar to Spain, or the Falkland Islands to Argentina, two ter- The real question is whether those leading the anti-genocide ritories of little account to anyone. recognition drive can ever be reached. Secondly, I don’t believe they As unlikely as it seems, it is a distinct would do anything that puts them possibility. Thinking in terms of real under criminal liability. No state politik, these people must realize that It is well known would allow its citizens to be prose- they are losing the battle of interna- cuted for a 90-year-old crime, no tional recognition. Their attempts to in American business matter how heinous. Nevertheless, I avoid recognition have backfired over do think that civil restitution, in some and over again, bringing the circles that when a form or another, is a distinct possibil- Armenian Genocide to almost univer- ‘‘ ity. In other words, I believe that the sal public acknowledgment, as evi- company makes grave Turkish state in the not too distant denced by the positive world-wide future would seriously consider mak- attention the Armenians received dur- mistakes injuring the ing some sort of financial restitution ing the recent debate over the recogni- to the Armenians, preferably to indi- tion by the U.S. Congress of the public, the best policy is viduals or recognizable groups of Armenian Genocide. Such recogni- individuals, namely to those who can tion passed the House of Represe- to openly confess, make make reasonable claims. There is even ntatives in 1975 and 1984, and the more it might be willing to do in initiative is not dead even today. apologies, offer some terms of restitution. There are only two countries, in my I believe the Turkish government estimation, that can help these denial- restitution, and then might consider the return of Armenian ists realize they are only making mat- properties, once owned by the com- ters worse for Turkey with their public get on with life. munity, back to Armenian community ineptitude. I believe that both the foundations. I also expect that they United States and Israel see great neg- might be willing to lift all of the bur- ative implications in backing, for purely political reasons, Turkey’s densome and inequitable limitations on Armenian public life in denialism. I think both the United States and Israel see denialism as Turkey. That is, Turkey would recognize its legal and moral an albatross around their necks, forced on them by Turkey’s reac- responsibilities under the Treaty of Lausanne. tionary politicians, and are behind the scenes trying to convince the Finally,’’ I believe that Turkey might be willing to restore Armenian nationalistic Turks that confession would be the better policy. monuments and to publicly recognize the contributions of It is well known in American business circles that when a com- Armenians to Anatolian civilization and indeed to the Turkish state pany makes grave mistakes injuring the public, the best policy is to itself. And, of course, all this is based on the assumption that Turkey openly confess, make apologies, offer some restitution, and then will first lift the embargo against Armenia, attracting the positive get on with life. Those who let the problem drag on by denying it, attention of the Armenian people. as Turkey is doing, suffer continuous negative consequences that Is any of this possible? I think so. The world is growing smaller are quite counterproductive in the long run. each year, national borders—particularly in Europe—have less and The Turkish state has much more to gain by confessing to the less meaning, populations currently are being mixed, exclusive Armenian Genocide than by its inept, counterproductive policy of nationalism is on the wane, and the world is in travail. Changes are denial. The question that they have to contemplate is what kind of coming rapidly. Anything can happen. Who knows what might be restitution would satisfy the Armenians, what would bring this expected in the near future? Wise people, however, think of various conflict to an end? Here, any Armenian commentator who tries to possible scenarios and plan ahead. Armenians should do no less. a

Constantine (Gosdan) Bozajian Edward Bozajian

BORN: Arabkir; September 10, 1910 BORN: Arabkir; 1887 DIED: ; February 11, 2005 DIED: Arabkir; 1915

44 | THE ARMENIAN WEEKLY | APRIL 26, 2008 5_KOTCHIKIAN_PER_2 4/13/08 8:38 PM Page 45

PERSPECTIVES

TURKISH ARMENIAN RELATIONS The Civil Society Dimension

By Asbed Kotchikian

The multidimensional aspects of Turkish-Armenian relations This being said, it is important to make it clear that civil soci- have gone through monumental changes in the last two decades. ety operates independent of democracy; it is quite possible to have Some of the more important changes include: the breakup of the elements of civil society operating in non-democratic countries, Soviet Union and the rise of an independent Armenian state, while at the same time not all democracies are conducive to civil which has added a state-to-state dimension to the bilateral rela- society movements.2 tions; the changing political landscape of Turkey, where in the last While civil society and democracy could be mutually exclusive, decade a rising civil society movement has emerged and started civil society and commitment to civil action go hand in hand. challenging the conventional socio-political processes in the Commitment to civil action is characterized as individuals acting in country; and the shifting perceptions within the Armenian dias- unison to advocate “collective action within an array of interests, Tporas regarding Turkish-Armenian relations after the appearance institutions and networks, developing civic identity, and involving of an internationally recognized actor—Armenia—and its inclu- people in governance processes.”3 Furthermore, commitment to civil sion in the genocide recognition equation. action occurs through participation in civil society where individual This article argues that the civil society dimension in Turkish- citizens are provided with opportunities to interact with politicians Armenian relations is important, based on the premise that only to influence policy or politics.4 The development of civil society and in the case of a well-developed and strong civil society in both civil action are possible either through government encouragement entities will it be possible to address the issue of genocide in a con- and development of such institutions—in the case of more open and structive way. democratic societies—or from a bottom-up process where grass- root organizations coalesce to form civil society groups and encour- CIVIL SOCIETY AND DEMOCRACY age citizen participation in political processes. Finally, in a democratic setting, civil society acts as a mediator The definition of civil society that this research focuses on is taken between individuals and the state apparatus, hence acting as a conduit from the Centre for Civil Society at the London School of to communicate personal views and values into state institutions.5 Economics. According to this definition, a civil society: CIVIL SOCIETY IN TURKEY “...refers to the arena of un-coerced collective action around shared interests, purposes, and values. In theory, its institu- Today Turkey is undergoing major domestic changes which are not tional forms are distinct from those of the state, family and getting the attention that they deserve from the Armenian side. Over market...” the last eight decades, Turkey has been trying to redefine itself and “...commonly embraces a diversity of spaces, actors, and insti- find its place in a changing world, among changing ideas about what tutional forms, varying in their degree of formality, autonomy, it means to be Turkish. A growing number of human rights activists and power. Civil societies are often populated by organizations in Turkey as well as increased civil society movements have been try- such as registered charities, development non-governmental ing to force Turkey to change from within as well as without. organizations, community groups, women’s organizations, From within, the issues of respecting human rights and the faith-based organizations, professional associations, trade rights of minorities have been almost ever present in the public dis- unions, self-help groups, social movements, business associa- course of successive Turkish governments during the last several tions, coalitions, and advocacy groups.”1 [Emphasis mine] decades. While this discourse has been initiated and encouraged by

April 26, 2008 | THE ARMENIAN WEEKLY | 45 5_KOTCHIKIAN_PER_2 4/13/08 10:02 AM Page 46

Kotchikian

Ankara’s continued attempts for European Union membership, the Observing the current social and political developments in results have been more genuine than one would expect; in late Turkey, it is possible to argue that engaging those elements of 2004, there were some legislative changes to create a less restrictive Turkish society that are adamant to change the political status quo environment in Turkey and to allow civil society groups to func- in their country—by advocating for more openness to discuss tion as alternatives to the existing state institutions.6 This came as controversial issues—could yield better results than the oversim- the debate of whether Turkey has viable and self-sustaining civil plified view that Turkey is the same country it was 30 or even 10 society movements was “raging” in academic and policy circles.7 years ago. The lack of parameters for this engagement is what One manifestation of civil society activism in Turkey occurred complicates this task. What is meant by parameters is the identifi- in January 2007 with the assassination of the Turkish-Armenian cation of actors within Turkish society to engage them in commu- journalist Hrant Dink. The assassination of Dink on Jan. 19, 2007 nication with their Armenia counterparts; and the setting up of resulted in mass outcries by Turks who regarded Dink and his discussion points which, while seemingly non-controversial, could advocacy important for the development of an open Turkey. pave the way for a gradual shift towards identifying issues and top- There were mass demonstrations in the immediate aftermath of ics that make Turkish-Armenian rapprochement difficult. the assassination where demonstrators carried signs that read, Extended hands over the divide between Turkish and “We are all Hrant Dink, we are all Armenians.” While these out- Armenian societies should be based on—and with the goal of— cries were cautiously greeted by Armenians, it is quite possible mutual respect for civil society endeavors. Such a goal should be that for those Turks taking the streets, Dink’s assassination pro- well thought of and articulated to make sure that individuals, vided them with a symbol for their cause to push the envelope for groups, parties, and governments on both sides realize that it is socio-political reforms in Turkey.8 mutually beneficial to further the development of civil society. A Turkey where civil society and rule of law prevail would be more likely to recognize the genocide—or at least entertain the idea of CIVIL SOCIETY IN ARMENIA talking about the genocide in a critical matter—than one where Similar to the situation in Turkey, civil society movements in the government and society are unwilling to even fathom the idea Armenia are a new phenomenon. The past decade witnessed a of using the word “genocide.” a rise in scholarship on the development of civil society in the post-Soviet space, in general, and in Armenia, specifically.9 ENDNOTES Also similar to Turkey, the civil society movement in Armenia has witnessed more activism in the past several years, as there 1 Definition of civil society, Centre for Civil Society at the London School of has been considerable advancement in the way civil society Economics at www.lse.ac.uk/collections/CCS/introduction.htm#gener- ated-subheading2, retrieved on March 31, 2008. groups have functioned beyond the realm of NGO sector devel- 2 Brian O’Connell,“Civil Society: Definitions and Descriptions,”Nonprofit and opment and have shifted their attention from humanitarian assis- Voluntary Sector Quarterly 29 (September 2000), no. 3, p. 477. tance to democracy building focusing on issues such as human 3 Terry L. Cooper, Thomas A. Bryer, and Jack W. Meek, “Citizen-Centered trafficking and women’s participation in politics. 10 Collaborative Public Management,” Public Administration Review 66 Furthermore, the mass demonstrations that Armenia wit- (December 2006), supp. 1, p. 76. 4Ibid. nessed in the immediate aftermath of the 2008 presidential elec- 5 Patrick M. Jenlink, “Creating Public Spaces and Practiced Places for tions in February 2008 was viewed by many experts as a sign of a Democracy, Discourse, and the Emergence of Civil Society.” Systematic growing number of civil society groups in the country where Practice and Action Research 20 (October 2007), no. 5, p. 432. attention was given on the issue of government accountability and 6 See Filiz Bikemen, “Progress on Civil Society Legislation in Turkey,” The respect for human rights.11 International Journal of Not-for-Profit Law 7 (February 2005), no. 2. 7 For a detailed discussion on pre-2000 civil society development in Turkey, see M. Lutfullah Karaman and Bulent Aras “The Crisis of Civil Society in WHY CIVIL SOCIETY MATTERS Turkey,”Journal of Economic and Social Research 2 (2000), no. 2, pp. 39–58. 8 For a more detailed discussion on this issue, see Asbed Bedrossian and From the perspective of Turkish-Armenian relations, civil society is Asbed Kotchikian, “Hrant Dink: The Martyr for Many Causes,” Armenian bound to play an important role in the enhancement of communi- News Network/Groong Review & Outlook. (Feb. 1, 2007). Available at www.groong.com/ro/ro-20070201.html. cation between the two entities. While it is quite possible that the 9 See for instance Dirk J. Bezemer and Zvi Lerman, “Rural Livelihoods in initial stages of communication would have to tackle issues less Armenia,” Post-Communist Economics (September 2004) 16, no. 3, pp. “painful” than genocide recognition, it is conceivable that over time 333–348; Robert S. Chase, “Supporting Communities in Transition: The genocide will be put on the discussion agenda at a popular level and, Impact of the Armenian Social Investment Fund,” The World Bank by extension, at the government level. Civil society is an instrument Economic Review (2002), 16, no. 2, pp. 219–240; and a very recent exhaustive book by Armine Ishkanian titled Democracy Building and Civil to allow more voices to be heard in the various socio-political Society in Post-Soviet Armenia (Routledge, 2008). processes in any given country and as such facilitates more repre- 10 See for instance Anna Walker, “Nations in Transit 2007 Reports: Armenia,” sentative policies. However, the development of such an atmosphere Freedom House Report available atwww.freedomhouse.hu//images/fdh_ is conditioned by the establishment of legal boundaries to protect galleries/NIT2007final/nit-armenia-web.pdf, accessed on March 31, 2008. the emerging public space from the influence of state power.12 Both 11 See Armine Ishkanian, “Democracy Contested: Armenia’s Fifth Presidential Elections,” openDemocracy, March 4, 2008. Available at www.opendemoc- Turkey and Armenia have gone a long way to create those legal racy.net/article/democracy_power/caucasus/armenia_elections, accessed boundaries; however, civil society movements in both countries are on March 31, 2008. still in their infancy and require more time to entrench themselves 12 See Michael Bernhard, “Civil Society and Democratic Transition in East in their respective countries. Central Europe,”Political Science Quarterly 108 (Summer 1993), no. 2, p. 309.

46 | THE ARMENIAN WEEKLY | APRIL 26, 2008 4_AYSE_GUNAYSU_2 4/13/08 6:21 PM Page 47

PERSPECTIVES Thoughts from Xancepek (and Beyond)

By Ayse Gunaysu

ancepek” is what the Muslim population of Diyarbekir used to call “Gavur Mahallesi,” that is, the neighborhood where the infidels lived. I’m standing in the middle of the ruins of the Armenian Saint Giragos Church in Xancepek, “ looking at what remains of the exquisite examples of beautiful, refined masonry, and the arched columns and walls where only tiny bits of vividly colored tiles have been left, here and there. Only curiousX and caring eyes can see them. Above my friends and I, the sun shines, as there is no longer a roof. With the densely populated environs of the church in sharp con- trast to its desolation, the place is like a scene from a science fiction movie. The irra- tionality of having such an unattended historic place in the middle of an overpopulated city, with an absolute lack of any care, is evidence—and very painfully material—of a tragic interruption in Diyarbekir’s social history.

We enter one of the old Armenian houses. In the courtyard, a reality denied, and the present-day world, seemingly unaware of young girl is lying on a matress laid on the ground, obviously very the other one but falling victim to the same deeply rooted culture ill, with her head on the knees of an elderly women who sits with of violence. crossed legs, resting her head on her hand, eyes shut. In another For us, the absence of the Armenian world is so material that it corner three young girls sit around a big pot, doing some kitchen has an existence of its own. You can feel it every moment. work. They greet us, curious about who we are and where we It is even more disturbing by the fact that the present-day peo- come from.We talk to them, take pictures. Throughout the day we ple don’t know anything about the fellow countrymen of their wander around Xancepek, welcomed by the Kurdish families, ancestors. They know nothing about the exquisite craftsmanship mostly women, many of them not speaking Turkish at all. they once practiced, the beautiful products of a wide variety of There are two worlds living side by side in Xancepek: a lost professions and the works of art they created. They know nothing world, with dilapidated churches silently standing witness to a about the vivid intellectual life, the newspapers and periodicals

April 26, 2008 | THE ARMENIAN WEEKLY | 47 4_AYSE_GUNAYSU_2 4/13/08 6:21 PM Page 48

Gunaysu So, thanks to the successful engineering of the heart and mind and also one’s ability to manipulate his or her own mind, generation after generation the truth gradually ceases to be the truth.

published, the cultural riches. The objective reality is simply non- generation after generation the truth gradually ceases to be the existant here; it has no meaning, no content for the present inhab- truth. Knowledge ceases to be knowledge. And the crime ceases to itants. The mission to bury the entire civilization was successfully be the crime of the decision-makers alone and the perpetrator accomplished. ceases to be the only one actually committing the crime. The peo- ple collectively perpetuate the forgetfullness. ow many people now carry in their inner selves the Turkey to a great extent—and not only the new inhabitants of unbearably heavy memory of June 1, 1915, the day Xancepek—is unaware of the facts about the Armenians, one of when the Diyarbekir governor, Dr. Resid, “had his the oldest and most productive peoples of Asia Minor. militia evacuate 1,060 Armenian men and women of theH Armenian neighborhood Xancepek and escort them to the ere, too, the mechanism of knowing and not know- Diyarbekir plain through the Gate. The people were gath- ing is at work. In the collective subconscious of ered and a proclamation was read out loud, offering the Turkey, there is the vague awareness of the existence Armenians their lives in exchange for converting to Islam. of an Armenian, the musician, the architect, a neigh- Although the decision was not unanimous, the victims refused, Hbor making delicious food, a jeweler, read about in a memoire, or whereupon they were stripped of their clothes and belongings. heard about from an elderly relative, or seen in a movie. However, The militia and local Kurdish villagers then massacred them with curiosity and willingness to learn the whereabouts of these people, rifles, axes, swords, and daggers. Many women were raped, some their roots in this country, is somehow blocked. Ignorance, then, were sold as slaves. The corpses were either thrown in wells or is partly the responsibility of those who conceal the truth, but also trenches, or left on the plain to rot,‘the men on their stomachs, the partly of those who choose not to be curious. 1 women on their backs.’” There is another, very grave aspect of this “not-knowing” that his is the process whereby people who have fallen victim lies in the fact that one’s ability to remember and one’s perception to a genocide are killed twice, first by a weapon, second of reality is quite fragmented, as all the ruins of the very near his- by the denial of the truth. A genocide is even more of a tory of the Armenian civilization in Asia Minor have been genocide when you are not only condemned to death destroyed in search of gold and hidden riches thought to be left by butT also condemned to be non-existent in the minds of the people the previous owners. In other words, they do know or did know that remain, wiped off not only from the landscape but also from that there had been people living there, that they were forced to the hearts and minds of the children and grandchildren of your abandon their homes abruptly, and that they could have hidden once-fellow country people, once your neighbors. It is because of their wealth somewhere in the church or in their homes or in the this reason that denial is the continuation of the extermination wells. They knew that many of them had been killed, but they spiritually, emotionally and intellectually—a fact refused to be made themselves forget the painful truth, or buried it deep within acknowledged by those who still place denial within the scope of themselves; many did not tell the truth to their children and freedom of speech. a grandchildren. The human mind is frightening in its ability to remember pleasant facts and ignore unpleasant ones. It is the ter- ENDNOTES rifying capability of a human being to manipulate his or her own mind. So, thanks to the successful engineering of the heart and 1 Ugur Ungor, master’s thesis,“CUP Rule in Diyarbekir Province 1913–1923,” mind and also one’s ability to manipulate his or her own mind, University of Amsterdam, department of history, June 2005.

Frank V. Hekimian Hazel Gulaksian Tatson

BORN: Chemishgazac; December 12, 1910 BORN: Kharpert; October 15, 1912 DIED: Methuen, Mass.; June 3, 2003 DIED: Scottsdale, Az.; February 2, 2007

48 | THE ARMENIAN WEEKLY | APRIL 26, 2008 Theriault_non spread 4/12/08 4:43 PM Page 49

PERSPECTIVES

From Past Genocide to Present Perpetrator— Victim Group Relations and Long-Term Resolution A Philosophical Critique

By Henry C. Theriault

n recent years, there has been much discussion of relations between Armenians and Turks. A move- ment toward what is termed “reconciliation” has emerged, with committed adherents in both general groups. A key fracture between different participants has turned on the role, if any, that the “events of 1915” should play in contemporary relations. Some Turks with a denialist agenda have argued that “claims” about Turkish violence against Armenians in the past should be set aside so as not to keep driv- ing tensions between the two groups. Some progressive Turks who might accept that the Armenian Genocide is a historical fact as well Ias some Armenians have joined in this approach.1 Their utilitarian calculation is clear: The past cannot be changed, but if by putting aside the past we can effect a more positive present and future, then it is right to do so, even for Armenians who will benefit in various ways. I will examine the logic of this kind of claim below; here I wish only to point out that it functions to distinguish some PHOTO: JULIE DERMANSKY Armenians from others relative to relations with Turks. Some progressive Turks and many Armenians, on the other hand, see broad state and societal acknowledgment of the Armenian Genocide as the key to improved relations. Typically, they hold that such an acknowledgment will cause or signal a dramatic shift in Turkish attitudes toward Armenians (and Armenian atti- tudes toward Turks), erasing the primary cause of contemporary

April 26, 2008 | THE ARMENIAN WEEKLY | 49 Theriault_non spread 4/12/08 4:43 PM Page 50

Theriault

Turkish prejudice against Armenians and Armenian “prejudice” entreaty and clerical pronouncement. Resolution is not an event or against Turks. (Turkish prejudice is a structural problem. While outcome; it is a process, a very long-term process. Armenian-Turkish Armenians are often accused of anti-Turkish prejudice simply for relations are not a simple all-or-nothing proposition, either “in ten- raising the genocide issue. There might be individual prejudices, but sion” or “worked out perfectly.”They are better or worse along a con- these are not systematic and have no structural impact.) Indeed, tinuum of fine gradations, with no bold line between “good” and some progressive Turks go so far as to say that this acknowledgment “bad” relations. Likewise, they are not fixed, but can fluctuate will force an opening in the Turkish ultranationalist, anti-demo- through time in trajectories of improvement and deterioration. And, cratic ideology and institutions that have hindered political as I discuss below, they are greatly complicated by the fact that dif- progress in Turkey and thus transform Turkey positively.2 Some ferent Turks and Armenians as well as their governments, institu- Armenians agree and take this transformation of Turkey as their tions, organizations, etc., themselves vary in attitude and behavior, ultimate goal. Just as typically, the Turks and Armenians stop there: and interact with one another in all sorts of different ways. If the Armenian Genocide issue is set aside in order not to antagonize or alienate Turks, so that they willingly engage in a relationship with Armenians, the apparently smooth result will not be a resolution.

Not only is acknowledgment necessary for improved relations, it is In the case where there is no acknowledgment of the Armenian sufficient as well. Hrant Dink seems to have been in this camp. Genocide, it is trivially obvious that no resolution can occur. If the Finally, some Armenians and a few Turks see the need for a deeper Armenian Genocide issue is set aside in order not to antagonize or process relative to the Armenian Genocide and contemporary alienate Turks, so that they willingly engage in a relationship with Armenian-Turkish relations. They typically call for a reparative route Armenians, the apparently smooth result will not be a resolution. as the foundation for improved relations3: the Turkish government The genocide issue cannot be resolved if it is not even engaged. and society must make substantive strides to repair the damage done The “conciliation” will be an illusion, because it will depend on a by the Armenian Genocide, even if all parties recognize that anything denial of reality and will hold only so long as Armenians them- approaching full restitution is impossible—the dead can never be selves accept the success of the genocide and, in a sense, the right brought back to life, and the suffering, even intergenerational, can of Turks to have committed it. Turks who are not willing to engage never be eliminated. At best, the prospects for future Armenian sur- the genocide issue are refusing to give up the anti-Armenian atti- vival can be improved and the identity of Armenians made more tude behind the genocide itself. Even if that attitude is not dis- secure. While I hold that the path to resolution is through reparation played explicitly because of Armenian deference does not mean it that includes support for the security of Armenian society and iden- is not there, but rather that its target is not presenting itself. tity, I do not hold that even this, taken alone, is the correct model for Now let us say that acknowledgment occurs. Acknowledgment “reconciliation” between Armenians and Turks. might be presented as an end in itself—from a Turkish govern- The basis of the view I share with a few in the Armenian and mental perspective, Armenians will have had their due and should possibly Turkish communities is not simply—following Raymond stop bothering “us.”In such a case, nothing will have been accom- Winbush’s critique of white-black reconciliation efforts in the con- plished but the uttering of words that do not have meaning. The temporary United States4—that “reconciliation” is impossible work of building better Armenian-Turkish relations and of resolv- because there was never a period of stable “conciliation” between ing the outstanding issues of the Armenian Genocide will remain Armenians and Turks prior to the genocide. If a certain naivete open tasks that must be undertaken. If anything, an empty about history and inter-group relations is revealed by the very use “acknowledgment” will make that future work more difficult, by of the term “reconciliation,” we can address this by shifting our ter- creating the false impression that something, maybe everything, minology to, say, Armenian-Turkish “resolution.” But there is a has already been accomplished. deeper problem, the assumption that there can be a single, decisive Here the word is misrepresented as the deed. The pronounce- transition from “unresolved” to “resolved” through an act or set of ment that the issue has been resolved is mistaken for the reality acts. This assumption shared by antagonists from Turkish deniers to that it has been resolved. I do not mean to suggest that verbal pro- committed Armenian activists is curiously Christian, echoing the nouncements necessarily have no meaning. But they have mean- notion of instantaneous absolution for sins through supplicant ing only when they reflect material and social-structural changes

Satenig Guilkaneian Dulgarian Tateoss Dulgarian

BORN: Goteh, Erzerum; 1896 BORN: Sis; 1885 DIED: Chelmsford, Mass.; December 3, 1954 DIED: Lowell, Mass.; June 3, 1965

50 | THE ARMENIAN WEEKLY | APRIL 26, 2008 Theriault_non spread 4/12/08 4:43 PM Page 51

PERSPECTIVES

or cause them. And in this case, no real change will have occurred, ongoing effort by the Turkish state and society to take the actions except in the subjective perceptions of some Armenians, some and maintain the changes necessary to ensure good relations with Turks, and some others. Though changes in attitudes can result in Armenians. Descartes provides a relevant concept of permanence changes in behavior, treatment, and thus structure of relations, through time that can be applied to this view of Armenian- even if some people change their attitudes, if the acknowledgment Turkish relations. According to Descartes, it is incorrect to see by the state and broad society is not accompanied by widespread God’s creation of the world as a single act that guarantees the change, it is not meaningful. Here in my argument two threads future existence of the world. There is no inertia of existence. On intertwine. The second thread is argument for the claim that, in the contrary, at every moment God must re-cause the world for it the case of Armenian-Turkish relations, something more than a to exist.6 If we set aside the religious element here, we can recog- change in subjective attitudes, even widespread, is necessary. I will nize a more general principle: Social relations and structures do return to this point below, after finishing out the first thread. not maintain themselves, but require a constant application of Let us now say that acknowledgment is presented as confirma- effort. Thus, positive relations between Turks and Armenians are tion that changes are occurring or even have already occurred in not made permanent simply by being enacted at a given point in Turkish attitudes toward Armenians and the genocide. Is this then time. They must be reproduced and supported at every moment, a terminus? What is this acknowledgment except a promise? or the relations will degenerate. Clearly this is the case if the acknowledgment is meant to establish he reasons for this are more obvious than for the new relations: The acknowledgment is meaningful only if those continued existence of the world as Descartes relations are actually established. Yet, even if it is the statement treats it. His is a metaphysical speculation, the that attitudes and relations have already changed, then to be acceptance of a possible metaphysical principle meaningful it must be a promise that those changes will hold. that says an effect does not outlast its cause. This is After all, acknowledgment tomorrow could give way to worsened in fact not a tenable view, if we hold that a given relations and retraction the day after, just as happened in Tstate endures until a counter-force is applied, as in Newtonian , where a 1997 government report confirming that the physics. But, in the case of Armenian-Turkish relations, two major policy of forced removal of aboriginal children constituted geno- counter-forces are already in place. If sustained improvement in cide was later recanted by the Australian government. Armenian-Turkish relations is to be achieved, it will require long- term pressure against these forces. inally, what if acknowledgment is confirmed by repa- First is a widespread and active anti-Armenian prejudice. It is ration, for instance, the return of lands depopulated of manifested in the never-ending stream of anti-Armenian vitriol in Armenians through genocide, to the original Wilson- the Turkish media, including its English-language extension; ian boundaries of the 1918 Republic? Clearly this political statements and policies; attitudes on the street; the pub- would be closer to producing a sustainably improved lic support for the trial and assassination of Hrant Dink; and even relationship between Armenians and Turks. As I have the harassment and threats against Turkish scholars who recog- Fargued previously, the giving of reparations, especially land repara- nize the Armenian Genocide. Even if the government of Turkey tions, transforms acknowledgment and apology into concrete, recognizes the Armenian Genocide, this will not necessarily trans- meaningful acts rather than mere rhetoric: Reparations are a sacri- form those who are explicitly prejudiced against Armenians. In fice on the part of the perpetrator group’s progeny that confirm the fact, it could heighten their negative attitudes and actions against sincerity of expressed regret.5 Would reparation, then, represent a Armenians in a backlash, recalling the way in which Armenian resolution of the Armenian Genocide issue? The historical evidence civil-rights activism “provoked” genocidal violence against them says no. After all, in 1919, the then-Ottoman government accepted in 1915. This attitude at once pre-dates the genocide as a causal transfer of such land to the new Armenian Republic, as a form of factor, exhibited by and tapped by the Committee of Union and restitution for the genocide, restitution to support the reconstitu- Progress, and was extended and intensified by the success of the tion of the Armenian people. Within two years, however, the ultra- genocide. The Turkish ultranationalist Ottoman government, nationalist Kemal Ataturk and his forces had renounced this with broad participation by Turkish society, acted on its preju- transfer and militarily invaded and conquered these lands, which dices with impunity, and has never been called to account for have remained part of the Republic of Turkey ever since. This act those acts. The attitudes have thus been preserved within Turkish ushered in the long post-genocide period of Turkish antagonism state and society, persisting because no rehabilitative counter- against Armenians that has continued to this day in various forms, force has been applied. Indeed, one can argue that the success of from an aggressively pursued, extensive campaign of genocide the Armenian Genocide and the way in which nearly universal denial to military and other assistance to Azerbaijan in its attempted horrific violence against Armenians became a core norm of Turkey ethnic cleansing of Armenians in the Karabagh region. in 1915 actually supported an increased anti-Armenianism based What even this approach fails to recognize is that any act of res- on the belief that Armenians are fit targets of the most extreme olution is not an endpoint but the beginning of an obligatory prejudice and violence, which can be perpetrated with absolute

Loutfig Gumuchian Heranouche Semirjian Gumuchian

BORN: Bilecik; 1888 BORN: Adapazar; May 5, 1904 DIED: Toulon, France; 1943 DIED: Lowell, Mass.; August 5, 1984

April 26, 2008 | THE ARMENIAN WEEKLY | 51 Theriault_non spread 4/13/08 8:33 PM Page 52

Theriault

impunity. This general trend is true despite the heroic efforts of a Turkish dialogue partner will not necessarily challenge the of some Turks then to oppose the genocide and now to oppose dominance relation in which Turks and Armenians are caught.8 its denial. This suggests an important distinction. So far, I have not distin- Second, the result of genocide is not a neutral disengagement of guished clearly between “conciliation” and “resolution.” But does the perpetrator and victim groups, but the imposition of an extreme resolution of the genocide issue have to include conciliation? If the dominance of perpetrator group over victim group. If prior to the key to resolution is eliminating dismantling the domination pro- . . . If Turkey is transformed into a true liberal democracy, with universal territorial citizenship, equal participation of citizens in governmental decision-making, and protected individual rights for all citizens regardless of ethnicity and religion . . . then “the Armenian Question” will be solved.

Armenian Genocide, Turks and other Muslims as a group were for- duced or reinforced by genocide, then the answer is no. Instead, mally and practically dominant over Armenians as a group, the resolution of the issue might be seen as the prerequisite of concili- genocide maximized this, to give Turks and other Muslims absolute ation. Just, fair, and positive relations between Turks and dominance to the level of life and death over Armenians. Often we Armenians cannot produce a resolution of the genocide issue, but mistake the end of a genocide for the end of the harm done to the in fact can occur only on the basis of that resolution, that is, the victims. It is the end of the direct killing, perhaps, but the result of ending of the dominance relation. If a good relationship must be that killing and all other dimensions of a genocide is to raise the free and uncoerced, then so long as the Armenian Genocide issue power and position of the perpetrator group high above that of vic- is unresolved, truly positive group relations between Armenians tims, in material terms—political, economic, etc. 7 Resolution of the and Turks are not possible. For, within a dominance relation, there Armenian Genocide requires reversing this domination. can be no truly free, uncoerced relations. It is only through a Can this be accomplished through a change in relations moment of disengagement after resolution that Armenians and between Armenians and Turks? At an individual level, good rela- Turks can then try to build a new form of relation disconnected tions are possible, but this does not guarantee a change in overall from and thus not determined by the Armenian Genocide. Even group relations. Inter-group relations are very complex, and are the desire to build good relations with Turks as a group is a func- best understood as resultant vectors or overall patterns. Turks and tion of the genocide, a desire to have one’s humanity recognized by Armenians relate to members of their own groups and the other the progeny of the original perpetrators as a way of subjectively— group in all sorts of ways. Attitudes and acts of Turks can directly not actually—erasing the impact of the Armenian Genocide. enact or support domination of Armenians, can be neutral with respect to that domination, or can even resist that domination. imilarly, good relations with Armenians might have What is more, the resistance, for instance, can be by means of a for some Turks a therapeutic function that displaces direct engagement with Turkish anti-Armenianism or an embrace the putative goal of resolving the Armenian Genocide. of abstract humanism. While the latter might be a counter-force Being accepted by Armenians might authorize the against Turkish ultranationalism, it can also be at cross-purposes to subjective perception by such Turks that the genocide the direct engagement approach. Thus, a move against ultranation- issue is resolved, when it is not. Turkish-Armenian alism is not necessarily in line with absolute progress in Armenian- dialogueS might then be seen to be a matter of self-interest of Turkish relations. What is more, in some cases Armenians and Turks, even an exploitation of Armenians for the psychological Turks have very close individual relationships that can even take benefit of Turks in which Armenians fulfill the psychological primacy over intra-group tensions. All these factors play out to needs of Turks while their own objective need for resolution of the determine the overall structure of the relationship of Turks to genocide issue is pushed aside. Armenians as general groups. And this model indicates that indi- There remains an alternative possibility for resolution of the vidual attitudes and resistances, while they can influence group Armenian Genocide issue embraced by many Turkish and relations, do not determine them. The best intentions on the part Armenian progressives, that is, the democratic transformation of

Diran Kalfayan Haroutiun Boghos Arzouhaldjian

BORN: ; 1911 BORN: Urfa; 1905 DIED: Alexandria, Egypt; 2000 DIED: Beirut, Lebanon; 1983

52 | THE ARMENIAN WEEKLY | APRIL 26, 2008 Theriault_non spread 4/13/08 8:36 PM Page 53

PERSPECTIVES

Turkey. The logic is clear: If Turkey is transformed into a true liberal integration of Armenians into Turkish society requires much democracy, with universal territorial citizenship, equal participation more than calls of “We are all Armenians.” (I have to ask, can it of citizens in governmental decision-making, and protected indi- even be called Turkish society if it is to integrate Armenians? Will vidual rights for all citizens regardless of ethnicity and religion (and, this not be just another result of the genocide, the folding of one would hope, gender, sexuality, and race), then “the Armenian Armenians into Turkish identity?) In any event, Turks are not Question” will be solved. Armenians in Turkey will be full citizens Armenians, not because progressive Turks refuse the connection with every right protected. They will be free to be Armenians and nor because Armenians do, but because an unresolved history Turkish citizens. And, a democratic Turkey with free speech pro- forces a difference in basic material terms. tected will no longer penalize discussion of the Armenian Genocide. The goal of my analysis has not been to paint the picture of a Sooner or later, the truth will take hold, and the denialist machin- hopeless situation, but rather to appraise realistically the effective- ery of government, academia, and media will become obsolete and ness of Armenian-Turkish dialogue and other approaches for silent. Turkey will recognize the Armenian Genocide and the need resolving the Armenian Genocide issue. The conclusion I draw is to treat Armenians humanely. It will make good on the promise of simple: There is no easy path to resolution, no single step that can the 1908 Revolution to establish a multinational liberal democracy be taken to reverse the damage of the Armenian Genocide. What in Turkey. And, democracy will be a cure-all for Turkish society. is more, resolution does not require Armenian-Turkish dialogue It is true that the democratization of Turkey could bring these or positive relations; it requires an end to the Turkish dominance results. But the history of modern liberal democracies suggests oth- relation over Armenians and repair of at least some of the damage erwise. The United States maintained an expanding democracy done by it before, during, and after the Armenian Genocide. throughout its first century of existence, and yet maintained just as Further, while democratic transformation of Turkey might be strongly the slavery of people of African descent and pursued geno- desirable in itself, it is not a guarantee of resolution of the cidal policies against Native Americans. During its second century, Armenian Genocide issue. a it maintained a long-term apartheid segregationist system followed by a sophisticated form of neo-racist domination that is still with us ENDNOTES today—and yet it celebrates a comprehensive democracy. This is to say nothing of American democracy’s participation in the recent 1 Probably the best known example of denialist Turks joined with genocides in Indonesia, East Timor, and Guatemala. Britain could Armenians who, at least temporarily, set aside the Armenian Genocide self-congratulate on its wonderful constitutional democratic insti- is the Turkish-Armenian Reconciliation Commission (TARC). tutions while maintaining colonial rule in India and beyond. France 2 This is, for instance, Taner Akcam’s view, as stated for instance in his today is a great democracy, except for Arabs. And so on. In short, remarks at the Commonwealth of Massachusetts’ Official 91st there is nothing about the democratization of Turkey that is in the Anniversary Commemoration of the Armenian Genocide, House of Representatives Chamber, Massachusetts State House, April 21, 2006. least inconsistent with a continued, pervasive anti-Armenianism. On the contrary, one might almost see racism against some minor- 3 I myself have argued for this position in “Justice or Peace? The Meanings, ity inside or outside a state’s borders as an invariable accompani- Potentials, and Pitfalls of Armenian-Turkish Dialogue,” paper, International Association of Genocide Scholars 5th Biennial Conference, ment of modern democracy. Do people need someone who is lower Irish Human Rights Center, National University of Ireland, June 8, 2003; in order to accept equality across most of a society? “Land-based Reparations: The Case of the Armenian Genocide and Its The danger is that the public profession of democracy and civil Comparison to Native American Land Claims,” paper, “Whose Debt? rights for all in Turkey might mask a situation in which rampant Whose Responsibility?” Global Symposium on Reparations, Worcester anti-Armenian prejudice renders those rights empty and even State College, Dec. 10, 2005; “The Case for Reparations,” paper, dangerous in exercise. The fact is that the democratization of Armenians and the Left Conference, City University of New York Turkey in itself is nothing to Armenians: Its essence will be a redis- Graduate Center, April 8, 2006; and “Beyond Democratization: tribution of power and decision-making among the majority seg- Perpetrator Societal Rehabilitation and Ethical Transformation in the ments of the society. The very foundations of Turkish national Aftermath of Genocide,” paper, “The Armenian Genocide: Intersections identity, statehood, and culture were formed through genocide of of Scholarship, Human Rights, and Politics” Symposium, Watertown, Armenians and other Ottoman minorities. The assumption that Mass., April 24, 2007. mere democratization, a mere shifting of power relations, can 4 “Should America Pay?” lecture, Worcester State College, March 29, address these foundational issues is naive. Armenians cannot sim- 2007. ply be folded into a general democratic process. What Armenians 5 “Justice or Peace?” are in Turkey and beyond today has been deeply impacted and 6 See René Descartes, Meditations on First Philosophy, trans. Donald A. shaped by the raw political and material facts of genocide and its Cress, 3rd ed. (Indianapolis: Hackett, 1993), p. 33. unmitigated, expanding effects over more than nine decades. Any 7 These ideas I first presented in “Toward a New Conceptual Framework change in Armenians’ status must directly address this history and for Resolution: The Necessity of Recognizing the Perpetrator-Victim the present that it has produced. However well-intentioned, the Dominance Relation in the Aftermath of Genocide,” paper, 7th Biennial Conference of the International Association of Genocide Scholars, Boca Raton, Fla., June 7, 2005. Nevart Der Ghevontian Fereshetian 8 This emphasis on the structure, not individual, nature of oppression is BORN: Kharpert; 1915 influenced by Marilyn Frye’s “Oppression” chapter in The Politics of Reality: Essays in Feminist Theory (Freedom, Calif.: Crossing Press, 1983), pp. 1–16.

April 26, 2008 | THE ARMENIAN WEEKLY | 53 images 4/13/08 6:17 PM Page 54

Julie Dermansky

Julie Dermansky was born in New York City in 1966 and grew up in Englewood, N.J. She received her bachelor of fine arts from Tulane University in New Orleans and worked as a painter and sculptor in New York for 10 years. She ran a corporation making furniture in upstate New York before switching paths and committing herself to photography. She began traveling the world in January 2005. Since then, her most stable address has been her email address. Her focus now is on documenting sites of “dark tourism,” including genocide memorials. The series will be shown in New York at the Center for Architecture in September and at the University of Southern California in spring 1 2009. She has received a Thomas J. Watson Fellowship and a fast-track award from the National Endowment for the Arts. Her work has been written about in numer- ous publications including . She is currently based in New York.

2

7

54 | THE ARMENIAN WEEKLY | APRIL 26, 2008 images 4/13/08 6:17 PM Page 55

3

4

1. Stacked bones at one of Cambodia's many genocide memorials spread throughout the country. There are 72 known sites with genocide monuments. 2. At the Genocide Memorial and Museum of Murambi (outside of the university town of Butare), built on the site where thousands of bodies were exhumed. 1,800 of the bodies, now mummified remains, are displayed on tables in the rooms where the victims were imprisoned before being massacred. 3. Worker at the Genocide Memorial of Murambi in one of the rooms where the remains of the victims are on display. 4. Photos of victims on display at the Genocide Memorial and Museum in Murambi. 5. A metal gate at Dachau, a former concentration camp in Germany, which opened in 1933 and is now the site of a museum and memorial. 6. A road in the Majdanek Death Camp in Lublin, , now the home of a museum and memorial. 7. One of 8,000 grave markers in Srebrenica of 6 Bosnian Muslims massacred by Bosnian in 5 July 1995.

April 26, 2008 | THE ARMENIAN WEEKLY | 55 images 4/13/08 6:17 PM Page 56

Rivest

Alex Rivest was born and raised in Boston, Mass., and is currently working on a Ph.D. in neuroscience at MIT. His goals with photography are to bring awareness about small corners of the globe, to challenge people’s stereotypes and assumptions about others and their way of life, and to get people involved with charitable work. He has recently turned his attention to orphanages and poverty-alleviation in Rwanda, and sells his photography to support various causes and orphanage projects there. Currently he is helping fund six school-age children through school, is supporting two college students, and has raised enough money to build a bakery which uses its profits to support over 100 orphaned children, all by selling his photography. More of his work can be seen online at www.alexrivest.com; the charitable projects can be seen at www.horebrwanda.org. Alex encourages readers to contact him if they are interested in getting involved.

6

5

56 | THE ARMENIAN WEEKLY | APRIL 26, 2008 images 4/13/08 6:17 PM Page 57

1 2

4

1. Woman picking tea in southwestern 4. In the old center of Kigali, a woman walks Rwanda. High in the hills, tea is picked by carrying produce on her head; the man on hand and constitutes Rwanda’s largest the right is a local musician. export. 5. An orphanage outside of Kigali. 2. A woman in traditional clothing carries 6. While driving through Rwanda, every time her produce to a local market. you stop the car, curious children come 3. Workers at a tea processing facility. These out to greet you. men keep the fires burning that create the heat that dries the tea, prior to packaging. 3

April 26, 2008 | THE ARMENIAN WEEKLY | 57 ÊØ´²¶ð²Î²Ü ÎƼ²Î¾î 93-ð¸À... ¦ä³ïÇõÝ»ñáõ ϳï³ñ»É³·áÛÝÁ ï³Ýù ݳѳ- ï³ÏÝ»ñáõÝ…²ÝáÝó ÛÇß»Éáí ٻͳ÷³é ÏÁ ÙݳÝù »õ ã»Ýù »ñÏÝãÇñ ³å³·³Û ÷áñÓ³éáõÃÇõÝÝ»ñ¿Ý§£ ºÔºèÜÜ àô ... Êûëù ¾. ¹³ñáõ ·Çïݳϳݪ ÆÝã忱ë ëÏëÇÉ£ àñù³Ýá±í ·»ñïå³õáñ»É »ñÇï³ë³ñ¹ ²Ý³Ýdz ÞÇñ³Ï³óÇÇ Ñ³Û å³ï³ÝÇÝ…ò»Õ³ëå³Ýáõû³Ý Ù³ëÇÝ, ³éáÕç ÑÇÙ»- ä³ïÙáõÃÇõÝÁª Ù³ñ¹Ï³ÛÇÝ Ï»³ÝùÁ å³ÛٳݳõáñáÕ ñáõ íñ³Û å³ïñ³ëï»Éáõ »õ ¹³ëïdzñ³Ï»Éáõ »õ ½»ñÍ Ùݳ- Å³Ù³Ý³Ï Ïáã»ó»³É ³Ýѳë³Ý»ÉÇ ·áÛáõû³Ý, ³Ý¹³¹³ñ áõ Éáõ ͳÛñ³Û»ÕáõÃÇõÝÝ»ñ¿ áõ ã³÷³½³ÝóáõÃÇõÝÝ»ñ¿£ ³ÝݳѳÝç í³½ùÝ ¿ áñ ÏÁ Û³é³ç³Ý³Û, Çñ »ïÇÝ Ó·»Éáí ³Ýó- ¸Åáõ³ñ å³ñï³Ï³ÝáõÃÇõÝ ÙÁÝ ¿ »õ ëå³ëáõ³Í¿Ý áõ »³É ÙÁ, áñ Çñ ϳñ·ÇÝ ³Û¹ ѳٳß˳ñѳÛÇÝ ÃßݳÙǪ ųٳ- Ýϳïáõ³Í¿Ý ß³ï ³õ»ÉÇ µ³ñ¹£ ºõ ³Ûë µáÉáñÁ, ³ÛÝù³Ý ݳÏÇÝ Ù¿Ï ÷áùñ Ù³ëÝÇÏÇÝ ÏÁ í»ñ³ÍáõÇ£ ÙÁ »õë ¹ñáõ³Í »Ý ѳۻñ¿ÝÇ áõëáõóÇãÇÝ »õ ¹³ë³ïáõÇÝ ØññÇÏÇ ÙÁ ÝÙ³Ý, ųٳݳÏÁ ù³ñ áõ ù³Ý¹ Ï°ÁÝ¿ áõë»ñáõÝ íñ³Û£ ̳Ýñ µ»é ÙÁ, »õ ³ÛÝù³Ý ÙÁ Ýáõñµ, áñ ßñç³å³ïÁ, ³ñÙ³ï³ËÇÉ ÏÿÁÝ¿ ϳñ»õáñ Çñ³¹³ñÓáõ- ÏñÝ³Û µáÉáñáíÇÝï³ñµ»ñ ³½¹»óáõÃÇõÝ ÙÁ áõÝ»Ý³É å³- ÃÇõÝÝ»ñ »õ Ùáé³óáõû³Ý ÏÁ Ù³ïÝ¿ ³ÝÙáé³Ý³ÉÇ ï³ÝÇÇÝ íñ³Û£ ϳñÍáõ»ÉÇù ³ÝÏÇõݳ¹³ñÓ³ÛÇÝ ¹¿åù ÙÁ, ϳ٠¹¿Ùù ÙÁ£ ´Ý³Ï³Ý³µ³ñ ßñç³Ý¿ ßñç³Ý ÏÁ ï³ñµ»ñÇ ºÕ»éÝÁ »ñÇ- ²é ³Û¹, ËáõųݳÛÇÝ Ï³ï³Õáõû³Ùµ Çñ³·áñÍáõ³Í ï³ë³ñ³¹ å³ï³ÝÇÇÝ Ï³Ù Ù³ÝáõÏÇÝ Ý»ñϳ۳óÝ»Éáõ á×Á£ гÛáó ºÕ»éÝÁ, Ñ³Û ÅáÕáíáõñ¹ÇÝ íÇ׳Ïáõ³Í ѽûñ³·áÛÝ Ð³Û³ëï³Ý¿Ý ¹áõñë, ½³Ý³½³Ý ·³ÕÃû׳ËÝ»ñ¿ Ý»ñë, å³- ù³ÙÇÝ áõ ÷áÃáñÇÏÝ ¿ñ£ ÛÙ³ÝÝ»ñÝ ³É ï³ñµ»ñ ϳóáõÃÇõÝÝ»ñ ÏÁ ëï»Õͻݣ ²Û¹ ³Ñ³õáñ Å³Ù³Ý³Ï Ïáã»ó»³É ͳõ³É³å³ßï Çñá- ØÇçÇÝ ²ñ»õ»É»³Ý »ñÏÇñÝ»ñáõ Ù¿ç, ѳõ³Ý³µ³ñ ÏÇ- Õáõû³Ý ÏÁ å³ïϳÝÇ Ù»ñ ³Ûëûñáõ³Û ²åñÇÉ 24Áª 93ñ¹Á, ñ³ñÏáõ³Í á×Á ϳñ»ÉÇ ã¿ µ³Õ¹³ï»É ºõñáå³ÛÇ »õ Ù³- ³Ýó»³É ï³ñÇÝ»ñáõÝ »õ Û³é³çÇÏ³Û ï³ñÇÝ»ñáõÝ Ýٳݣ ݳõ³Ý¹ ÐÇõëÇë³ÛÇÝ ²Ù»ñÇϳÛÇ Ñ»ï£ Æñ»ñ³Û³çáñ¹ ë»ñáõݹݻñ ÏÁ ß³ñáõÝ³Ï»Ý µáõéÝ å³Ûù³ñ ºÕ»éÝÁ ѳñÇõñ³Ù»³ÏÇ ë»ÙÇÝ »Ýù£ ä³ÛÙ³ÝÝ»ñÝ ³É ÙÕ»É »õ Û³ÝÓݳéáõ ¹³éÝ³É ³Û¹ Å³Ù³Ý³Ï Ïáã»ó»³É ³Ý- ÷áËáõ³Í »Ý »õ ÝáÛÝÇÝùÝ Ð³Ûáó ºÕ»éÝ Ã³åáõÝ, ÙݳÉáí ѳÝ- ͳÛñ³ÍÇñ ÇñáÕáõû³Ý »õ ¿áõû³Ý µ³ñ¹áÛÃÇÝ, ³Ý¹³¹³ñ ¹»ñÓ å³ïÙ³Ï³Ý ¹³Å³Ý Çñ³Ï³ÝáõÃÇõÝ ÙÁ, ù³ÛÉ å³Ñ³Í ¿ å³Ñ³Ýç»Éáí ѳÛáó »Õ»éÝÇ å³ïß³× ×³Ý³ãáõÙ£ »Õ³÷áËáõû³Ý (evolution) Ñ»ï£ âϳ݅ù³ÝÇ ÙÁ ï³ñÇ¿Ý ²Ûë ë»ñáõݹݻñÁ ɳõ³å¿ë ÏÁ ·Çï³ÏóÇÝ Ã¿ ãϳ°Û åÇïÇ ãÙÝ³Ý í»ñçÇÝ í»ñ³åñáÕÝ»ñÁ, ë³Ï³ÛÝ Ï³Ý »ñÇï³- ݳѳÝç, ï³ï³Ùëáõ٠ϳ٠ÁÝÏñϳÝù, ³ÛÉ å³Ûù³ñ Ç ë³ñ¹ ¦í»ñ³åñáÕÝ»ñ§Á, áñáÝó å³ñï³Ï³ÝáõÃÇõÝÝ ¿ ãÁÝÏñ- ·ÇÝ Ñ³Û ¹³ïÇ Ñ»ï³åݹٳÝ, Ç ·ÇÝ ºÕ»éÝÇ ×³Ý³ãáõ- ÏÇÉ »õ å³Ûù³ñ ÙÕ»É, Ç ·ÇÝ ³ñ¹³ñáõû³Ý, Ç ·ÇÝ ³Û¹ ë³ÑÙé- ÙÁ Ûëï³Ï ³ñÙ³ïÝ»ñáõ íñ³Û ϳéáõó»Éáõ£ Ï»óáõóÇã á×ÇññÇÝ áñ ó³Ûëûñ ÏÁ ÙÝ³Û ³Ýå³ïÇÅ£ ijٳݳÏÁ ã¿ å³ñ½ ëáõ·Ç ûñáí ÙÁ µ³õ³Ï³Ý³Éáõ, ²Ûë ËÇëï ϳñ»õáñ ÝÇõÃÁ, áñáß»óÇÝù ³ñͳñÍ»É »-½ñáÛó ϳ٠ïËáõñ ³Ýó»³É ÙÁ ÛÇß»Éáõ£ Àݹѳϳé³ÏÁ, Ýáñ ë»- ÙÁ ϳï³ñ»Éáí, ßñç³ÝÇë ù³ÝÇ ÙÁ í³ñųñ³ÝÝ»ñáõÝ Ñ»ï£ ñáõݹݻñ Çñ»Ýó ·ÉËáõÝ íñ³Û, ¸³ÙáÏÉ»³Ý ëáõñÇ å¿ë гϳé³Ï ó÷áõ³Í Ñ»ï»õáÕ³Ï³Ý ×Ç·ÇÝ, ϳñ»ÉÇ ã»Õ³õ ϳËáõ³Í åÇïÇ áõÝ»Ý³Ý ³Û¹ ³Ýó»³ÉÁ ³åñ»óÝ»ÉÝ áõ µáÉáñ ѳëï³ïáõÃÇõÝÝ»ñ¿Ý å³ï³ë˳ÝÝ»ñ ëï³Ý³É£ å³ïÙáõû³Ý ï¿ñ ϳݷÝÇÉÁ…»õ ³Û¹ ³É ѳٳѳÛϳ- ÆÝã忱ë Ùûï»Ý³É »õ Ý»ñϳ۳óÝ»É ³Ûë ÷³÷áõÏ Ñ³ñ- Ï³Ý Ý³Ë³ÝÓ³Ëݹñáõû³Ùµ »õ ѳٳ½·³ÛÇÝ ³ÝÑáõÝ óÁª »ñÇï³ë³ñ¹ ѳÛáñ¹ÇÇÝ…²ÝóÝÇÝù »-½ñáóÇÝ£ ï³ñáÕáõû³Ùµ£ ÎÁ ÛÇß»Ýù »Õ»éÝÇ ë³ñëé³½¹»óÇÏ »õ ëñï³×ÙÉÇÏ áõ ³ÕÇáÕáñÙ ï»ë³ñ³ÝÝ»ñÁ£ ´àì²Ü¸²ÎàôÂÆôÜ ÎÁ ï³é³åÇÝù…Ïÿ³÷ëáë³Ýù…Ïáõ ɳÝù£ ¾ç ²Ýßáõßï ݳ»õ ÏÁ ä²Ð²Ü溰Üø áõ ÏÁ ä²Úø²ðÆÜ°ø£ ÊÙµ³·ñ³Ï³Ý 1 гñó³½ñáÛó 1-6 àôÞ²¸ðàôÂÆôܪ ì³ã¿ ´ñáõï»³Ý 7 ²õÇÏ î¿ÛÇñÙ¿Ý×»³Ý 10 »õ 16 غð ÀܺðòàÔܺðàôÜ Ê. î¿ñ ÔáõÏ³ë»³Ý 11 Ødzó»³É ܳѳݷݻñáõ öáëà ѻ鳷ñ³Ï³Ý 껹û äáÛ³×»³Ý 14 ·ñ³ë»³Ý»³ÏÇ, Ù¿Ï ûñ¿ÝùÇ ÑÇÙ³Ý íñ³Û, ³Ûë ï³ñ- ì³ñ¹³Ý سïÿáë»³Ý 17 áõ³Û ²åñÇÉ 24Ǫ ¦Ð³Ûñ»ÝÇù§-¦²ñÙÇÝÇÁÝ àõÇùÉǧ Ü. ØÏñïÇ㻳Ý-î³ÕÉ»³Ý 20 µ³ó³éÇÏ ÃÇõÁ, ϳñ»ÉÇ »Õ³õ ÉáÛë ÁÝͳۻÉ, ÙdzÛÝ ê. ¸. ¶ñÇ·áñ»³Ý 22 ǵñ»õ ¦²ñÙÇÝÇÁÝ àõÇùÉÇ§Ç ³ÝáõÝÇÝ ï³Ï£ ȳÉÇÏ ²ñ½áõٳݻ³Ý-ȳ÷áÛ»³Ý 24

вÚðºÜÆø —1 Ý»ñÁ »õ ûñáõ³Ý ¹¿åù»ñÁ ͳÝûóó- Ý»ÉÝ ¿«µ³ó³ïñ»É ïÇñáÕ ÙÃÝáÉáñïÁ вðò²¼ðàÚò »õ »ñÇï³ë³ñ¹ Ãáõñù»ñáõ Ùï³Û- ÝáõÃÇõÝÝ áõ Íñ³·ÇñÁ »õ ³ÝÏ¿ Û³- é³ç³ó³Í ϳóáõÃÇõÝÁ£ äÇïÇ ãáõ½¿Ç ³ß³Ï»ñïÇÝ Ý»ñϳ- Û³óÝ»É Ñ³ÛÁ ÙdzÛÝ Ë»Õ× íÇ׳ÏÇ ºðÆî²ê²ð¸ Ð²Ú ä²î²ÜÆÜ Ù¿ç« ³Ý½¿Ý« ³Ûá« ³Û¹ ûñ»ñáõ å³ñ- سëݳÏóáÕ ì³ñųñ³ÝÝÝ»ñª ï³¹ñ³ÝùÁ« ë³Ï³ÛÝ Ý³»õ µ³ó³ï- ñ»É Ù»ñ ÅáÕáíáõñ¹Ç ³Ýë³ë³Ý ϳÙ- ².- ÜÇõ ÖÁñ½ÇÇ ¦Úáíݳݻ³Ý§ ì³ñųñ³Ý (å³ï³ë˳ÝÁ å³ï- ùÁ áõ É»½áõÇÝ »õ ÏñûÝùÇÝ Ñ³Ý¹¿å ñ³ëïáõ³Í ïÝûñ¿Ýáõû³Ý »õ ËáõÙµ ÙÁ áõëáõóÇãÝ»ñáõ ÏáÕÙ¿)£ áõÝ»ó³Í í×é³Ï³ÙáõÃÇõÝÝ áõ ë¿- ñÁ£ ´.- àõ³ÃÁñóáõÝÇ (سë³ãáõë¿ó) ²½·³ÛÇÝ ¦êáõñµ êï»÷³Ýáë§ ì³ñųñ³Ý (å³ïñ³ëïáõ³Í ïÝûñ¿Ý ÐáõñÇ äáÛ³Ù»³ÝÇ »õ ѳۻñ¿Ý ¸.- î»Õ-ÙÇç³í³Ûñ ³å³Ñáí»É É»½áõÇ ¹³ë³ïáõ ²ñï»ÙÇë ØÏñïÇ㻳ÝÇ ÏáÕÙ¿)£ å³ï³ÝÇÝ»ñáõ£ γñ× Ó»õáí Ý»ñϳ- Û³óÝ»É »Õ»éÝÇ å³ïÙ³Ï³Ý ïáõ»³É- ¶.- È»ùëÇÝÏÃÁÝÇ (سë³ãáõë¿ó) Ð³Û Î³ÃáÕÇÏ¿ øáÛñ»ñáõ ì³ñų- Ý»ñÁ£ гñó å³ï³ë˳ÝÇ ÙÕ»É ½³- ñ³Ý (å³ïñ³ëïáõ³Í гۻñ¿Ý É»½áõÇ å³ï³ë˳ݳïáõª سÛï³ Ø»É- ÝáÝù, ß»ßï»Éáí ³Ý³ñ¹³ñáõû³Ý »õ ùáÝ»³ÝÇ ÏáÕÙ¿, áñ ݳ»õ êáõñµ êï»÷³ÝáëÇ ß³µ³Ãûñ»³Û í³ñųñ³ÝÇ ë÷ÇõéùÇ Ý»ñÏ³Û ¹Åáõ³ñ å³ÛÙ³Ý- ïÝûñ¿ÝÝ ¿)£ Ý»ñÁ£

¸.- ÜÇõ ºáñùÇ ²½·³ÛÇÝ êñµáó ܳѳï³Ï³ó ì³ñųñ³Ý (å³ï- 2.- î³ñÇùÝ áõ ÁÙµéÝ»Éáõ ϳ- ñ³ëïáõ³Í ïÝûñ¿Ý ¼³ñÙÇÝ¿ äûÕá뻳ÝÇ ÏáÕÙ¿)£ ñáÕáõÃÇõÝÁ, µÝ³Ï³Ý³µ³ñ Ù»Í ¹»ñ áõÝÇÝ£ Ú³ïáõÏ ï³ñÇù ÙÁ 1.- à±ñÝ ¿ ɳõ³·áÛÝ Ó»õÁ, Ñ³Û ñÁ áñáß ã³÷áí ¹Åáõ³ñ ¿ ò»Õ³ëå³- ϳ°Û, áñ å¿ïù ÷³÷ϳÝϳïû- å³ï³ÝÇ ÙÁ, ³éáÕç ÑÇÙ»ñáõ íñ³Û Ýáõû³Ý á×ñ³ÛÇÝ ³ÙµáÕç »ñ»ëÁ Çñ ñ¿Ý »õ ³Ù¿Ý³ÛÝ µÍ³Ëݹñáõ- å³ïñ³ëï»Éáõ »õ ¹³ëïdzñ³Ï»- Ù³Ýñ³Ù³ëÝáõÃÇõÝÝ»ñáí Çñ»Ý ÷á- û³Ùµ, Ùûï»Ý³É å³ï³ÝÇÇÝ »õ Éáõ, ºÕ»éÝÇ Ù³ëÇÝ£ ˳Ýó»É£ ê³Ï³ÛÝ, áñå¿ë ò»Õ³ëå³- Ý»ñϳ۳óÝ»É ³Ýó»³ÉÇÝ å³ï³- ².- ÎÁ ϳñÍ»Ýù, áñ ¹³ëïdzñ³- Ýáõû³Ý »ÝóñÏáõ³Í ÅáÕáíáõñ¹Ç ѳÍ, ³Ûë ³Ñ³õáñ ³ñ³ñùÁ£ Ïáõû³Ý ɳõ³·áÛÝ Ó»õÁ ³ÛÝ ¿ ÿ, ÙÁ ½³õ³Ï ³ÝÑñ³Å»ßï å³ïÙ³Ï³Ý å³ï³ÝÇÝ ÷áùñ ï³ñÇù¿Ý ëáñíÇ ³Ûë á×ÇñÇÝ ³éÝã³ÏÇó ¹³ñÓÝ»É ².- î³ñÇùÁ áñù³Ý áõß ³ÛÝù³Ý Ù»ñ É»½áõÝ »õ Çõñ³óÝ¿ Çñ ųé³Ý- ½³ÛÝ, áñáíÑ»ï»õ ÙdzÛÝ ³Û¹ Ó»õáí ɳõ ¿£ ÆÝãå¿ë, ݳ˳å¿ë ß»ßï»- ·³Í Ùß³ÏáõóÛÇÝ Ñ³ñëïáõÃÇõÝÁ£ ϳñ»ÉÇ ¿ ³Û¹ á×ÇñÇ ³ñ¹³ñ ѳïáõ- óÇÝù, å³ï³ÝÇÝ É³õ³å¿ë ïÇñ³å»- ²Ý·³Ù ÙÁ, áñ ³Û¹ Çõñ³óáõÙÇ ·áñ- óáõÙÁ ³å³Ñáí»É£ ï»É¿ »ïù, Çñ Ùß³ÏáÛÃÇÝ áõ å³ï- ÍáÕáõÃÇõÝÁ ³õ³ñï³Í ¿ áõ ÇÝù µÝ³- ²Ûë »ñÏáõ ϳñ»õáñ ѳñó»ñÁ Ù³Ý- Ùáõû³Ý, µÝ³Ï³Ý³µ³ñ Çñ Ñ»ï³- ϳÝûñ¿Ý ÇñÁ ¹³ñÓáõó³Í ¿ Çñ ëáñ- ϳí³ñÅ³Ï³Ý Û³ñÙ³ñ å³ñáõݳÏÇ ù»ñùñáõû³Ý ¹éÝ»ñÁ åÇïÇ µ³Ý³Û í³ÍÝ»ñÁ, ³ÛÝ ³ï»Ý ÇÝù ÏÁ ëÏëÇ ÙÁ Ù¿ç ¹Ý»Éáõ ɳõ³·áÛÝ Ó»õÁ ò»- ݳ»õ å³ïÙáõû³Ý ³ÛÝ ¿ç»ñáõÝ, ѳñóáõÙÝ»ñ ¹Ý»É£ àõ Ù»Ýù ÏÁ Õ³ëå³Ýáõû³Ý ÷³ëïÁ Ý»ñϳ۳ó- áñáÝù ÏÁ ÏáãáõÇÝ Ø»ÍÝ ºÕ»éÝ, ëÏëÇÝù Ñ»ï»õÇÉ Çñ ѳñóáõÙÝ»ñáõÝ Ý»É å³ï³ÝÇÇÝ Ñ³Ù³ñ ßûß³÷»ÉÇ µÝ³çÝçáõÙ, ó»Õ³ëå³ÝáõÃÇõÝ áõ å³Ñ³ÝçÝ»ñáõÝ£ ä³ï³ÝÇÝ ³ñ¹³- ³ÛÅÙ¿³Ï³Ý ÷³ëï»ñáõ Áݹٿç¿Ý, »õ³ÛÉÝ£ ØÇçݳϳñ·Ç ³õ³ñïÇÝ ¿, áñ ñáõû³Ý ½·³óáõÙÁ áõÝÇ, ÝáÛÝÇëÏ ÇÝãå¿ë ûñÇݳϪ ½ÇÝù ÙÕ»É Ùï³Í»- å³ï³ÝÇÝ Ç íÇ׳ÏÇ ¿ ѳëÏݳÉáõ ³õ»ÉÇ ½ûñ³õáñ Ï»ñåáíª ù³Ý ã³÷³- Éáõ ÿ ÇÝãá±õ ³Ûëûñ ÇÝù Çñ ѳÛñ»- ѳٳï³ñ³Í µÝ³çÝçáõÙÇ, ó»Õ³ë- ѳëÁ, »õ »ñµ ÏÁ ï»ëÝ¿, ÿ Ç°Ýã å³- ÝÇù¿Ý Ñ»éáõ Ïþ³åñÇ »õ Çñ»Ý ׳ϳ- å³Ýáõû³Ý, Ù³ñ¹Ïáõû³Ý ¹¿Ù á×Ç- ï³Ñ³Í ¿ Çñ Çõñ³óáõó³Í ·Çï»ÉÇù- ï³·ñ³ÏÇó áõÝÇ ÙÇÉÇáݳõáñ ë÷Çõé- ñÇ ÝÙ³Ý ·³Õ³÷³ñÝ»ñ áõ ½³ÝáÝù Ý»ñáõÝ Áݹٿç¿Ý, ³ñ¹¿Ý ÇëÏ åÇïÇ ù³Ñ³Û»ñ£ Æñ ë»÷³Ï³Ý ÁÝï³ÝÇùÇ ïñ³Ù³µ³Ýûñ¿Ý ϳå»É Ø»ÍÝ ºÕ»é- ëÏëÇ Ñ³ñó áõ ÷áñӻɣ ºñµ»ÙÝ ³ïÇ- ·³ÕÃ³Ï³Ý Ï³óáõÃÇõÝÁ Éáõë³µ³Ý»É ÝÇ ÇñáÕáõû³Ý Ñ»ï£ Ï³ ÏñÝ³Û Ï³Ý˳ѳë ÁÉɳÉ, ÇÝãå¿ë »õ ³Û¹åÇëáí ³ëïÇ׳ݳµ³ñ Çñ»Ý Ðñ³Ý¹ îÇÝùÇ Ù³Ñáõ³Ý å³ñ³·³ÛÇÝ Ñ³ëÏݳÉÇ ¹³ñÓÝ»É Ñ³Û ÅáÕáíáõñ- ´-´Ý³Ï³Ý³µ³ñ ݳ˳Ïñóñ³ÝÇ »Õ³õ, áõñ ÏÁ ëïÇåáõÇÝù Ù³ë³Ùµ ¹ÇÝ Ñ³Ý¹¿å ·áñͳ¹ñáõ³Í á×ÇñÇÝ ï³ñÇùÁ áñáß ÷³÷ϳÝϳïáõÃÇõÝ ½ÇçÇÉ ûñáõ³Ý Ññ³Ù³Û³Ï³ÝÇÝ ï³Ï£ ï³ñáÕáõÃÇõÝÁ£ ÏÁ å³Ñ³Ýç¿£ سÝϳí³ñÅ³Ï³Ý ³éáõÙáí Ù»ñ ÑÇÙÝ³Ï³Ý ¹Åáõ³ñáõ- ´-ÜϳïÇ áõݻݳÉáí å³ï³ÝÇ ¶©• ȳõ³·áÛÝ Ó»õÁ ÏÁ ËáñÑÇÙ áñ ÃÇõÝÁ Ù»ñ ÅáÕáíáõñ¹ÇÝ Ñ³Ý¹¿å ï³ñÇùÇÝ ³é³ÝÓݳ۳ïÏáõÃÇõÝÝ»- Ý³Ë å³ïÙ³Ï³Ý Çñ³¹³ñÓáõÃÇõÝ- ·áñͳ¹ñáõ³Í á×ÇñÇÝ ³Ñ³õáñáõ-

вÚðºÜÆø—2 û³Ý ã³÷Ý ¿, áõñ ÝáÛÝÇëÏ ³Û¹ á×Ç- ².- ºñ»Ë³Ý »õ å³ï³ÝÇÝ »ñµ»ù ÝáÛÝ ù³Õ³ù³Ï³ÝáõÃÇõÝÁ ¹»é ÏÁ ñÇÝ ³Ù»Ý³çÝçÇÝ Ù³ëÝ ³É Ý»ñϳ۳ó- å¿ïù ã¿ ½áÑáõ³ÍÇ ¹»ñÇÝ Ù¿ç ß³ñáõݳÏáõÇ£ ÆÝãå¿ë ݳ»õ, ³ÝÑñ³- Ý»Éáí ³Ñ³½¹áõ ÏñÝ³Û ÁÉÉ³É ÷áùñ ÙïÝ»Ý Ï³Ù ÙïóáõÇÝ, ³ÛÉ Ñ³Ý·Çëï Å»ßï ¿ Ý»ñϳ۳óÝ»É ³ÛÝ Ãáõ³Ï³Ý- ï³ñÇùÇÝ£ ê³Ï³ÛÝ, ã»Ù ϳñÍ»ñ, áñ »õ ³éáÕç Ù»Íݳݪ Çñ»Ýó áõÝ»ó³Íáí, Ý»ñáõ Ñ»ñáë³Ï³Ý ÇÝùݳå³ßïå³- ò»Õ³ëå³Ýáõû³Ý ³Ñ³½¹áõ »ñ»ëÁ Çñ»Ýó ù³ÛÉ ³é ù³ÛÉ ëáñí³Í, Çõñ³- ÝáõÃÇõÝÝ»ñáõ å³ïÙáõÃÇõÝÁ, áñáÝù ³ÙµáÕçáõû³Ùµ å¿ïù ¿ ¹áõñë ѳ- óáõó³Í áõ ëï³ÝÓÝ³Í Ùß³ÏáÛÃáí£ ³½·³ÛÇÝ Ñå³ñïáõÃÇõÝ ÙÁ ÏñÝ³Û Ý»É Ù»ñ ¹³ëïdzñ³ÏáõûݿÝ, ·áÝ¿ È»½áõÝ Ï³ñ»õáñ ¹»ñ ÏÁ Ë³Õ³Û Ñ³Õáñ¹»É ë÷Çõéù³Ñ³Û »ñÇï³ë³ñ- Ýáõ³½³·áÛÝÁ å¿ïù ¿ Ù³ïáõó»É ÇÝùÝáõû³Ý ϳ½Ùáõû³Ý Ù¿ç, µ³Ûó ¹ÇÝ£ Û³ñÙ³ñ »Õ³Ý³Ïáí£ ÆëÏ »ñÏñáñ¹³- ó³õ³ÉÇ ¿ Ýß»É, áñ ÁݹѳÝñ³å¿ë É»½- ÆëÏ Ñ³Û»óÇ ¹³ëïdzñÏáõû³Ý Ï³Ý í³ñųñ³ÝÇ ï³ñÇùÇÝ ÏÁ ϳñ- áõÇÝ å¿ïù »Õ³Í ϳñ»õáñáõÃÇõÝÁ ÁݹѳÝáõñ ÍÇñÇÝ Ù¿ç Ù»ñ ¹³ëïdz- ͻ٠áñ ϳñ»ÉÇ ¿ á×ñ³ÛÇÝ ³ÙµáÕç ãÇ ïñáõÇñ »õ å³ïÙáõÃÇõÝÁ ³õ»ÉÇ ñ³Ïáõû³Ùµ å¿ïù ¿ Ññ³ÙóÝ»É Ñ³- å³ïÏ»ñÁ ï³É£ Ûáó å³ïÙáõû³Ý, Ùß³ÏáÛÃÇÝ, ·ñ³- ϳÝáõû³Ý, ·Çï³Ï³Ý Ýáõ³×áõÙÝ»- ¶©• ²Ýßáõßï ï³ñÇùÁ Ù»Í ¹»ñ áõ- ñáõÝ »õ ³ÛÉ µÝ³·³õ³éÝ»ñáõ ÷³Û- ÝÇ ÁÙµéÝ»Éáõ Ý³Ë ç³ñ¹ÇÝ Ý³Ëáñ- ÉáõÝ ¿ç»ñ, áñáÝù Ñ³Û »ñÇï³ë³ñ¹ÇÝ ¹áÕ ù³Õ³ù³Ï³Ý áõ å³ïÙ³Ï³Ý Ùûï ³½·³ÛÇÝ å³ïϳݻÉÇáõû³Ý ¹¿åù»ñÁ« ÇÝãå¿ë ݳ»õ ³Ñ³õáñáõ- áñáß Ñå³ñïáõû³Ùµ ÏñÝ³Ý ½ÇÝ»É ÃÇõÝÁ ³Û¹ ³ñ³ñùÇÝ£ »õ ½ÇÝù Û»ï ÙÕ»É ³ÙµáÕçáíÇÝ öáùñÇÏÇÝ ÏÁ Ý»ñϳ۳óáõÇ ³Ñ³- ûï³ñ Ùß³ÏáÛÃÇ áõ ù³Õ³ù³ÏñÃáõ- õáñ å³ï³Ñ³ÍÁ ѳÏÇñ× ·ÇÍ»ñáõ û³Ý ·ÇñÏÁ Ý»ïáõ»É¿Ý£ ²Ûë ·Íáí Ù¿ç« ß»ßïÁ ¹Ý»Éáí ѳÛñ»ÝÇ ÑáÕ»ñáõ ϳñ»õáñ³·áÛÝ Ñ³ñóÁ ¹³ëïdzñ³- ³ñÅ¿ùÇÝ »õ Ù»ñ ³ñÙ³ïÝ»ñáõÝ í»- Û³é³ç ÏÁ ù³ßáõÇ, ÇÝã áñ ëË³É ÏÁ Ïáõû³Ý áñ³ÏÝ ¿, áñ å¿ïù ¿ Ñ»éáõ ñ³¹³éݳÉáõ« ³ÝÏ¿ ëݳݻÉáõ ϳñ»- ï»ëÝ»Ýù£ È»½áõÝ ÑÇÙùÝ ¿ Ñݳ·áÛ- ÁÉÉ³Û ½áõï Ñé»ïáñ³Ï³Ý ÇÝùݳ·á- õáñáõû³Ý íñ³Û© ³ÝáÝó ѳݹ¿å ë¿ñ ÝÁ, ÑÇÝÁ ϳñ¹³Éáõ áõ ѳÕáñ¹áõ»É- í³µ³ÝáõÃ»Ý¿Ý »õ ³õ»ÉÇ ß³ï ÑÇÙÝ- Ý»ñÙáõÍ»Éáí Çñ»Ýó Ñá·ÇÝ»ñáõÝ Ù¿ç£ áõ³Ýáñ Ñ»ï, ÝáñÁ ëï»ÕÍ»Éáõ ѳ- áõ³Í ÁÉÉ³Û ³é³ñÏ³Û³Ï³Ý ÷³ëï»- γñ»õáñ³·áÛÝÁ ѳõ³Ý³µ³ñ ³ß³- Ù³ñ£ ²Ûëûñáõ³Ý å³ï³ÝÇÝ í³ñÅ- ñáõ íñ³Û, áñáÝù ùÇã ã»Ý£ Ï»ñïÇÝ Ý»ñßÝã»ÉÝ ¿ ³½·³ÛÇÝ å³ï- áõ³Í ¿ ѳٳó³ÝóÇ û·Ýáõû³Ùµ ϳݻÉÇáõû³Ý ·Çï³ÏóáõÃÇõÝÁ »õ åñåïáõ٠ϳï³ñ»Éáõª ³Ù»Ý¿Ý ³ñ¹- ¶©• ̳Ûñ³Û»Õ Øûï»óáõÙ ãáõÝ»- Çñ Ñ³Û ÇÝùÝáõÃÇõÝÁ å³Ñ»Éáõ ³ÝÑ- Ç³Ï³Ý ÙÇçáóÝ»ñáí£ ²Û¹ å³ï׳- ݳɫ áË³Ï³É ½·³óáõÙÝ»ñ ãÝ»ñßÝã»É ñ³Å»ßïáõÃÇõÝÁ£ éáí ÇëÏ, Çñ ·ÇïáõÃÇõÝÁ Ù»ÍóÝ»Éáõ »õ ÙÕ»É ½Çñ»Ýù áõ å³ñ½»É áñ ù³- ºññáñ¹ ¹³ë³ñ³Ý¿Ý ëÏë»³É »õ µáÉáñ ϳñ»ÉÇáõÃÇõÝÝ»ñÁ å¿ïù ¿ Õ³ù³Ï³Ý ÙÇçáóÝ»ñáí ϳñ»ÉÇ ¿ Éáõ- ³ëïÇ׳ݳµ³ñ Û³çáñ¹ ϳñ·»ñáõÝ ëï»ÕÍ»Ýùª É»½áõÇ ÇÙ³óáõû³Ý Áݹ- ÍáõÙ ·ïݻɩ ³ï»ÉáõÃÇõÝ«ëå³éݳ- ³õ»ÉÇ Ù³Ýñ³Ù³ëÝûñ¿Ý ϳñ»ÉÇ ¿ Ëû- Ù¿ç¿Ý£ à°ã ÙdzÛÝ áõ ³é³çݳѻñà ÉÇù ϳ٠á×Çñ ÉáõÍáõÙÝ»ñ ã»Ý£ ëÇÉ å³ï³ÝÇÇÝ© ¹³ñÓ»³É ÏÁ ÏñÏݻ٠ϻñåáí ѳۻñ¿ÝÁ, ³ÛÉ Ý³»õ, ÇÝãá°õ ë³ñë³÷³½¹áõ ¹¿åù»ñáõ Ù³Ýñ³- ã¿, áõñÇß É»½áõÝ»ñ, áñå¿ë½Ç ϳñ»- Ù³ëÝáõÃ»Ý¿Ý Û³×³Ë Ëáõë³÷»Éáí« ÉÇáõÃÇõÝÝ»ñÁ ÁݹɳÛÝÇÝ, åñåïáõ- ¸.- ¸³ëïÇñ³Ï³áõÃÇõÝÁ å¿ïù ¿ áñáÝù ÏñÝ³Ý Ùáõà å³ïÏ»ñÝ»ñ ÙÇ ¹³ßïÁ ãë³Ñٳݳ÷³ÏáõÇ Ùdz- áñ ïáõÝ¿Ý ëÏëÇ£ ¼áÑÇ Ñá·»µ³Ýáõ- ¹ñáßÙ»É Çñ»Ýó Ñá·ÇÝ»ñáõÝ Ù¿ç »õ É»½áõª ³Ý·É»ñ¿Ç ³ß˳ñÑÇÝ£ û³Ùµ, å¿ïù ã¿ Ùûï»Ý³É ѳñóÇÝ, ï³Ýç»É ½Çñ»Ýù£ ²Ûë Ó»õáí ëïáñݳ- ä³ïÏ»ñ³õáñ Ï»ñåáí Áë»Éáõ ѳ- ϳñ»ÉÇ ¹³ñÓÝ»Éáõ å³ï³ÝÇÇÝ ·áñ- ó³Í »õ ³Ý½ûñ ÁÉɳÉáõ ½·³óáõÙ¿Ý Ù³ñ, å³ï³ÝÇÝ ëï»Õͳ·áñÍ³Ï³Ý ÍûÝ Ù³ëݳÏóáõÃÇõÝÁ£ ä¿ïù ¿ ·»- å¿ïù ¿ ËÝ³Û»É ÷áùñ»ñÁ »õ å³ï³- µ³ÅÝÇÝ Ý³Ë³Ó»éÝáõÃÇõÝÁ å¿ïù ¿ ñ³Ï³Ûáõû³Ý µ³ñ¹áÛÿݪ ¦ÆÝã áñ ÝÇÝ»ñÁ£ áõݻݳÛ, áã ÿ ë³ÑÙ³ÝáõÇ ³é ¹·³É ѳÛÏ³Ï³Ý ¿, å³ïáõ³Ï³Ý ¿§¿Ý ³É µ»ñ³ÝÁ Ï»ñ³Ïáõñ ëï³óáÕÇ ¹»ñÇÝ£ Ó»ñµ³½³ïáõÇÉ, ³Ýßáõßï ݳ»õ ãÙáé- 3.- ÆÝãå¿°ë ϳñ»ÉÇ ¿ µ³ñ- Ý³É ï»Õ³ÛÝ³Ï³Ý »ñ»õáÛÃÝ»ñÁ£ ¹áÛÃÝ»ñ¿ Ó»ñµ³½³ïáõÇÉ, áñáÝù ÏñÝ³Ý ³å³·³ÛÇÝ Ù»Í ³½¹»- ´-ÀݹѳÝñ³å¿ë µ³ñ¹áÛà ÏñÝ³Û óáõÃÇõÝ áõÝ»Ý³É Ñ³Û å³ï³ÝÇ- Û³é³ç³óÝ»É ò»Õ³ëå³Ýáõû³Ý áÕ- 4.- г۳ëï³ÝÇ »õ ê÷ÇõéùÇ ÇÝ íñ³Û£ ²ÛÉ Ëûëùáí, ëË³É µ»ñ·³Ï³Ý å³ïÏ»ñÝ»ñáõ íñ³Û Ï»¹- (³Ýßáõßï Çõñ³Û³ïáõÏ ¿, äáÉ- ¹³ëïdzñ³Ïáõû³Ý ³ñ¹ÇõÝù, ñáݳó³Í ¹³ëïdzñ³ÏáõÃÇõÝÁ£ ²ÝÑ- ëáÛ å³ñ³·³Ý) Ù¿ç ï³ñµ»ñ »ñÇï³ë³ñ¹ å³ï³ÝÇÝ ÏñÝ³Û ñ³Å»ßï ¿ Ó»õ»ñÁ ·ïÝ»É µ³ó³ïñ»- á×áí ÏÁ ϳï³ñáõÇ ºÕ»éÝÇ Ù³- µáÉáñáíÇÝ ûï³ñáõû³Ý »õ ³Ý- Éáõ ò»Õ³ëå³Ý³Ï³Ý Íñ³·ñÇ ù³Õ³- ëÇÝ, ¹³ëïdzñ³Ïã³Ï³Ý ³ß˳- ï³ñµ»ñáõû³Ý ·ÇñÏÇÝ Ù¿ç ÇÛ- ù³Ï³Ý »ñ»ëÁ, áñ ݳ»õ ³ÛÅÙ¿³Ï³Ý ï³ÝùÁ£ ÜϳïÇ áõݻݳÉáí ³å- ݳɣ ÆÝãå¿°ë ϳñ»ÉÇ ¿ ë³ÝÓ»É ÑÝã»ÕáõÃÇõÝ ÏñÝ³Û áõݻݳÉ, ÝϳïÇ ñ»É³Ï»ñåÇ µáÉáñáíÇÝ ï³ñµ»ñ ÝÙ³ÝûñÇÝ³Ï ÁÝóóù£ áõݻݳÉáí áñ ѳÛáõû³Ý ѳݹ¿å å³ÛÙ³ÝÝ»ñÁ, ϳñ»ÉÇþ ¿ ѳٳ¹-

вÚðºÜÆø—3 ñáõÙ ÙÁ ϳï³ñ»É£ ½³ÛÝ£ ²Ûë µáÉáñÁ ÏÁ ϳï³ñáõÇÝ å»- Ý»ñÏ³Û Ï°ÁÉÉ³Ý ºÕ»éÝÇ ÛÇß³ï³Ïáõ- ï³Ï³Ýáõû³Ý ÙÁ ÍÇñÇÝ Ù¿ç ïñáõ»- û³Ý Ó»éݳñÏÝ»ñáõ£Ð³ñó Ïáõï³Ù ².- ØÇç³ÝÏ»³É ϳñ»ÉÇ ¿ Áë»É, áñ ÉÇù ¹³ëïdzñ³Ïáõû³Ý ÙÁ µ³½Ù³- ÇÝù½ÇÝùÇë ÿ ³ñ¹»ûù ϳñ»ÉÇ ¿ áñá- äáÉëáÛ Ñ³Ûáõû³Ý Çõñ³Û³ïÏáõ- ÃÇõ ³ÛÉ »ñ»ëÝ»ñáõ ÏáÕùÇÝ£ ²ÛÝï»Õ, Ý»É »õ ·ïÝ»É Ó»õ ÙÁ« áñ Û³ñ·³ÝùÇ ÃÇõÝÁ ¹ñ³Ï³Ý å¿ïù ¿ ·Ý³Ñ³ï»Éª Ç ï³ñµ»ñáõÃÇõÝ ê÷ÇõéùÇÝ, ò»Õ³ë- ½·³óáõÙÁ ͳÕÏ»óÝ»Ýù ÷áùñ»ñáõÝ ÝϳïÇ áõݻݳÉáí гٳó³ÝóÇ ³ß- å³Ýáõû³Ý ѳñóÁ ³ÛÝù³Ý Ï»¹ñá- ëñï»ñáõÝ Ù¿ç£ Ë³ñÑÁ, áñ ÃáÛÉ Ïáõ ï³Û Ãñù³Ï³Ý Ý³Ï³Ý ï»Õ ã¿ áõÝ»ó³Í, ³ÛÉ ³ÛÝ ³ÕµÇõñÝ»ñÁ »õ íÇ׳ÏÁ Ù»Ïݳµ³- å³ñ½³å¿ë ³½·³ÛÇÝ µ³½Ù³ÃÇõ ³ÛÉ Ý»É£ ²Ù»ñÇÏ³Ñ³Û å³ï³ÝÇÇ å³ñ³- ËݹÇñÝ»ñáõ ÏáÕùÇÝ Ñ³ñó»ñ¿Ý Ù¿ÏÝ 5.- ²Ù»ñÇÏ³Ñ³Û å³ï³ÝÇÇÝ ·³ÛÇ, ³ÕµÇõñÇ É»½áõÝ ã·ÇïݳÉáí ¿£ å³ñ³·³ÛÇÝ, Û³ïáõÏ ï³ñµ»- (ѳۻñ¿Ý, ýñ³Ýë»ñ¿Ý, ÝáÛÝÇëϪ ¼áõ·³Ñ»é³µ³ñ, ê÷ÇõéùÁ, áñå¿ë ñáõÃÇõÝ ÙÁ ϳþÛ, ºÕ»éÝÇ Ù³- Ãñù»ñ¿Ý), ³Ý ÏÁ µ³Ý³Û ¹³ëïdz- ò»Õ³ëå³Ýáõû³Ý Ñ»ï»õ³Ýùáí ëÇÝ ¹³ëïdzñ³Ïáõû³Ý á×Ç Ñá- ñ³Ïã³Ï³Ý µ³½Ù³ÃÇõ ϳñ»ÉÇáõ- ϳ½Ù³õáñáõ³Í ѳõ³ù³Ï³ÝáõÃÇõÝ, ÉáíáÛÃÇÝ Ù¿ç, Û³ïϳå¿ë Ýϳ- ÃÇõÝÝ»ñ£ úñÇݳϪ Ø͵ÇÝÇ Ï³Ù äÇÃ- Çñ ³½·³ÛÇÝ ËݹÇñÝ»ñáõ Ï»¹ñáݳ- ïÇ áõݻݳÉáí áñ, ßñç³ÝÇ ½³- ÉÇëÇ Ù¿ç 1915Ç ëå³Ý»³ÉÝ»ñáõ Éáõ- Ï³Ý ï»ÕÁ ïáõ³õ ò»Õ³ëå³Ýáõ- ݳ½³Ý ·³ÕáõÃÝ»ñÁ ÏÁ µ³Õϳ- ñ»ñáõÝ áõëáõÙݳëÇñáõÃÇõÝÁ ï»Õ»- û³Ý ѳñóÇÝ£ ²Ûë ѳñóÁ ½·³ó³- Ý³Ý ê÷ÇõéùÇ ³ÛÉ ßñç³ÝÝ»ñ¿ ÏáõÃÇõÝÝ»ñáõ ³Ñ³·ÇÝ ¹³ßï ÙÁ ÏÁ Ï³Ý Ï³Ù »ÝÃ³Ï³Û³Ï³Ý ³é³õ»- Å³Ù³Ý³Í Ñ³Ûáñ¹ÇÝ»ñ¿£ µ³Ý³Ûª ëáëÏ³Ï³Ý Éáõñ¿Ý ³Ý¹ÇÝ£ ɳ·áÛÝ ³ëïÇ׳Ýáí ¹³ñÓ³õ ä³ïÙ³Ï³Ý Ð³Û³ëï³ÝÇ ï³ñµ»ñ ë÷Çõéù»³Ý ·ñ³Ï³Ýáõû³Ý, ².- î»ëÝ»É ¿ç 4Ç å³ï³ë˳ÝÁ£ ßñç³ÝÝ»ñáõ Ù¿ç, ѳۻñáõ Ý»ñϳÛáõ- ¹³ëïdzñ³Ïáõû³Ý, ³½·³ÛÇÝ, û³Ý ÷³ëï»ñÁ ÏÁ ëÏëÇÝ Çõñ³óáõÇÉ ÏñûÝ³Ï³Ý áõ ÝáÛÝÇëÏ ù³Õ³ù³- ´-²ÝÏ»ÕÍûñ¿Ý ³Ù»ñÇÏ³Ñ³Û ³½- áõñÇß Ù»ÏݳϿïáí£ Ï³Ý Ï»³ÝùÇ ·É˳õáñ ѳñó£ ·³ÛÇÝ Ï»³ÝùÁ, -áñáõÝ ³ÝÙÇç³Ï³Ý ÜÇõûñáõÝ áõ ï»Õ»ÏáõÃÇõÝÝ»- ²Ûë »ñÏáõ ï³ñµ»ñ Ùûï»óáõÙÝ»- ³½¹»óáõû³Ý ï³Ï ¿ ݳ»õ ³Ù»ñÇ- ñáõÝ Ñ»ï»õ»Éáí, ϳñ»ÉÇ ¿ ïñ³Ù³- ñÁ ѳٳ¹ñ»É ϳñ»ÉÇ ¿ ³ÛÝ å³ñ³- Ï³Ñ³Û å³ï³ÝÇÝ- ß»ßïáõ³Í Ó»õáí µ³Ýûñ¿Ý ѳëÏݳÉ, áñ ¦ÃáõñùÁ Ù»ñ ·³ÛÇÝ »Ã¿ ѳÛñ»ÝÇ Ùûï»óáõÙÁ áñáß Ï»¹ñáݳó³Í ¿ ò»Õ³ëå³Ýáõû³Ý ÃßݳÙÇÝ ¿§ Éá½áõݽ³ÛÇÝ Û³Ûï³ñ³- ã³÷áí Ù»ÕÙ³óÝ¿ Çñ ã³÷³½³Ýó ѳñóÇÝ íñ³Û, ³õ»ÉÇ ×ß·ñÇïª ò»Õ³ë- ñáõÃÇõÝ¿Ý ³Ý¹ÇÝ Çñ³Ï³ÝáõÃÇõÝ ÙÁ ³é³ñϳ۳å³ßïáõÃÇõÝÁ, µ³Ûó Ù³- å³Ýáõû³Ý ׳ݳãÙ³Ý íñ³Û£ ²ÛÝ- ϳÛ, áñ ³Ûëûñ ¦ÃßݳÙǧ åÇï³Ï- ݳõ³Ý¹ª »Ã¿ ê÷ÇõéùÁ Ù»ÕÙ³óÝ¿ Çñ ù³Ý ͳÛñ³Û»Õáõû³Ý ѳë³Í ¿ ׳- áõ³Í ³Û¹ ѳõ³ù³Ï³Ýáõû³Ý Ù¿ç ã³÷³½³Ýó ½·³ó³å³ßï Ùûï»óáõ- ݳãÙ³Ý ËݹÇñÁ, áñ áÙ³Ýù ÝáÛÝÇëÏ Ù³ñ¹ÇÏ Ï³Ý, áñáÝù µáÉáñáíÇÝ ï³ñ- ÙÁ£ ÏñÝ³Ý µ³õ³ñ³ñáõÇÉ ³Û¹ ׳ݳãáõ- µ»ñ, ³õ»ÉÇ å³ñÏ»ßï Ù»ÏݳϿï»ñáí Ùáí£ ´³õ³ñ³ñ ï»Õ ã¿ ïñáõ³Í Ð³Û áõ Ýå³ï³ÏÝ»ñáí ÏÁ Ùûï»Ý³Ý ¶©• гõ³Ý³µ³ñ ϳñ»ÉÇ ¿ ѳ- ¸³ïÇ ù³Õ³ù³Ï³Ý µáí³Ý¹³Ïáõ- 1915ÇÝ£ ²Û¹ Çñ³Ï³Ýáõû³Ý ·Ç- Ù³¹ñ»É£ î³ñÇÝ»ñ ß³ñáõݳϫ ºÕ»é- û³Ý Ù³ïáõóٳݣ ï³ÏóáõÃÇõÝÁ ÇÝùݳµ»ñ³µ³ñ ÏÁ Ý¿Ý ×áÕáåñ³Í í»ñ³åñáÕ ë»ñáõݹÁ г۳ëï³ÝÇ ³ÝϳËáõÃ»Ý¿Ý µ»ñ¿ ݳ»õ ѳñóÇÝ ÷³÷ÏáõÃÇõÝÁ áÕµ³ó »õ ó³õ³ÉÇ ¹¿åù»ñÁ í»ñÛÇ- »ïù, áñáß ã³÷áí ³Ù»ñÇÏ³Ñ³Û ûñ³- µÝ³Ï³Ýûñ¿Ý ÁÝϳɻÉáõ »õ ³ëïÇ׳- ß»Éáí ³åñ»ó³õ »õ ¹³ëïdzñ³Ï»ó ϳñ·ÇÝ íñ³Û ³ÛÉ Ñ³ñó»ñ ëÏë³Í »Ý ݳµ³ñ ³Ýáñ ÁÝï»É³Ý³Éáõ »õ ¦÷³- Û³çáñ¹ ë»ñáõݹÁ£ ijٳݳÏÝ ¿ áñ ï»Õ áõݻݳÉ, ë³Ï³ÛÝ ï»Õ-ï»Õ, áñáß ÷áõϧ ÁÉɳɿ ¹³¹ñ»Éáõ ÇñáÕáõ- Ó»ñµ³½³ïáõÇÝù ³Û¹ íÇ×³Ï¿Ý »õ ßñç³Ý³ÏÝ»ñáõ Ùûï ݳ»õ г۳ëï³- ÃÇõÝÝ»ñÁ£ ½³ñÏ ï³Ýù Ùß³ÏáÛÃÇÝ© ѳõ³ë³ ÝÇ áõ ²ñó³ËÇ ûųݹ³ÏáõÃÇõÝÁ ñ³ÏßéáõÃÇõÝ å³Ñ»Éáí ³Ýó»³ÉÇÝ« ³é³çݳѻñà ï»Õ ·ñ³õ³Í ¿, ³Ûë ´-ò»Õ³ëå³Ýáõû³Ý Ù³ëÇÝ Ð³- Ý»ñϳÛÇÝ »õ ³å³·³Û Ù»ñ í»ñ»É- ³Ý·³Ù Ç Ñ³ßÇõ Ù»ñ ÅáÕáíáõñ¹Ç Û³ëï³ÝÇ »õ ê÷ÇõéùÇ Ù¿ç ¹³ëïdz- ùÇÝ£ å³ïÙ³Ï³Ý Çñ³õáõÝùÝ»ñáõÝ£ ²Ûë ñ³Ïã³Ï³Ý ³ß˳ï³ÝùÝ»ñáõ µáí³Ý- úñÇݳϻÉÇ »ñ»õáÛà ¿ г۳ëï³- µáÉáñÇÝ ÙÇç»õ, ³é³Ýó Ù¿ÏÁ ÙÇõëÇÝ ¹³ÏáõÃÇõÝÝ»ñÁ ß³ï ï³ñµ»ñ ã»Ý, ÝÇ Ù¿ç ²åñÇÉ 23•ÇÝ ¹¿åÇ ÌÇÍ»é- ѳϳ¹ñ»Éáõ, ѳõ³ë³ñ³ÏßÇé Ùû- ï³ñµ»ñ ¿ ³Û¹ ÝáÛÝ µáí³Ý¹³Ïáõ- ݳϳµ»ñ¹ ù³Ûɳñß³õÁ Ù»ñ ³½·Ç ï»óáõÙ óáõó³µ»ñ»Éáõ ѳñó áõ- û³Ý Ù»Ïݳµ³ÝáõÃÇõÝÁ »õ ³å³·³Û ½³õ³ÏÝ»ñáõÝ« ÷áùñ»ñ ÁÉÉ³Ý ³ÝáÝù ÝÇÝù, áõñ г۳ëï³ÝÇ áõ ²ñó³- ÁÝ»ÉÇùÝ»ñáõ å³ïÏ»ñ³óáõÙÁ£ гÛ- ÿ ٻͻñ« ÝáÛÝÇëÏ ³Ýóóáõåáí« ËÇ ûųݹ³ÏáõÃÇõÝÁ, ²ñ»õÙï³- ñ»ÝÇ ÑáÕÇÝ íñ³Û ³åñ»Éáí ѳÛñ»ÝÇ ÅáÕáíáõñ¹Ç µáÉáñ ˳õ»ñ¿Ý« Çñ»Ýó ѳ۳ëï³ÝÇ ËݹÇñÁ, ò»Õ³ëå³- ѳë³ñ³ÏáõÃÇõÝÁ ò»Õ³ëå³Ýáõ- Û³ñ·³ÝùÇ ïáõñùÁ ï³Éáõ Ù»ñ ݳ- Ýáõû³Ý ׳ݳãáõÙÝ áõ ѳïáõ- û³Ý ËݹÇñÁ ³õ»ÉÇ ³é³ñϳ۳- ѳï³ÏÝ»ñáõÝ£ óáõÙÁ »õ Ùß³ÏáÛÃÇ áõ É»½áõÇ å³ßï Ó»õáí ÏÁ ¹Çï¿ »õ ë»÷³Ï³Ý ê÷ÇõéùÇ Ù¿ç ·ñ»Ã¿ ³Ù¿Ýáõñ»ù å³Ñå³ÝáõÙÁ ѳٳѳõ³ë³ñ ÁÝï³ÝÇùÇ íϳÛáõÃÇõÝ»ñáõ ÏáÕùÇݪ ³ñï³Û³Ûïáõ»Éáõ ³½³ïáõÃÇõÝÁ ÏÁ ï»Õ áõÝ»Ý³Ý áã ÙdzÛÝ Ù»ñ ¹³ëï- ݳ»õ å³ïÙ³Ï³Ý ·Çï³ß˳ïáõ- í³Û»É»Ýù« ë³Ï³ÛÝ ¹Åµ³Ëï³µ³ñ dzñ³Ïáõû³Ý Ù¿ç, ³ÛÉ Ý³»õ Ù»ñ ÃÇõÝÝ»ñáõ Áݹٿç¿Ý ÏÁ Ù»Ïݳµ³Ý¿ ÙdzÛÝ áñáß ï³ñÇù¿ í»ñ Ù³ñ¹ÇÏ ·áñÍáõÝ¿áõû³Ý Ù¿ç£

вÚðºÜÆø—4 ù³Õ³ù³Ï³ÝáõÃÇõÝÁ ѳÛáõÃÇõÝÁ ëáõû³Ý ³ñáõ»ëïÁ£ ´Ý³Ï³Ý³µ³ñ ¶©• ÏÁ ËáñÑÇ٠ÿ ï³ñµ»ñáõ- µÝ³çÝç»Éáõ, å³ïÙ³Ï³Ý Ù»ñ ѳÛñ»- ÃßݳÙÇ µ³éÁ Ïÿ³ñ·ÇÉ¿ áñ»õ¿ µ³- ÃÇõÝÁ ³ÛÝ ¿ áñ ³½³ïáõÃÇõÝÁ ëË³É ÝÇù¿Ý ï»Õ³Ñ³Ý»Éáõ »õ ѳÛñ»ÝÇ Ù»ñ ݳÏóáõÃÇõÝ£ ÏñÝ³Û Ù»Ïݳµ³ÝáõÇÉ »õ ²Ù»ñÇϳ- µÝûññ³ÝÁ ·ñ³õ»Éáõ Íñ³·Çñ ÏÁ Ñ»- ÛÇ Ù¿ç å³ï³ÝÇÝ ÙÕ»É ëË³É ×³Ùµáõ« ï³åݹ¿ñ, »õ ǵñ»õ ³Û¹åÇëÇݪ 7.- ²ÝÓÝ³Ï³Ý ÷áñÓ³éáõ- ëË³É ù³ÛÉ ³éÝ»Éáõ ÉáõÍáõÙÇ ÙÁ Û³Ý- ÃßÝ³Ù³Ï³Ý í»ñ³µ»ñÙáõÝù ϳñ ÃÇõÝÝ»ñ (¹ñ³Ï³Ý ÿ ÅËï³Ï³Ý) ·»Éáõ Ùï³¹ñáõû³Ùµ£ Ù»ñ ³½·ÇÝ Ýϳïٳٵ£ ö³ëï ¿ ݳ- áõÝ»ó³°Í ¿ù ³ß³Ï»ñïÝ»ñáõ Øï³Ñá·áõÃÇõÝ ÙÁÝ ³É Ï°áõ½»Ù »õ, áñ ³Û¹ ÃßÝ³Ù³Ï³Ý í»ñ³µ»ñ- Ñ»ï, ³Ûë ºÕ»éÝÇ ¹³ëïdzñ³- µ³ÅÝ»É ³Ù»ñÇÏ³Ñ³Û å³ï³ÝÇÇ å³- ÙáõÝùÇÝ Ñ»ï»õ³ÝùÝ»ñÁ ã»Ý í»ñ³- Ïáõû³Ý ѳñóÇÝ ³éÝãáõû³Ùµ£ ñ³·³ÛÇÝ£ ²Ûëûñ »Ã¿ ѳٻٳï»Ýù ó³Í »õ ÝáÛÝÇÝùÝ í»ñ³µ»ñÙáõÝù¿Ý ѳÛÏ³Ï³Ý í³ñųñ³Ý ۳׳ËáÕ å»ï³Ï³Ý ٳϳñ¹³Ïáí ß³ï µ³Ý ã¿ ².- ì»ñáÛÇß»³É Ùûï»óáõÙÇÝ Ñ»- »ñ³Ë³Ý»ñáõ ÃÇõÁ ·³ÕáõÃÇ ÃÇõÇÝ« ÷áËáõ³Í ݳ»õ ³Ûëûñ£ ï»õ³Ýùáí, ÅËï³Ï³Ý ³ÝÙÇç³Ï³Ý Ûáõë³Ë³µáõû³Ý ÏÁ Ù³ïÝáõÇÝù© â»Ýù Ïñݳñ ³Ýï»ë»É ݳ»õ ³ÛÝ ÷áñÓ³éáõÃÇõÝÝ»ñÁ ã»Ýù áõÝ»ó³Í£ Ù»Í ½³Ý·áõ³Í ÙÁ Ù»ñ ѳÛáñ¹ÇÝ»- áñ Ãáõñù ÅáÕáíáõñ¹Á áã ûñÇÝ »õ áã î³ñµ»ñ ѳݹÇåáõÙÝ»ñáõ ÁÝóó- ñ¿Ý Ñ»éáõ ¿ ѳ۳ßáõÝã ¹³ëïdzñ³- ³É ³Ûëûñ ¹³ï³å³ñï³Í Çñ ջϳ- ùÇÝ, Ýϳï³Í »Ýù, ë³Ï³ÛÝ áñ µáÉáñ Ïáõûݿ« Ñ»éáõ ¿ ѳ۳ϻñïáõÙÇ í³ñáõû³Ý ³ñ³ñùÝ»ñÝ áõ ù³Õ³- ³ÛÝ »ñ»Ë³Ý»ñÁ, áñáÝù áõÕ»Õ³É- ûç³Ë¿Ý£ äÇïÇ áõ½¿Ç ï»ëÝ»É ³Û¹ ù³Ï³ÝáõÃÇõÝÁ£ ÖÇßï ¿ Ý»ñϳÛÇë áõ³óù ÑáÉáíáÛÃÇ ÙÁ Ù¿ç »Õ³Í »Ý áõÕÕáõû³Ùµ ³ß˳ï³Ýù Ù»ñ »Ï»- áñáß Ó³ÛÝ»ñ ÏÁ ÉëáõÇÝ, µ³Ûó ã»Ù (³ÛëÇÝùݪ ÙdzÛÝ ëï³óáÕÇ Ïñ³õáñ³- Õ»óõáÛ«Ù»ñ ÙÇáõÃÇõÝÝ»ñáõ ϳ٠ϳ½- ϳñÍ»ñ, áñ ³ÝáÝó ï³ñáÕáõÃÇõÝÁ, »õ Ï³Ý ¹»ñÇÝ Ù¿ç), ÏáñëÝóáõó³Í »Ý ëï»Õ- ٳϻñåáõÃÇõÝÝ»ñáõ ÏáÕÙ¿£ ٳݳõ³Ý¹ ³ÝáÝó ïñáõ³Í ³½³ïáõ- ͳ·áñÍ»Éáõ ϳñáÕáõÃÇõÝÁ£ Øݳó³Í ÃÇõÝÁ ѳë³Í ¿ ³ÛÝ ³ëïÇ׳ÝÇÝ áñ »Ý ½áÑÇ Ñá·»µ³Ýáõû³Ý Ù¿ç£ ½Çñ»Ýù ǵñ»õ »ñ»õáÛà ÝϳïÇ áõÝ»- ´Ý³Ï³Ý³µ³ñ, ¹ñ³Ï³Ý Ï¿ï»ñÁ ¸.- ´Ý³Ï³Ý³µ³ñ äáÉë¿Ý ųٳ- ݳÝù Ù»ñ ¹³ëïdzñ³Ïáõû³Ý Ù¿ç£ ß³ï »Ý. ûñÇݳÏ, Ù»ñ ³ß³Ï»ñïÝ»ñÁ, ÝáÕÝ»ñÁ ùÇã Éë³Í »Ý »Õ»éÝ¿Ý, »õ γñ»ÉÇ ¿ ³ÝáÝó ·áÛáõû³Ý Ù³ëÇÝ í»ñÁ ÛÇßáõ³Í Ó»õáí ݳ˳å³ï- Ïÿ³Ýѳݷëï³Ý³Ý »ñµ ÇÙ³Ý³Ý Ï³- ³ÏݳñÏáõÃÇõÝ ÁÝ»É, µ³Ûó Çëϳå¿ë ñ³ëïáõ»É¿ »ïù, ß³ï ³õ»ÉÇ ½·³ÛáõÝ ï³ñáõ³Í ³Ñ³õáñ Çñ³¹³ñÓáõÃÇõÝ- å¿ïù ¿ »ñ»õáÛÃÁ Ý»ñϳ۳óÝ»É Çñ »Ý ó»Õ³ëå³Ýáõû³Ý, ³Ý³ñ¹³ñáõ- Ý»ñáõÝ Ù³ëÇÝ£ г۳ëï³Ý¿Ý ųٳ- ÇëÏ³Ï³Ý å³ïÏ»ñáí »õ áã áñå¿ë û³Ý ÁݹѳÝáõñ ÝÇõÃÇÝ Ñ³Ý¹¿å, Ý³Í »õ Ñáë µÝ³ÏáÕ »ñÇï³ë³ñ¹áõ- Ãáõñù ѳë³ñ³Ïáõû³Ý Ù¿ç ϳ۳- »ñµ »ñÏñáñ¹³Ï³Ý í³ñųñ³Ý Ïÿ»ñ- ÃÇõÝÁ, ëå³ëáõ³Í¿Ý ³õ»ÉÇ ùÇã ï»- ó³Í ÇÝã áñ Ù»Í ³ÉÇù, áñáíÑ»ï»õ óÝ, Çñ»Ýó ¹åñáó³Ï³Ý ¹³ë³Å³Ù»- Õ»³Ï ¿ »Õ»éÝ¿Ý »õ Áݹѳϳé³ÏÁ, Çñ³Ï³ÝáõÃÇõÝÁ ³Û¹åÇëÇÝ ã¿£ ñáõÝ ÏÁ ¹³éÝ³Ý ÝÙ³Ý ÝÇõûñ Ý»ñ- ß³ï µ³Ý Éë³Í ¿ ÊáñÑñ¹³ÛÇÝ ûñ»- ϳ۳óÝáÕÝ»ñ£ ÜÙ³Ý µ³Ý»ñ ÏÁ å³- ñáõÝ ïÇñáÕ ³ÝѳݹáõñÅ»ÉÇ Ï³óáõ- ¶©• àã« ¹Åáõ³ñ ã¿« áñáíÑ»ï»õ ï³ÑÇÝ áõëáõóÇãÇ ÙÁ ³ÏݳñÏáõÃÇõ- ÃÇõÝ¿Ý£ ØÇÝã¹»é ³Ù»ñÇÏ³Ñ³Û »ñÏ- Çñ³Ï³ÝáõÃÇõÝ ¿ »õ Çñ³Ï³ÝáõÃÇõÝÁ Ý¿Ý Ù»ÏÝ»Éáí, ϳÙáíÇÝ Çñ»Ýó ¹³- ñáñ¹ ϳ٠»ññáñ¹ ë»ñáõÝ¹Ç ½³õ³Ï- Ý»ñϳ۳óÝ»ÉÁ Ñ»ßï ¿£ ëÁÝÏ»ñÝ»ñáõÝ ëáñí»óÝ»Éáõ Û³ÝÓݳ- Ý»ñáõÝ Ñ³Ù³ñ, ϳñ»õáñÁ ùñÇëïáÝ- γñ»ÉÇ ¿ Ý»ñÏ³Û Ù»ñ ³ÝÙÇ- éáõÃÇõÝÁ ëï³ÝÓÝ»Éáí, »õ³ÛÉÝ£ »³Û Ñ³Û ÁÉɳÉÝ ¿£ ç³Ï³Ý Ï»³Ýù¿Ý ûñÇÝ³Ï ï³É©²Ù»- ñÇϳÛÇ Ï³é³í³ñáõÃÇõÝÁ å³ï»- ñ³½ÙÇ Ù¿ç ¿ Æñ³ùÇ Ñ»ï« Ï³Ù Ü³- ´-ÆÝÍÇ Ñ³Ù³ñ ³Ù»Ý³¹Åáõ³ñ 6.- ¸Åáõ³ñ ¿ ¦ÂáõñùÁ Ù»ñ ˳·³ÑÁ Ï°³éÝ¿ ù³ÛÉ»ñ áñáÝó ѳ- ÷áñÓ³éáõÃÇõÝÁ åáÉë³Ñ³Û Ù»ñ ѳÛ- ÃßݳÙÇÝ ¿§Ý ³ñï³Û³Ûïáõ»Éáí, Ù³Ó³ÛÝ ã¿ ÅáÕáíáõñ¹Ç Ù¿Ï ½³Ý·- ñ»Ý³ÏÇóÝ»ñáõ ½³õ³ÏÝ»ñáõÝ å³ñ³- ݳ»õ ϳñ»Ý³É µ³ó³ïñ»É ÿ áõ³ÍÁ »õ ãÇ µ³ÅÝ»ñ ³Û¹ ·³Õ³÷³- ·³Ý ¿ñ£ ºÃ¿ ê÷ÇõéùÇ áõ гÛñ»ÝÇ- ³ÛɳËáÑ Ãáõñù»ñáõ ËáõÙµ ÙÁ ñÁ£ ùÇ ï³ñµ»ñáõÃÇõÝÝ»ñáõ Ù³ëÇÝ Ëû- ·áÛáõÃÇõÝ áõÝÇ, áñ Ñ»ï»õáÕ³- ²Ûëûñ Ï³Ý Ãáõñù Ùï³õáñ³Ï³Ý- ë»Éáõ Å³Ù³Ý³Ï ÁëÇ áñ µáí³Ý¹³Ïáõ- Ï³Ý Ó»õáí »õ å³ïß³×ûñ¿Ý ÏÁ Ý»ñ« áñáÝù Ý»ñáÕáõÃÇõÝ ÏÁ Ëݹñ»Ý û³Ý ßáõñç ï³ñµ»ñáõÃÇõÝÝ»ñ ãϳÝ, µ³ó³Û³Ûï¿ ºÕ»éÝÇ ÙÁ »Õ»Éáõ- Ñ³Û ÅáÕáíáõñ¹¿Ý« Ï°ÁݹáõÝÇÝ ³Ýó- ³å³ ï³ñÇÝ»ñ ß³ñáõÝ³Ï Ãñù³Ï³Ý ÃÇõÝÁ£ ÆÝã忱ë Ùûï»Ý³É »õ »³ÉÇ ³Ñ»Õ å³ï³Ñ³ÍÁ »õ ã»Ý í³- ù³ñá½ã³Ï³Ý áõ ÏñÃ³Ï³Ý ù³Õ³- Ý»ñϳ۳óÝ»É ³Ûë ÷³÷áõÏ Ñ³ñ- ñ³ÝÇñ ³ñï³Û³Ûï»Éáõ Çñ»Ýó ï»ë³- ù³Ï³Ýáõû³Ý »ÝÃ³Ï³Û åáÉë³Ñ³- óÁ£ Ï¿ïÁ£ Ûáõ ½³õ³ÏÇÝ Ùûï áñáß ï³ñµ»ñáõ- ÃÇõÝ Ýϳï»óÇ£ ´Ý³Ï³Ý³µ³ñ ³Ýáñ ².- î»ëÝ»É ¿ç 4Ç å³ï³ë˳ÝÁ£ ¸.- Ðáë å¿ïù ¿ µ³ó³ïñ»É ÿ ³½- Ù»Õ³õáñÁ Çñ³Ï³ÝáõÃÇõÝÁ óùó- ·³ÛÇÝ ÇÝùÝáõû³Ý ѳßõáÛÝ, Ï»Ýë³- ÝáÕ »õ å³ïÙ³Ï³Ý ÷³ëï»ñÁ ´-¸³ëïdzñ³Ïáõû³Ý ÑÇÙÝ³Ï³Ý Ï³Ý Ñ³ñó ÙÁ ϳÛ, áñ ù³Õ³ù³Ï³Ý ßñçáõ³Í Ý»ñϳ۳óÝáÕ Ãñù³Ï³Ý Ù»ÏݳϿïÁ åÇïÇ ÁÉÉ³Û ³ÛÝ, áñ ¹³- µÝáÛà áõÝÇ£ ä¿ïù ¿ ݳ»õ ½³ñ·³ó- ù³ñá½ãáõÃÇõÝÝ ¿£ ê³Ï³ÛÝ, ³ÝÓݳ- ñ³ëÏǽµÇÝ Ãñù³Ï³Ý å»ï³Ï³Ý Ý»É ¹Çõ³Ý³·Çï³Ï³Ý á×áí »ñÏËû- Ï³Ý ÷áñÓ³éáõû³Ùµ Ïñݳ٠åݹ»É,

вÚðºÜÆø—5 áñ ³Ûë Ù¿ÏÁ Û³Õóѳñ»ÉÇ ¿, »õ ѳٳñª ÝáÛÝÇëÏ »Ã¿ ѳٳó³Ýó³ÛÇÝ ².- Ú³ïáõÏ Íñ³·Çñ ÙÁ ãϳۣ ¹³ëïdzñ³Ïã³Ï³Ý ³éáÕç Ùûï»óáõ- ÁÝûñóáõÙ ÙÁ ÁÉɳۣ ²ñÙ³ïÝ»ñ¿ ¦Ìñ³·Çñ§Á ÙÇßï µÝ³Ï³Ý ÁÝóóùÇ Ùáí Û³çáÕ³Í »Ù åáÉë³Ñ³Û Ù»ñ »ñ»- Ïïñáõ»Éáí (É»½áõÇ ³Ý·Çï³óáõÙÇÝ Ù¿ç ÁÉɳÉÝ ¿, û·ï³·áñÍ»É Ù»½Ç Ý»ñ- ˳ÛÇÝ Ùûï»óáõÙÁ áã ÿ Ùûï»óÝ»É Ñ»ï»õ³Ýùáí), ÏÁ ÙݳÝù ÙdzÛÝ áõ- ϳ۳óáõáÕ ³éÇÃÝ»ñÁª ÝÇõûñ ³ñ- Çñ ¹³ëÁÝÏ»ñáç Ùûï»óáõÙÇݪ ³ÛÉ ³Ù- ñÇßÇÝ ïáõ³Íáí£ ì»ñçÇÝ ßñç³ÝÇÝ Í³ñÍ»Éáõ ѳٳñ£ î³ñáõ¿ ï³ñÇ µáÕçáíÇÝ ÝáÛݳóݻɣ Ãñù³Ï³Ý ³ßËáÛŠѳϳ½ó»óáõ- ÏñݳÝù ѳݹÇåÇÉ ËáõÙµ ÙÁ å³ï³- ÃÇõÝÁ ³ÝÃÇõ ³ÕµÇõñÝ»ñ ÏÁ µ³Ý³Ûª ÝÇÝ»ñáõ, áñ ³õ»ÉÇ Ñ³ëáõÝ ÁÉɳÛ, ù³Ý ¶©• ºñµ ³Ûë ÝÇõÃÁ Ïÿ³ñͳñÍáõÇ« ³ß˳ï»Éáõ áõ ëáñí»Éáõ ѳٳñ£ Þû- Ù¿Ï áõñÇßÁ, »õ Áëï ³ÛÝÙ Ý»ñßÝãáõÇÉ ºÕ»éÝÁ ϳ٠ٻñ å³å»Ý³Ï³Ý ÑáÕ»- ß³÷»ÉÇ, ·áñÍÝ³Ï³Ý (hands-on) ÑáÉá- ϳ٠ݻñßÝã»É£ ØdzÛÝ ÙÇçݳϳñ·¿Ý ñáõ ·ñ³õáõ³Í ÁÉɳÉáõ Çñ³Ï³Ýáõ- íáÛÃÇ ÙÁ Ù¿ç »Ýù ³Ûëûñ£ ²Ûëûñáõ³Ý »ïù ÏñÝ³Ý å³ïñ³ëï ÁÉɳɪ ÝÇõû- ÃÇõÝÁ« ÷áùñÇÏÝ»ñÁ Û³×³Ë Ï°Áݹí- å³ïÙáõÃÇõÝÁ å³ï³ÝÇÝ»ñÁ ÏÁ Ï»ñ- ñáõÝ ÉñÇõ ÁÝϳÉáõÙÁ ϳï³ñ»Éáõ ³ß- ½ÇÝ »õ áñáß ³ñï³Û³ÛïáõÃÇõÝÝ»ñ ï»Ý, Çñ»Ýó å¿ïù ¿ íëï³ÑÇÉ ³Û¹ ˳ï³ÝùÇÝ£ ÏáõÝ»Ý³Ý £²ÝÓݳå¿ë ÏÁ Ëñ³Ëáõ- Ï»ñïáõÙÁ, áñå¿ë½Ç ¹»ñ³Ï³ï³ñ ÁÉ- ë»Ù ½Çñ»Ýù ÿ ³Ûëûñ Ù»Ýù ϳÝù »õ É³Ý »õ áã ÿ ¹Çïáñ¹£ ²Ûë ÇÙ³ëïáí, ´-гٳѳÛϳϳÝ, ѳٳë- åÇïÇ ·áÛ³ï»õ»Ýù© ÿ ¹áõù ³É åñåïáõÙÇ »õ ¹³ëïdzñ³Ïã³Ï³Ý ÷Çõéù»³Ý ϳ٠ÝáÛÝÇëÏ Ñ³Ù³³Ù»- å³ñï³Ï³ÝáõÃÇõÝ ÙÁ áõÝÇù© ÑÇÙ³ ³ß˳ï³ÝùÝ»ñáõ Ýáñ ÙÇçáóÝ»ñÁ ñÇÏ»³Ý ٳϳñ¹³ÏÝ»ñáí ÝÙ³Ý ³ß- Ó»ñ ï³ñÇùÇÝ Ù¿ç Ó»ñ ½ûñáõÃÇõÝÁ ÃáÛÉ Ïáõ ï³Ý Û³é³çÁÝóóÇ Ï³ñ»- ˳ï³ÝùÇ ÙÁ ·áÛáõû³Ý ͳÝûà »õ ·áÛ³ï»õ»Éáõ ϳÙùÁ óáÛó Ïñݳù ÉÇáõÃÇõÝÝ»ñ£ ã»Ù£ Ðñ³å³ñ³Ï³ÛÇÝ ³é³ç³ñÏ- ï³É Ù»ñ Ù³Ûñ»ÝÇÝ »õ å³ïÙáõÃÇõÝÁ Ý»ñ ϳ٠ϳñÍÇùÝ»ñ ϳÝ, µ³Ûó ëáñí»Éáí áõ å³Ñ»Éáí Ù»ñ ³ÝÝÙ³Ý ´-ÀݹѳÝñ³å¿ë å³ï³ÝÇÇÝ Ñá- ³Û¹ ï»ë³Ï¿ïÝ»ñÁ ϳ½Ù³Ï»ñå- Ùß³ÏáÛÃÁ£ä¿ïù ¿ ÛÇß»Ýù Ù»ñ ³Ýó- ·»Ùï³õáñ ϳéáõóáõ³ÍùÁ Çñ ÙÇç³- áõ³Í å³ñáõݳÏÇ ÙÁ Ù¿ç ¹Ý»Éáõ »³ÉÁ »õ å³ñï³Ï³ÝáõÃÇõÝ ½·³Ýù í³ÛñÇ ÍÝáõÝ¹Ý ¿£ àõëïÇ, ò»Õ³ëå³- ݳ˳ӻéÝáõÃÇõÝ ã¿ »Õ³Í£ г- ÷á˳Ýó»Éáõ Û³çáñ¹ ë»ñáõݹÇÝ£ Ýáõû³Ý ׳ݳãÙ³Ý ·Íáí ï³ñáõ³Í õ³Ý³µ³ñ ³ÛÉ ûñ³Ï³ñ·»ñáõ ß³ñ- ³ß˳ï³ÝùÝ»ñáõÝ ³ßËáõÅáõÃÇõÝÁ, ùÇÝ ³Ûë ѳñóÁ ùÝÝáõ³Í ¿ Ïñó- ³õ»ÉÇ Û³×³Ë Ññ³ï³ñ³ÏáõáÕ ·Çñ- Ï³Ý ï³ñµ»ñ ËáñÑñ¹³ÅáÕáíÝ»- ¸.- î³ñÇÝ»ñ ³é³ç »ñµ ݳ˳Ïñ- ù»ñÝ áõ ϳ½Ù³Ï»ñåáõ³Í Éë³ñ³Ý- ñáõ ųٳݳÏ, µ³Ûó ßûß³÷»ÉÇ ³ñ- óñ³ÝÇ ³ß³Ï»ñïÝ»ñáõÝ, ݳѳï³Ï Ý»ñÁ ³Ýå³ÛÙ³Ý ÏÁ Ý»ñù³ß»Ý »õ ¹ÇõÝù ó³ñ¹ ãϳۣ гϳé³Ï ³Ûë ·ñ³·¿ïÝ»ñáõ ÏÁ Ëûë¿Ç, ³ß³Ï»ñï- ¹³ëïdzñ³Ïã³Ï³Ý ³½¹»óáõÃÇõÝ ÇñáÕáõû³Ý, ³ÛÉ Ù³Ýϳí³ñÅÝ»- Ý»ñ¿Ý Ù¿ÏÁ Ùï³Ñá· Áë³õ.- §îÇÏÇÝ ÏþáõÝ»Ý³Ý Ñ³Û å³ï³ÝÇÇÝ »õ »ñÇ- ñáõ Ñ»ï ß÷áõÙÝ»ñáõ Å³Ù³Ý³Ï ÏÁ Ù»ñ µáÉáñ ·ñáÕÝ»ñ Ù»é³°Í »Ý¦£ ²Ûë ï³ë³ñ¹ÇÝ íñ³Û£ ê³Ï³ÛÝ, ÏñÏÇÝ ÏÁ Ýϳï»Ù, áñ Çõñ³ù³ÝãÇõñÇÝ Ùûï Ù¿ÏÁ ÇÝùÝÇÝ Ññ³õ¿ñ ÙÁÝ ¿ñ Ù³Ýϳ- ͳ·Ç ³Û¹ µáÉáñÇÝ Ëáñù ѳÕáñ¹»- Ï³Û ³ÛÝ ×Ç·Á áñ ò»Õ³ëå³Ýáõ- í³ñÅÇÝ Ñ³Ù³ñ, ³Ý¹ñ³¹³éݳÉáõ ÿ Éáõ ѳñóÁ, áñ »ñÇï³ë³ñ¹Á Ð³Û ¸³- û³Ý ѳñóÁ Ù³ïáõóáõÇ ³½·³ÛÇÝ ³Û¹ ï³ñÇùÇ ³ß³Ï»ñïÝ»ñÁ ÇÝãå¿°ë ïÁ ϳñ»Ý³Û ï»ëÝ»É ò»Õ³ëå³Ýáõ- »õ Ù³Ýϳí³ñÅ³Ï³Ý ³éáÕç å³- ÏÁ Ùûï»Ý³Ý ѳñóÇÝ£ û³Ý ׳ݳãáõÙ¿Ý ³Ý¹ÇÝ£ ñáõݳÏÇ ÙÁ Ù¿ç£ ¶áõó¿ ûñ ³Û¹ ³é³ÝÓÇÝ ×Ç·»ñáí Ó»éù µ»ñáõ³Í 8.- ä³ïÙ³Ï³Ý Û»ï¹³ñÓ ¶©• ÎÁ ËáñÑÇÙ áñ Û³é³ç¹ÇÙáõ- ÷áñÓ³éáõÃÇõÝÝ»ñáõ ·áõÙ³ñáí ³ñ³· ³ÏݳñÏ ÙÁ ϳï³ñ»Éáí, ÃÇõÝ Ï³Û«Ùûï»óáõÙÇ å³ñ³·³Ý ¿ áñ Ó»õ³õáñáõÇ ÏñÃ³Ï³Ý Ù³ëݳ·Ç- Ç°Ýã »Õ³÷áËáõÃÇõÝ (evolution) ÷áËáõ³Í ¿£ ï³Ï³Ý Û³ïáõÏ Íñ³·Çñ ÙÁ£ ϳï³ñáõ³Í ¿ Ñ³Û å³ï³ÝÇÝ »Õ»éÝÇ Ù³ëÇÝ ¹³ëïdzñ³Ï»Éáõ ¸.- ØÇçÇÝ ²ñ»õ»ÉùÇ Ù¿ç ëáõ·Ç ¶©• àñáß å³ïñ³ëïáõÃÇõÝÝ»ñ« µÝ³·³õ³é¿Ý Ý»ñë£ Ú³é³ç¹ÇÙáõ- ï³ñÇ ¿ñ ²åñÇÉ 24Á£ ²ÛÅÙ ³Û¹ ÙÇßï ·ñù»ñ »õ³ÛÉÝ Ï³Ý« ë³Ï³ÛÝ ÏÁ ϳñ- ÃÇõÝ Ï³°Û ÿ Áݹѳϳé³ÏÁ£ ïËáõñ ϳóáõÃÇõÝ¿Ý ¹áõñë ·³Éáõ ͻ٠áñ ³õ»ÉÇ Éáõñç ³ß˳ï³Ýù ѳٳñ, Ù»ñ í³ñųñ³Ý¿Ý Ý»ñë ¦Å³- å¿ïù ¿ ï³ñáõÇ ûñáõ³Ý Û³ñÙ³ñ³- ².- ÜϳïÇ å¿ïù ¿ áõݻݳÉ, ÇÝã- é³Ý·áõû³Ý ß³µ³Ã§ ÏÁ Ïáã»Ýù, ·áÛÝ Ó»õÁ áñ¹»·ñ»Éáõ »õ ¹³ëïdz- å¿ë ݳ˳å¿ë ÁëÇÝù, áñ Û³×³Ë ³Ýßáõßï ³é³Ýó ÙáéݳÉáõ å³ï³- ñ³Ï»Éáõ Ýáñ ë»ñáõݹÁ« áñáÝó Ñ»- Ýϳï»ÉÇ ¿ ͳÝñ³óáõÙ ÙÁ å³ïÙáõ- ѳÍÁ£ ï³ùñùñáõÃÇõÝÁ ٳݳõ³Ý¹ Ý»ñϳ- û³Ý »õ áã ÿ É»½áõÇÝ íñ³Û, ½áñ ÛÇë ²Ù»ñÇϳÛÇ Ù¿ç ³Ûɳ½³Ý áõÕ- ³ÝÑñ³Å»ßï ¿ áõݻݳÉ, áñáíÑ»ï»õ 9.- Ú³ïáõÏ ³ß˳ï³Ýù ï³ñ- ÕáõÃÇõÝÝ»ñáí ¿© ³ÝÓÝ³Ï³Ý ÝÇõó- Ù³ñ¹ ³ñ³ÍÁ ϳñ¹³óáÕ ¿ Ç µÝ¿ (ÝáÛ- áõ³þÍ ¿, ϳ٠·³Õ³÷³ñÁ ϳ°Û Ï³Ý ß³Ñ»ñÁ ÏÁ ·»ñ³¹³ë»Ý ³Ù¿Ý ÝÇëÏ »Ã¿ ÁÝûñó³ëÇñáõÃÇõÝÁ Ýáõ³- Û³ïáõÏ Ù³ëݳ·Çï³Ï³Ý Íñ³- ÇÝ㣠½³Í ¿), ãÇ Ïñݳñ ·áÑ³Ý³É ÙdzÛÝ ·Çñ ÙÁ å³ïñ³ëï»Éáõ ºÕ»éÝÇ Éëáõ³Íáí£ Ð»ï»õ³µ³ñ, É»½áõÇ ÇÙ³- Ù³ëÇÝ ¹³ëïdzñ³Ïáõû³Ý ¸.- ¶³Õ³÷³ñÁ ϳÛ, ë³Ï³ÛÝ ³ß- óáõÃÇõÝÁ ³ÝÑñ³Å»ßï ¿ª ÷Ýïéïáõù ѳñóÇÝ ³éÝãáõû³Ùµ£ ˳ï³ÝùÝ áõ Ï»¹ñáݳóáõÙÝ ¿ áñ ÏÁ ϳ½Ù³Ï»ñå»Éáõ ѳٳñ, ϳñ¹³Éáõ å³ÏëÇ£

вÚðºÜÆø—6 ºÕ»éÝÁ Ð³Û³Ñ³Û ø³Õ³ù³Ï³Ýáõû³Ý лï»õ³ÝùÝ ¿ñ кîºô²´²ðª ØƲÚÜ 1915-àì âÆ ê²ÐزÜàôÆð ì²â¾ ´ðàôÜ

γÛëñáõÃÇõÝ: ´³éÁ ³ñ¹¿Ý ݳ¹ñáõÃÇõÝ Ïáãáõ³Í ÷³ëï³ÃáõÕ- õáñáõÙÇ ÙÁ Ñ»ï: г峱 »Ã¿ ϳÛë- ÅËï³Ï³ÝáõÃÇõÝ ÙÁ ÏÁ Ûáõß¿: γÛë- ÃÁ ÙdzÛÝ Ýáõ³½³·áÛÝ Ï³åÁ áõÝ»- ñáõû³Ý ÙÇõë ï³ññ»ñÁ »õë áõ½¿ÇÝ ñáõÃÇõÝÁ ÇÁ ë³ÑÙ³ÝáõÙáíÝ ÇëÏ ÏÁ Ý³Û ·³õ³éÇÝ Ñ»ï, áõñ ë³Ï³ÛÝ ûñÇÝ³Ï ³éÝ»É Ñ³Û»ñ¿Ý, ѳ峱 »Ã¿ Ý߳ݳϿ, ÿ Ï³Û Ù»Í áõÅ ÙÁ áñ Ïÿ³åñ¿ñ ϳÛëñáõû³Ý Ñ³Û µÝ³Ïãáõ- í³ñã³Ï³ñ·Ç Ý»ñùÇÝ Áݹ¹ÇÙ³¹Çñ- µéݳ·ñ³õ³Í ÏÁ å³Ñ¿ ÇñÙ¿ ïϳñ- û³Ý ç³Ëç³ËÇã ٻͳٳëÝáõÃÇõÝÁ: Ý»ñÁ »õë áõ½¿ÇÝ ÝÙ³Ý µ³Ý ÙÁ å³ñ- Ý»ñáõ ѳÛñ»ÝÇùÝ»ñÁ: ºõ ¦µéݳ·ñ³- ÖÇß¹ ¿, áñ ϳÛëñáõÃÇõÝÁ ÇÝù- ï³¹ñ»É ëáõÉóÝÇÝ: õ³Í å³Ñ»Éáõ§ ³Ûë ѳëϳóáõÃÇõÝÁ ½ÇÝù Ýáñá·»Éáõ, Çñ ϳéáÛóÝ»ñÁ ³ñ¹- ²Ñ³õ³ëÇÏ, Çñ í»ñçÇÝ ûñ»ñÁ Ïÿ»Ýó¹ñ¿ ݳ»õ, ³Ù¿Ý µ³Ý¿ ³é³ç, dzϳݳóÝ»Éáõ ×Ç·Ç ÙÁ Ù¿ç ¿ñ, ë³- Ïÿ³åñÇ úëٳݻ³Ý ϳÛëñáõû³Ý 54 µéÝÇ áõÅÇ ·áñͳÍáõÃÇõݪ Çñ ³ÝËáõ- ϳÛÝ í»ñçÇÝ Ñ³ßáõáíª Ï³ÛëñáõÃÇõÝ ï³ñ»Ï³Ý í³ñã³å»ï, »õñáå³Ï³Ý ë³÷»ÉÇ Ñ³Ï³½¹»óáõÃÇõÝÝ»ñáí: ºõ ¿ñ, ٻݳïÇñ³Ï³Ý í³ñã³Ï³ñ·áí: ³éáõÙáí áõ뻳É-½³ñ·³ó³Í ø¿ã¿- áñáíÑ»ï»õ ù³Õ³ù³Ï³Ý Ùï³ÍáÕáõ- ²É ǯÝã ë³Ñٳݳ¹ñáõÃÇõÝ, ǯÝã ×ǽ³ï¿ üáõ³ï ÷³ß³Ý, 1869ÇÝ, ѳ- û³Ý Ù¿ç Ï³Û ï»ëáõÃÇõÝ ÙÁ, Áëï ÑÇÙÝ³Ï³Ý ûñ¿Ýù: ºõ áõñ»ÙÝ, ³ÛÝ, ÇÝã Ûáó ²½·³ÛÇÝ ë³Ñٳݳ¹ñáõû³Ý áñáõÝ »ñµ áõÅÁ ÇÝùݳÝå³ï³Ï ¿, áñ ѳÛÏ³Ï³Ý Çñ³Ï³Ýáõû³Ý Ù¿ç ųٳݳϳßñç³ÝÇ ÑÇÙÝ³Ï³Ý ¹»ñ³- ÏÿáõÕÕáõÇ ¹¿åÇ ÇÝùݳù³Ý¹áõÙ, Ñ»- ͳÝûà ¿ ǵñ»õ ²½·³ÛÇÝ ë³Ñٳݳ¹- ϳï³ñÝ»ñ¿Ý ÙÇÝ: ²Ý Çñ Ù³Ñáõ³Ý ï»õ³µ³ñ, áõÅÇ ¦ï¿ñ»ñÁ§ å¿ïù ¿ ñáõÃÇõÝ Ñ³Ûáó, ûëٳݻ³Ý ϳé³í³- ³ÝÏáÕÇÝ¿Ý ëáõÉóÝÇÝ ÏÁ ÛÕ¿ Çñ ù³- ³ß˳ïÇÝ Ýáñá·»É Çñ»Ýó áõÅÇ ³Õ- ñáõû³Ý ÏáÕÙ¿ ׳Ýãóáõ³Í ¿ñ ëáëÏ Õ³ù³Ï³Ý Ïï³ÏÁ, áñáõÝ Ù¿ç ÏÿÁݹ·- µÇõñÝ»ñÁ, ïÝï»ë³å¿ë, ù³Õ³ù³- ǵñ»õ ¦ø³ÝáõÝݳٿ ¿ñÙ¿ÝÇ ÙÇÉÉ¿- Í¿.- ä³Éù³ÝÝ»ñáõ Ù¿ç Ù»Ýù (Ãáõñ- ϳÝ, ½ÇÝáõáñ³Ï³Ý ÿ ³ÛÉ ÙÇçáóÝ»- Ãǧ: ²ÛëÇÝùÝ, Ñ³Û Ñ³Ù³ÛÝùÇ (ÙÇÉ- ù»ñë) Ù»ñ ·ÇñÏÁ ÇÅ»ñ Ù»ÍóáõóÇÝù, ñáí, áñå¿ë½Ç ϳñ»Ý³Ý »ñϳñ³Ó·»É É¿ÃÇ) ϳÝáݳ·Çñ: ä»ï³Çñ³õ³Ï³Ý áñáÝù ³Ûëûñ ÏÁ å³ïñ³ëïáõÇÝ Ù»½ Çñ»Ýó Çß˳ÝáõÃÇõÝÁ: ³éáõÙáí, Ñëϳ۳ϳÝ, É»é-Óáñ ï³ñ- ˳ÛûÉáõ, ÝáÛÝ ë˳ÉÁ å¿ïù ã¿ ·áñ- ºõ áõñ»ÙÝ, ¦ÇÝùݳÝáñá·áõÙǧ µ»ñáõÃÇõÝ Ï³Û ¦ë³Ñٳݳ¹ñáõ- Í»Ýù öáùñ ²ëÇáÛ Ù¿ç, áõñ Û³ïϳ- ³Ûë ¹³ë³Ï³Ý ûñÇݳÏÝ»ñ¿Ý Ù¿ÏÝ ³É ÃÇõݧ »õ ¦Ï³Ýáݳ·Çñ§ µ³é»ñáõÝ å¿ë ѳۻñÁ, í»ñç»ñë Ù»Í »é³Ý¹ ÏÁ úëٳݻ³Ý ϳÛëñáõû³Ý å³ñ³·³Ý ÙÇç»õ: ä»ïáõÃÇõÝÝ»ñÝ »Ý, áñáÝù óáõó³µ»ñ»Ý ó÷³Ýó»Éáõ Ù»ñ å»- ¿ñ, Û³ïϳå¿ë 19ñ¹ ¹³ñáõÝ, »ñµ ë³Ñٳݳ¹ñáõÃÇõÝ ÏÿáõݻݳÝ. г- ï³Ï³Ý ÑÇÙݳñÏÝ»ñ¿Ý Ý»ñë: ä¾îø 1836ÇÝ »õ 1856ÇÝ, »ñ³ñ³Û³çáñ¹ »ñ- Û³ëï³ÝÇ Ð³Ýñ³å»ïáõÃÇõÝÁ, ûñÇ- ¾ â²ö²ôàðºÈ вںðàô ºè²Ü¸À: Ïáõ ëáõÉóÝÝ»ñ, ²åïÇõÉ Ø¿×Çï »õ ݳÏÇ Ñ³Ù³ñ, áõÝÇ ë³Ñٳݳ¹ñáõ- Ð³Û ù³Õ³ù³Ï³Ý ÙÇïùÇ å³ï- ²åïÇõÉ ²½Ç½, ÷áñÓ»óÇÝ ³ñ¹Ç³Ï³- ÃÇõÝ, ÇëÏ ³Ýáñ ë³ÑÙ³ÝÝ»ñ¿Ý Ý»ñë Ùáõû³Ý Ù¿ç ²½·³ÛÇÝ ë³Ñٳݳ¹- ݳóÝ»É ûëٳݻ³Ý å»ï³Ï³Ý ϳ- ·áñÍáÕ ïáõ»³É ϳ½Ù³Ï»ñåáõÃÇõÝ ñáõÃÇõÝÁ Çõñ³Û³ïáõÏ ï»Õ ÙÁ ÏÁ éáÛóÝ»ñÁª ϳÛë»ñ³Ï³Ý Ññ³Ù³Ý³·- ÙÁ, Áë»Ýùª Ð³Û û·Ýáõû³Ý ÙÇáõ- ·ñ³õ¿: ØdzųٳݳÏ, ûëٳݻ³Ý ñ»ñ ³ñӳϻÉáí, áñáÝù å³ïÙáõ- ÃÇõÝÁª å³ñ½³å¿ë ϳÝáݳ·Çñ: ºõ å»ïáõû³Ý Ñá·»í³ñùÇ Ù¿ç û³Ý Ù¿ç ͳÝûà »Ý ǵñ»õ гÃÃÁ áõñ»ÙÝ, ÇÝã áñ Ù»Ýù ÏÁ Ïáã¿ÇÝù ²½- ·ïÝáõáÕ ë³ïñ³½³ÙÁ (³Û¹å¿ë ÏÁ ÐÇõÙ³ÛáõÝ »õ гÃÃÁ Þ»ñÇý: ²Ûë »ñ- ·³ÛÇÝ ë³Ñٳݳ¹ñáõÃÇõÝ, ûëÙ³Ý- Ïáãáõ¿ÇÝ Ï³Ûëñáõû³Ý í³ñã³å»ï- Ïáõ ϳñ»õáñ ù³ÛÉ»ñÁ, áñáÝóÙ¿ Ù¿- »³Ý å»ïáõû³Ý ѳٳñ ¦Ï³Ýáݳ- Ý»ñÁ) ɳõ ·Çï¿ñ, ÿ ϳÛëñáõû³Ý ÏáõÝ Û³çáñ¹»óÇÝ »õ ÙÇõëÇÝ Ý³Ëáñ- ·Çñ§ ¿ñ, áõñÇß áãÇÝã (Ð³å³ Ç±Ýã, ÏÁ ѳٳñ ¦³ëáñ í»ñçÁ ɳõ åÇïÇ ãÁÉ- ¹»óÇÝ 1848Ç »õñáå³Ï³Ý Û»Õ³÷á- ϳñÍ¿ÇÝù áñ µéݳïÇñ³Ï³Ý í³ñã³- ɳۧ: ØÇõë ÏáÕÙ¿ ë³Ï³ÛÝ, Çñ ß³ñù Ë³Ï³Ý ß³ñÅáõÙÝ»ñÁ, ëï»ÕÍ»óÇÝ Ï³ñ·Ç ÙÁ ï³Ï ³åñáÕ Ñ³Ù³ÛÝù ÙÁ ÙÁ ³ÛÉ ·áñͳÏÇóÝ»ñáõ Ùïù»ñÁ ѳÝ- ݳ»õ ³ÛÝ »ÝóÑáÕÁ, ÙÃÝáÉáñïÁ, áñ Çñ³õ³ëáõÃÇõÝ Ïñݳ±Û ëï³Ý³É ·Çëï ¿ÇÝ, ³ÛÝù³Ý ³ï»Ý, áñ ³Û¹ ²½- ٻͳå¿ë Ýå³ëï»ó Ù»ñ ¼³ñÃûÝùÇ ¦ë³Ñٳݳ¹ñáõÃÇõݧ áõݻݳÉáõ, ·³ÛÇÝ ë³Ñٳݳ¹ñáõÃÇõÝÁ (ù³- ß³ñÅáõÙÇÝ »õ Ñ»ï»õ³µ³ñ ݳ»õª ²½- »ñµ ûëٳݻ³Ý å»ïáõÃÇõÝÁ Ç°Ýù ÝáõÝݳٿÝ) í³õ»ñ³óáõ³Í ¿ñ ³ÛÝ- ·³ÛÇÝ ë³Ñٳݳ¹ñáõû³Ý, 1863ÇÝ: ë³Ñٳݳ¹ñáõÃÇõÝ ãáõÝ¿ñ »õ ëáõÉ- åÇëÇ µáí³Ý¹³Ïáõû³Ùµ, áñ ѳÛϳ- ²Ûë ųٳݳϳßñç³ÝÇ ûëٳݻ³Ý óÝÝ»ñÁ ÏÁ ë³ñë³÷¿ÇÝ ³Û¹ ·³Õ³- Ï³Ý ·³õ³éÝ»ñÁ ϳñ»ÉÇ »Õ³ÍÇÝ »ñÏáõ í³ñã³å»ïÝ»ñÁ, ²ÉÇ »õ ÷³ñ¿Ý ÇëÏ): ã³÷ Ù»Ïáõë³óáõ³Í ÙݳÛÇÝ äáÉÇë¿Ý: üáõ³ï ÷³ß³Ý»ñÁ ³Ù¿Ý ×Ç· ó÷»- 1860³Ï³Ý Ãáõ³Ï³ÝÝ»ñáõ ûëÙ³Ý- ºÕ³ÍÁ, Ãñù³Ï³Ý å»ïáõû³Ý ѳ- óÇÝ, áñå¿ë½Ç åáÉë³Ñ³Û ѳٳÛÝùÇ »³Ý å»ï³Ï³Ý ³õ³·³ÝÇÇÝ Ñ³Ù³ñ, Ù³ñ, å³ñ½³å¿ë å³ïñdzñù³Ï³Ý ջϳí³ñáõû³Ý ÏáÕÙ¿ Ùß³Ïáõ³Í ß³ï ѳ׻ÉÇ ã¿ñ ³éÝãáõÇÉ ¦ë³ÑÙ³- ѳëï³ïáõÃÇõÝÁ Ý»ñùÇÝ Ï³Ýáݳ·- »õ ³é³ç³¹ñáõ³Í ²½·³ÛÇÝ ë³ÑÙ³- ݳ¹ñáõÃÇõݧ áõÝ»Ý³É Ó·ïáÕ ËÙµ³- ñáí ÙÁ ûÅï»ÉÝ ¿ñ »õ áã ³õ»ÉÇÝ. ³ÛÝ

вÚðºÜÆø—7 å³ïñdzñù³ñ³ÝÁ, áñ 16ñ¹ ¹³ñáõ ÃÇõÝÝ»ñáõÝ: ²ÛëÇÝùÝ, ²Ý·ÉÇáÛ, ûëٳݻ³Ý µéݳïÇñáõÃÇõÝÁ, ÙÇõë ÏÇëáõÝ Ñ³ëï³ïáõ³Í ¿ñ ëáõÉÃ³Ý üñ³Ýë³ÛÇ »õ èáõëÇáÛ (ÑÇÙݳϳÝÇÝ ÏáÕÙ¿ ѳÛÏ³Ï³Ý Û»Õ³÷áË³Ï³Ý Ø»ÑÙ¿ï ü³ÃÇÑÇ ÏáÕÙ¿ª å³ïñdzñù Ù¿ç ³ëáÝù ¿ÇÝ Ñ³Ù³ß˳ñѳÛÇÝ ß³ñÅáõÙÁ: ïÇïÕáëáí Ïñûݳå»ïÇ ÙÁ ÏáÕÙ¿ óï»ñ³µ»ÙÇ ³Û¹ ûñ»ñáõ ÑëϳݻñÁ. ä³Ûù³ñÁ »õ »ñÏáõëï»ù Ù³·Éóáõ- ϳÛëñáõû³Ý Ñ³Û µÝ³ÏãáõÃÇõÝÁ ϳ- ¶»ñÙ³Ýdz ³õ»ÉÇ áõß Ùdzó³õ ³Ûë ÙÁ ³ÝËáõë³÷»ÉÇ Çñ³Ï³ÝáõÃÇõÝÝ»ñ é³í³ñ»ÉÇ ¹³ñÓÝ»Éáõ »õ ǵñ»õ ³Û¹- ËáõÙµÇݪ ˳éÝ»Éáí µáÉáñÇÝ Ñ³ßÇõ- ¿ÇÝ ³ÛÉ»õë: Ø¿Ï ÏáÕÙ¿ ѳÛáõÃÇõÝÁ, åÇëÇÝ å³Ñ»Éáõ Ýå³ï³Ïáí: Âñù³- Ý»ñÝ áõ ù³ñï»ñÁ, ÇÝã áñ Ç í»ñçáÛ Çñ Û»Õ³÷áË³Ï³Ý Ïáõë³ÏóáõÃÇõÝ- Ï³Ý å»ïáõû³Ý ³Ûë í³ñ- Ý»ñáõ ׳ٵáí ÏÁ ÷áñÓ¿ñ ù³·ÇÍÇÝ ÉáÛëÇÝ ï³Ï å¿ïù ³½³ï³·ñáõÇÉ Ãñù³Ï³Ý ¿ ¹Çï»É ØÏñïÇã ÊñÇÙ»³Ý ÉáõÍ¿Ý, ÙÇõë ÏáÕÙ¿ ûë- ѳÛñÇÏÇ å³ïñdzñù³Ï³Ý ٳݻ³Ý å»ïáõÃÇõÝÁ ³Ãáé¿Ý Ñ»é³óáõÇÉÁ, áñáí- ûÕ³ÏÁ Ñ»ï½Ñ»ï¿ ³õ»ÉÇ Ñ»ï»õ äáÉÇë, å³ïñdzñù³- ÏÁ ë»ÕÙ¿ñ ѳÛáõû³Ý Ï³Ý ³ÃáéÇÝ Ýëï³Í, Çñ ßáõñçª ËáñùÇÝ Ù¿ç ³°É »ÉáÛÃÝ»ñáí áõ µáÕáù³·Çñ- ³õ»ÉÇ Ã³÷ ï³Éáí Û»Õ³- Ý»ñáí, ³Ý ³Ý¹³¹³ñ ÏÁ ÷áËáõû³Ý: ÑÝã»óÝ¿ñ ¶³õ³éÇÝ Ó³ÛÝÁ: гÙÇïÇ ³ñï³ùÇÝ ù³- ÆëÏ å»ïáõÃÇõÝÁ ³Û¹ Ó³Û- Õ³ù³Ï³ÝáõÃÇõÝÁ ÑÇÙÝ- ÝÁ Éë»É ÇëÏ ã¿ñ áõ½»ñ: áõ³Í ¿ñ »õñáå³Ï³Ý í»- ñáÝß»³É áõÅ»ñáõ Ý»ñùÇÝ äºðÈÆÜÀ ѳϳٳñïáõÃÇõÝÝ»ñÁ Ç ²ÜÎÆôܲ¸²ðÒª ۳ݷ»ó³õ ². ѳٳß˳ñѳÛÇÝ å³- Ýå³ëï Çñ»Ý ߳ѳ·áñÍ»Éáõ ²ðºôºÈº²Ü вðòÆÜ ï»ñ³½ÙÇÝ): ²Û¹ Ïÿ³é³ç³¹ñ¿ñ ä»ñ- ëϽµáõÝùÇÝ íñ³Û, ½áõ·³Ñ»é³µ³ñ ê³Ý êûý³ÝáÛÇ »õ ä»ñÉÇÝÇ ¹³ß- ÉÇÝÇ ¹³ßݳ·ñÇ 61ñ¹ Ûû¹áõ³ÍÁ: ÷áñÓ»Éáí ѳÛÏ³Ï³Ý ³½¹³ÏÁ ϳñ»- ݳ·ÇñÝ»ñáõ ëïáñ³·ñáõÙÇÝ (1878) гÙÇïÇ Ñ³ßáõ³ñÏÁ ë³Ï³ÛÝ áõ- ÉÇ »Õ³ÍÇÝ ã³÷ ïϳñ³óÝ»É áõ Ç í»ñ- ݳËáñ¹³Í ¿ÇÝ Ï³ñ»õáñ ½³ñ·³- ñÇß ¿ñ: ²Ý íëï³Ñ³µ³ñ ϳñ¹³ó³Í çáÛ ×½Ù»É: гÛÏ³Ï³Ý ³½¹³ÏÁ ϳ- óáõÙÝ»ñ úëٳݻ³Ý ϳÛëñáõû³Ý ¿ñ ë³ïñ³½³Ù üáõ³ï ÷³ß³ÛÇ ù³- ñ»ÉÇ »Õ³ÍÇÝ ã³÷ ïϳñ³óÝ»Éáõ ѳ- Ù³Ûñ³ù³Õ³ù äáÉëáÛ Ù¿ç: гÛáó Õ³ù³Ï³Ý Ïï³ÏÁ »õ í×é³Í ¿ñ öáùñ ÙÇï»³Ý ³Ûë í³ñù³·ÇÍÁ ÑÇÙÝáõ³Í ²½·³ÛÇÝ ë³Ñٳݳ¹ñáõÃÇõÝÁ, ßÝáñ- ²ëÇáÛ Ù¿ç Ýáñ äáõÉϳñÇáÛ Ù¿ç ëï»Õ- ¿ñ üáõ³ï ÷³ß³ÛÇ Ã»É³¹ñ³Í ù³- ÑÇõ ØÇïѳà ÷³ß³ÛÇ áõ ³Ýáñ Ñ³Û ÍáõÙÇÝ ³é³çùÁ ³éÝ»É: ²é ³Ûë, ³Ý Õ³ù³Ï³Ý Ùï³ÍáÕáõû³Ý íñ³Û: ·áñͳÏÇó ¶ñÇ·áñ úﻳÝÇ, ·áñÍ³Í í×é³Í ¿ñ å³ñ½³å¿ë ×½Ù»É Ñ³Ûáõ- ØÇÝã ³Û¹, гÙÇï ÏÁ ÷áñÓ¿ñ ϳ- ¿ñ Çñ ¦³õ»ñÁ§ª ϳÛë»ñ³Ï³Ý Ù³- ÃÇõÝÁ, áñå¿ë½Ç »õñáå³Ï³Ý å»ïáõ- ñ»ÉÇ »Õ³ÍÇÝ ã³÷ Ó·Ó·»É-ù³ßùß»É Ï³ñ¹³ÏÇ íñ³Û »õ Ýáñ ·³Ñ µ³ñÓñ³- ÃÇõÝÝ»ñáõÝ Ó»éù¿Ý ϳñ»Ý³Û ËÉ»É Ñ³ÛÏ³Ï³Ý µ³ñ»Ýáñá·áõÙÝ»ñáõ ѳñ- ó³Í ëáõÉóÝÁ, гÙÇï ´., ëïÇåáõ³Í, ³ÛÝ Ýáñ ˳ճù³ñïÁ, áñ ÏÁ Ïáãáõ¿ñ óÁ: Æñ ³Ûë í³ñù³·ÇÍÁ Û³çáÕ»ó³õ áñ¹»·ñ³Í ¿ñ ûëٳݻ³Ý å»ï³Ï³Ý гÛÏ³Ï³Ý Ñ³ñó: гÙÇïÇ ïñ³Ù³- ÙÇÝã»õ 1895, »ñµ ³ÛÉ»õë ׳ñ³Ñ³ï, ë³Ñٳݳ¹ñáõÃÇõÝ ÙÁ, 1876ÇÝ: µ³Ýáõû³Ùµ, áñ ѻﳷ³ÛÇÝ Ï³ï³- ï»ÕÇ ï³Éáí »õñáå³Ï³Ý ×ÝßáõÙÝ»- ²Ûë ë³Ñٳݳ¹ñ³Ï³Ý Ù»Õñ³Éáõ- ñ»É³·áñÍáõ»ó³õ ºñÇï³ë³ñ¹ Ãáõñ- ñáõÝ, ³Ý ÏÁ ëïÇåáõ¿ñ ÁݹáõÝÇÉ µ³- ëÇÝÁ »ñϳñ ãï»õ»ó: гÙÇï ´. ½³- ù»ñáõ ÏáÕÙ¿ª »ñµ ãÏ³Û Ñ³ÛáõÃÇõÝ, ñ»Ýáñá·áõÙÝ»ñáõ Ùß³Ïáõ³Í Íñ³·Çñ ݳ½³Ý å³ïñáõ³ÏÝ»ñáí ³éϳ˻ó ³É DZÝã µ³ñ»Ýáñá·áõÙ, DZÝã гÛϳ- ÙÁ, áñ å³ïÙáõû³Ý Ù¿ç ͳÝûà ¿ ½³ÛÝ áõ ³Ýáñ ½áÛ· Ñ»ÕÇݳÏÝ»ñÁ, Ï³Ý Ñ³ñó: ǵñ»õ سÛÇë»³Ý Íñ³·Çñ: ºõñáå³- ɻճå³ï³é, Çñ»Ýó ßáõÝãÁ ³éÇÝ ºõ- гÙÇïÇ Ñ³Û³Ñ³É³Í ù³Õ³ù³- Ï³Ý ³Ûë ×ÝßáõÙÇÝ ß³ñųéÇÃÁ ѳÝ- ñáå³ »õ º·Çåïáë (*): ϳÝáõû³Ý ³ñ¹ÇõÝùÁ »Õ³õ ѳÛϳ- ¹Çë³ó³Ý ê³ëÝáÛ 1894Ç ³åëï³Ù- Üß»³É ¹³ßݳ·ÇñÝ»ñáí, ²ñ»õ»É- Ï³Ý Û»Õ³÷áËáõû³Ý ÍÝáõݹÁ, ѳÛ- µáõÃÇõÝÁ, ³Ýѳõ³ë³ñ ÏéÇõÝ»ñÝ áõ »³Ý ѳñóÇÝ Ù¿ç ÏÁ ÙïÝ¿ñ Ýáñ ³½- Ï³Ï³Ý Ïáõë³ÏóáõÃÇõÝÝ»ñáõ ÍÝáõÝ- ³ÝáÝó Û³çáñ¹³Í ç³ñ¹»ñÁ: ²Ûë Ñ»- ¹³Ï ÙÁ áõ Ïÿ³ñӳݳ·ñáõ¿ñ Ýáñ ½³ñ- ¹Á (²ñٻݳϳÝ, êáóÇ³É ¹»ÙáÏñ³ï ñáë³Ù³ñïÁ ɳõ³·áÛÝ ³éÇÃÝ ¿ñ »õ- ·³óáõÙ ÙÁ: ä»ñÉÇÝÇ ¹³ßݳ·ñáí, ÑÝã³Ï»³Ý Ïáõë³ÏóáõÃÇõÝ »õ Ð³Û ñáå³óÇÝ»ñáõÝ Ñ³Ù³ñ, áñå¿ë½Ç ëáõÉÃ³Ý³Ï³Ý Ï³é³í³ñáõÃÇõÝÁ Ú»Õ³÷áË³Ï³Ý ¸³ßݳÏóáõû³Ý, Çñ»Ýó ϳñ·ÇÝ µ³ñÓñ³óÝ¿ÇÝ ×Ýßáõ- Û³ÝÓݳéáõû³Ý ï³Ï ÏÁ ÙïÝ¿ñ áñ ëϽµÝ³Ï³Ý ßñç³ÝÇÝ ÏÁ Ïáãáõ¿ñ ÙÁ гÙÇïÇ íñ³Ûª ³é³ç ÙÕ»Éáí ¦µ³ñ»Ýáñá·áõÙÝ»ñ§ ÙïóÝ»Éáõ Ð³Û Ú»Õ³÷á˳ϳÝÝ»ñÇ ¸³ßݳÏ- ϳÛëñáõû³Ý Ý»ñùÇÝ ·áñÍ»ñáõÝ ÙÇ- ϳÛëñáõû³Ý ¦³ñ»õ»É»³Ý ݳѳݷ- óáõÃÇõÝ) »õ Ñ»ï»õ³µ³ñ ݳ»õª ѳÛ- ç³ÙáõË ÁÉɳÉáõ Çñ»Ýó »ñϳñ³Ù»³Û Ý»ñáõݧ Ù¿ç »õ ³å³Ñáí»É ѳۻñáõ Ï³Ï³Ý ³½³ï³·ñ³Ï³Ý ß³ñÅáõÙÁ: í³ñù³·ÇÍÁ »õ ³é ³Û¹ª Ýáñ ߳ѻñ Ï»³ÝùÝ áõ ÇÝãù»ñÁ. ݳ»õ, Çñ ³é³Í ÐÇÙ³ ³ÛÉ»õë, å³Ûù³ñÇ Ëñ³- ³å³Ñáí»É, Çõñ³ù³ÝãÇõñÁ Çñ»Ý ѳ- µ³ñ»Ýáñá·ã³Ï³Ý ù³ÛÉ»ñáõÝ Ù³ëÇÝ Ù³ïÝ»ñÁ Ûëï³Ï³ó³Í »õ ¹¿Ù ¹ÇÙ³ó Ù³ñ: ²Ûë ïñ³Ù³µ³Ýáõû³Ùµ ³É, å³ñµ»ñ³µ³ñ ½»Ïáõó»É Ù»Í å»ïáõ- ÷áñáõ³Í ¿ÇÝ: Ø¿Ï ÏáÕÙ¿ гÙÇïÇ µÝ³Ï³Ý³µ³ñ, ê³ëáõÝÁ å³ïñáõ³Ï

вÚðºÜÆø—8 ÙÁÝ ¿ñ »õñáå³Ï³Ý Ù»Í å»ïáõÃÇõÝ- 1895Ç å³ïÙáõÃÇõÝÁ ÏñÏÝ»ó ÇÝù- Ý»ñáõÝ Ñ³Ù³ñ: ²ÛÝå¿ë ÇÝãå¿ë ê³ë- Ðàü ºô ìºêîºÜºÜÎ ½ÇÝù, ë³Ï³ÛÝ Ù»½Ç ѳٳñ ³°É ³õ»- ÝáÛ ³åëï³ÙµáõÃ»Ý¿Ý ß³ï ³é³ç áõ 1908ÇÝ Ñéã³Ïáõ³Í úëٳݻ³Ý ÉÇ ³Ñ³õáñ Ñ»ï»õ³ÝùÝ»Ááí: ä³Ûû- µ³½Ù³ÃÇõ ³ÛÉ å³ñ³·³Ý»ñ, ÇÝãå¿ë »ñÏñáñ¹ ë³Ñٳݳ¹ñáõÃÇõÝÁ ÙdzÛÝ ó³õ ². ѳٳß˳ñѳÛÇÝ å³ï»ñ³½- Èǵ³Ý³ÝÇ Ù¿ç Ù³ñáÝÇ »õ ïÇõñ½Ç ϳñ׳ï»õ ÛáÛë»ñ Ý»ñßÝã»ó ѳÛáõ- ÙÁ »õ å³ï»Ñ ³éÇÃÁ ·ï³Í ÁÉɳÉáí, ѳٳÛÝùÝ»ñáõ ÙÇç»õ ½ÇÝ»³É ѳϳ- û³Ý: Âñù³Ï³Ý ÆÃÃÇѳï Ïáõë³Ï- Ãñù³Ï³Ý å»ïáõÃÇõÝÁ ·áñͳ¹ñ»ó Ù³ñïáõÃÇõÝÁ (1861), áñ ۳ݷ»ó³õ óáõû³Ý Ñ»ï µ³Ý³ÏóáõÃÇõÝÝ»ñáí Çñ Ùß³Ï³Í ó»Õ³ëå³Ý³Ï³Ý Íñ³·Ç- ¹³ñÓ»³É »õñáå³Ï³Ý ÙÇç³Ùïáõ- ѳÛ-Ãñù³Ï³Ý ÏÝ×ÇéÁ ÉáõÍÙ³Ý ÁÝ- ñÁª ³Ûë ³Ý·³Ù ѳÛáõÃ»Ý¿Ý Ç ëå³é û³Ý: óóùÇ Ù¿ç ¹Ý»Éáõ Ð.Ú.¸³ßݳÏóáõ- å³ñå»Éáí ³Ýáñ µÝûññ³Ý г۳ëï³- ê³Ï³ÛÝ Ð³ÙÇï ³Ñ³õáñ ³Ý³ÏÝ- û³Ý ×Ç·»ñÁ ³ñ³·ûñ¿Ý Ç ¹»ñ»õ ÝÁ áõ Çñ ѳßáõ³ñÏÝ»ñáíª ¦Ùdzݷ³- Ï³É ÙÁ í»ñ³å³Ñ³Í ¿ñ ÿ° ѳÛáõ- »É³Ý: ÎáÙëÇ (ì³Ñ³Ý ö³÷³½»³Ý, ÙÁݹÙÇßï§ µÝ³çÝç³Í ÁÉɳÉáí ѳ- û³Ý »õ ÿ гÛÏ³Ï³Ý Ñ³ñóÁ ß³- úëٳݻ³Ý ËáñÑñ¹³ñ³ÝÇ Ñ³Û ³Ý- ÛáõÃÇõÝÁ, ïÇñ³ó³õ г۳ëï³ÝÇ Ñ³·áñÍáÕ »õñáå³Ï³Ý å»ïáõÃÇõÝ- ¹³Ù, ¹³ßݳÏó³Ï³Ý) íϳÛáõû³Ùµ, ³ñ»õÙï»³Ý Ù³ëÇÝ: Ý»ñáõÝ Ñ³Ù³ñ: ÜáÛÝ ï³ñáõ³Ý, 1911Ç ³ßÝ³Ý ³ñ¹¿Ý, ³Û¹ Û³ñ³µ»- ÂáõñùÇáÛ Ñ³Ù³ñ, гÛÏ³Ï³Ý 1895Ç ³õ³ñïÇÝ, ͳÛñ Ïáõ ï³ÛÇÝ ñáõÃÇõÝÝ»ñÁ ˽áõ³Í »õ Ùûï³õáñ³- ѳñó Áëáõ³Í ËݹÇñÁ ÉáõÍáõ³Í ¿ñ ÁݹѳÝáõñ »õ ϳ½Ù³Ï»ñåáõ³Í ç³ñ- å¿ë »ñÏáõ ï³ñÇ ³é³ç ëïáñ³·ñ- ³ÛÉ»õë: ¹»ñ, áñáÝù ï»õ»óÇÝ ÙÇÝã»õ 1896Ç áõ³Í ѳٳӳÛݳ·ÇñÁ ÷³ëïûñ¿Ý üàô²î-вØÆî-²Ⱦ²Â ³é³çÇÝ ³ÙÇëÝ»ñÁ: лï»õ³ÝùÁ çáõñÁ ÇÝÏ³Í ¿ÇÝ: ºô ²êàÜòؾ ´Ê²Ì »Õ³õ Ùûï³õáñ³å¿ë 300,000 ³ÝÙ»Õ ä³Éù³Ý»³Ý å³ï»ñ³½ÙÇ (1912) ÞºÞðàôØÆ Ð²ðòºð Ñ³Û ½áÑ: ëï»ÕÍ³Í ×·Ý³Å³ÙÁ гÛÏ³Ï³Ý ²é³Ýó ÙïÝ»Éáõ å³ïÙ³Ï³Ý Ù³Ý- Æ ¹¿å, áñå¿ë½Ç ³õ»ÉÇ ×Çß¹ ÁÙµé- ѳñóÇ Ë³Õ³Õ ÉáõÍáõÙÇ Ýáñ ÛáÛë»- ñ³Ù³ëÝáõÃÇõÝÝ»ñáõ Ù¿ç å¿ïù ¿ Ý»Ýù ä³Ýù ûÃáÙ³ÝÇ ·ñ³õáõÙÁ ñáõ Ñ»é³ÝϳñÝ»ñ µ³ó³Í ¿ñ, ë³Ï³ÛÝ Áݹ·Í»Ýù, áñ úëٳݻ³Ý ϳÛëñáõ- (ú·áëïáë 1896) »õ ʳݳëáñÇ ³ñ- ¹Åµ³Ëï³µ³ñ ÝáÛݪ Û»ïå»ñÉÇÝ»³Ý, û³Ý ÆÃÃÇѳï³Ï³Ý ջϳí³ñáõ- ß³õ³ÝùÁ (ÚáõÉÇë 1897), ½³ÝáÝù ³õ³Ý¹³Ï³Ý óï»ñ³µ»ÙÇÝ íñ³Û: ÃÇõÝÁ, Çñ ϳñ·ÇÝ, ɳ°õ ë»ñï³Í ¿ñ å¿ïù ¿ ¹Çï»É áõ í»ñÉáõÍ»É ³Ûë ²ÛëÇÝùݪ ÙÇç-»õñáå³Ï³Ý ѳϳ- гÙÇïÇ í³ñù³·ÇÍÁ: 1909¿Ý »ïù, ¹¿åù»ñáõ »õ ÑáÉáíáÛÃÝ»ñáõ ÉáÛëÇÝ Ù³ñïáõÃÇõÝÝ»ñáõ ÝáÛÝ µ»Ù³¹ñáõ- гÛÏ³Ï³Ý Ñ³ñóÇÝ Ýϳïٳٵ ï³Ï: ²ñ¹³ñ»õ, ³é³çÇÝÇÝ å³ñ³·³- ÃÇõÝÝ»ñÁ ÏÁ ÏñÏÝáõ¿ÇÝ: ¸»ñ³Ï³- Ãñù³Ï³Ý í³ñù³·ÇÍÇÝ Ù¿ç Ùï³Í ÛÇÝ, ¸³ßݳÏóáõû³Ý å³ïñ³ëï³Í ï³ñ ³ÝÓݳõáñáõÃÇõÝÝ»ñÁ ï³ñµ»ñ ¿ñ Ù»½Ç ѳٳñ ³Û¹ ûñ»ñáõÝ ³Ýͳ- áõ ¹»ëå³Ý³ïáõÝ»ñáõÝ µ³ÅÝ³Í Û³Û- ¿ÇÝ, ë³Ï³ÛÝ ÏáÕÙ»ñÁ, ˳ÕÝ áõ ³Ýáñ Ýûà Ýáñ »õ ß³°ï ³õ»ÉÇ íï³Ý·³õáñ ï³ñ³ñáõÃÇõÝÁ ÏÁ å³Ñ³Ýç¿ñ ³Ûë ëϽµáõÝùÝ»ñÁ ã¿ÇÝ ÷áËáõ³Í: î³ñ- ³½¹³Ï ÙÁ, áñ áõñÇß µ³Ý ã¿ñ, »Ã¿ áã ç³ñ¹»ñáõÝ å³ï³ë˳ݳïáõÝ»ñáõ µ»ñ Ëûëùáí, ѳÛÏ³Ï³Ý µ³ñ»Ýáñá- ѳٳÃñù³Ï³Ý ·³Õ³÷³Ëûëáõ- ³ñ¹³ñáõû³Ý Û³ÝÓÝáõÇÉÁ: ºñÏñáñ- ·áõÙÝ»ñáõ å³Ñ³ÝçÝ»ñÁ Ñ»ï³åÝ- ÃÇõÝÁ: ²Ûë ·³Õ³÷³ñ³Ëûëáõû³Ý ¹ÇÝ å³ñ³·³ÛÇݪ å³ïÅ»É ì³ÝÇ ¹áÕ »õñáå³Ï³Ý Ù»Í å»ïáõÃÇõÝÝ»- ÑÇÙݳ¹ÇñÝ»ñ¿Ý áÙ³Ýù ÆÃÃÇѳï ÇÝùݳå³ßïå³Ýáõû³Ýª ¹³ßݳÏ- ñÁ Ïÿáõ½¿ÇÝ ×ÝßáõÙÁ µ³ñÓñ³óÝ»É Ïáõë³Ïóáõû³Ý µ³ñÓñ³·áÛÝ Õ»Ï³- ó³Ï³Ý ä»ïáÛÇ, ÑÝã³Ï»³Ý سñïÇ- ä³Éù³Ý»³Ý å³ï»ñ³½ÙÇÝ Ñ»ï»- í³ñ Ù³ñÙÇÝÇÝ ëÏë³Í ¿ÇÝ ³Ý¹³- ÏÇ »õ ³ñÙ»Ý³Ï³Ý ²õ»ïÇ뻳ÝÇ ÙÇ- õ³Ýùáí ³°É ³õ»ÉÇ ïϳñ³ó³Í úë- Ù³ÏóÇÉ (**): ÆÃÃÇѳïÁ ÏÁ Ó·ï¿ñ ³ó»³É ½ÇÝ»³É ËáõÙµ»ñÁ ¹³õ³¹ñ³- ٳݻ³Ý å»ïáõû³Ý íñ³Û, ÙÇÝã Ñ³Û ëï»ÕÍ»É äáÉÇë¿Ý ÙÇÝã»õ λ¹ñáݳ- µ³ñ å³ß³ñ³Í »õ ½³ÝáÝù µÝ³çÝç³Í ջϳí³ñáõÃÇõÝÁ, å³ïñdzñù³ñ³- Ï³Ý ²ëdz »ñϳñáÕ ³ß˳ñѳ·ñ³- س½ñÇÏ ó»Õ³ËáõÙµÁ, áñ ·áñÍÇù ÝÇ ·É˳õáñáõû³Ùµ, ÏÁ ÷áñÓ¿ñ å³- Ï³Ý ï³ñ³Íáõû³Ý íñ³Û ëï»ÕÍ»É ¹³ñÓ³Í ¿ñ гÙÇïÇ í³ñã³Ï³ñ·ÇÝ ÑÁ Û³ñÙ³ñ Ýϳï»Éáí ëï³Ý³É ³ÛÝ, Ùdzï³ññ Ãñùáõû³Ùµ µÝ³Ïáõ³Í Ó»éùÁ: ÇÝã áñ ã¿ÇÝù Û³çáÕ³Í ëï³Ý³É ϳÛëñáõÃÇõÝ ÙÁ: ²Ûë Íñ³·ÇñÇ ÑÇÙ- лﳷ³Û ï³ñÇÝ»ñáõÝ, ³Ûë Ù³·É- 1878¿Ý Ç í»ñ: ÆëÏ Ãñù³Ï³Ý ÏáÕÙÁ, Ý³Ï³Ý »õ ³é³çÇÝ ËáãÁݹáïÁ, ѳ- óáõÙÁ ۳ݷ»ó³õ ÝáÛÝÇÝùÝ ëáõÉó- ׳ñ³Ñ³ï, ÏÿÁݹáõÝ¿ñ µ³ñ»Ýáñá- Ù³Ãñù³Ï³Ý ·³Õ³÷³ñ³ËûëÝ»ñáõ ÝÁ ٳѳ÷áñÓÇ »ÝóñÏ»Éáõª ·áõÙÝ»ñáõ Ýáñ Íñ³·Çñ ÙÁ, áñáõÝ ï»ë³Ï¿ïáí, гÛÏ³Ï³Ý Ñ³ñóÝ áõ Ð.Ú.¸³ßݳÏóáõû³Ý áñáßáõÙÇÝ, áñ ÑëÏ»Éáõ ѳٳñ ѳٳӳÛÝáõÃÇõÝ ÏÁ ѳÛáõÃÇõÝÝ ¿ÇÝ: ¹Åµ³Ëï³µ³ñ ãÛ³çáÕ»ó³õª ѳϳ- ·á۳ݳñ »õñáå³Ï³Ý »ñÏáõ 㿽áù é³Ï ϳ½Ù³Ï»ñåÇãÝ»ñáõ óáõó³µ»- »ñÏÇñÝ»ñ¿ Ù¿Ï³Ï³Ý ùÝÝÇãÝ»ñáõ ºõ áõñ»ÙÝ, ñ³Í µ³ó³éÇÏ »õ ûñÇݳϻÉÇ ßáõñçª Ýáñí»ÏdzóÇ Ðáý »õ ÑáɳÝ- µÍ³Ëݹñáõû³Ý (³Ûë Ù³ëÇÝ ï»ëÝ»É ï³óÇ ì»ëï»Ý»ÝÏ: ØÃÝáÉáñïÁ, Çñ 1.- 1869ÇÝ üáõ³ï ÷³ß³ ëáõÉó- òáõó³Ï³Ý Ù³ñÙÝÇ ï»Õ»Ï³·ÇñÁ, ¹ñ³Ï³Ý Ñ»é³ÝϳñÝ»ñáí áõ ɳõ³- ÝÇÝ ÏÁ ûɳ¹ñ¿ ¦ã³÷³õáñ»É ѳۻ- å³ïñ³ëïáõ³Í ³Ýáñ å³ï³ë˳- ï»ëáõû³Ùµ, Û³ñ »õ ÝÙ³Ý ¿ñ ñáõ »é³Ý¹Á§: ݳïáõ ê³ýáÛÇÝ ÏáÕÙ¿. ¦ÜÇõûñ 1895ÇÝ Ø³ÛÇë»³Ý Íñ³·ñÇ ëïá- Ð.Ú.¸³ßݳÏóáõû³Ý å³ïÙáõû³Ý ñ³·ñáõû³Ý ëï»ÕÍ³Í Ï³óáõ- 2.- гÙÇï ´. 1895-96Ç ½³Ý·áõ³- ѳٳñ§, ¸. ѳïáñ): û³Ý: ͳÛÇÝ ç³ñ¹»ñáí ÏÁ µ³ó³Û³Ûï¿ ûë-

вÚðºÜÆø—9 ٳݻ³Ý Ñ³Ï³Ñ³Û ù³Õ³ù³Ï³Ýáõ- ½³Ýó ³éÝ»Éáí гÙÇïÇ Ï³½Ù³Ï»ñ- Çñ³õ³½ñÏáõ³Í, µéݳ·ñ³õáõ³Í ÃÇõÝÁ, áñ ÏÁ Ó·ï¿ñ ѳÛáõû³Ý å³Í ½³Ý·áõ³Í³ÛÇÝ ç³ñ¹»ñÁ: ÏáÕÙ ÙÁ, »ñÏÇñ ÙÁ, ÅáÕáíáõñ¹ ÙÁ: µÝ³çÝçáõÙáí ÉáõÍáõ³Í-㿽áù³ó- êáëÏ ½·³ó³Ï³Ý »õ µ³ñáÛ³Ï³Ý ºñµ ÏÁ ËûëÇÝù ϳÛëñáõû³Ý ÙÁ Ù³- áõ³Í ï»ëÝ»É Ð³ÛÏ³Ï³Ý Ñ³ñóÁ: ËݹÇñ ã¿ 1895-96Ç ÁݹѳÝáõñ ç³ñ- ëÇÝ, ÇÝùݳµ»ñ³µ³ñ ³ÏݳñÏ³Í ¹»ñáõÝ ½áÑ ·³ó³Í 300,000 ѳÛáñ- ÏÿÁÉɳÝù Çñ³õ³½ñÏáõÙÇ »õ µéݳ·- 3.- ÆÃÃÇѳï³Ï³Ý ϳé³í³- ¹ÇÝ»ñáõ å³ñ³·³Ý: ²ÝáÝù å³ñ½³- ñ³õáõÙÇ: ñáõÃÇõÝÁ 1915ÇÝ Ç ·áñÍ ÏÁ ¹Ý¿ å¿ë íÇ׳ϳ·ñáõÃÇõÝ ã»Ý, ³Ûɪ ÝáÛÝ ²ÛÝå¿ë áñ, Ù»ñ ϳñÍÇùáí, ѳÛ- ѳ۳ëå³Ýáõû³Ý Çñ Íñ³·ÇñÁª ϳÝ˳Ùï³Íáõ³Í »õ Ùß³Ïáõ³Í ѳϳ- Ï³Ï³Ý ÏáÕÙÇ å³ïÙ³µ³Ý³Ï³Ý Ù»- ѳٳÃñù³Ï³Ý ·³Õ³÷³ñ³Ëû- Ñ³Û ù³Õ³ù³Ï³Ýáõû³Ý ½áÑ»ñÝ »Ý: Ãáï³µ³ÝáõÃÇõÝÁ, ÇÝãå¿ë ݳ»õ Ù»ñ ëáõÃÇõÝÁ Ï»³ÝùÇ Ïáã»Éáõ Ó·ïáõ- ÜáÛÝå¿ë, íÇ׳ϳ·ñáõÃÇõÝ ã»Ý 1909ÇÝ ù³Õ³ù³Ï³Ý Ùï³ÍáÕáõÃÇõÝÝ áõ Ùáí, áõ ³Ûë Ó»õáí ûÕ³ÏÁ Ïÿ³Ù- ÎÇÉÇÏÇáÛ »õ Û³ïϳå¿ë ²ï³Ý³ÛÇ ç³ñ- ù³ñá½ãáõÃÇõÝÁ ³Ûë áõÕÕáõû³Ùµ µáÕç³Ý³Û: ¹»ñáõÝ ½áÑ»ñÁ, 30,000 Ñá·Ç: ²ÝáÝù »õë ß»ßï³¹ñáõÙÇ ÷á÷áËáõÃÇõÝÝ»ñ Ãñù³Ï³Ý Ñ³Ï³Ñ³Û ù³Õ³ù³Ï³Ýáõ- å¿ïù ¿ ϳï³ñ¿: ²Ûë µáÉáñÇÝ Ù¿ç ß³ï Ûëï³Ï ¿, áñ û³Ý ½áÑ»ñÝ »Ý (***): ºÕ»éÝÁ, гÛÏ³Ï³Ý ò»Õ³ëå³Ýáõ- ºñµ ß»ßïÁ ÏÁ å³Ñ»Ýù 1915Ç ÃÇõÝÁ, ÂáõñùÇáÛ í³ñ³Í Ñ³Ï³Ñ³Û íñ³Û, µÝ³Ï³Ý³µ³ñ å¿ïù ã¿ ù³Õ³ù³Ï³Ýáõû³Ý Ñ»ï»õ³ÝùÝ ¿ñ ³Ý³ÏÝϳÉÇ ·³Ýù Ãñù³Ï³Ý ÏáÕÙÇ ²Üزð »õ ³Û¹ ù³Õ³ù³Ï³ÝáõÃÇõÝÁ 1915ÇÝ å³ï³ë˳Ýáíª Ã¿ »ñÏÇñÁ å³ï»- ¼²ðÂúÜø ã¿ñ, áñ ¹ñë»õáñáõ»ó³õ: ²ÛÝå¿ë ÙÁ ñ³½ÙÇ Ù¿ç ¿ñ, ѳۻñÁ ½ÇݳÏó»ó³Ý ã¿ñ, áñ ÙÇÝã»õ 1915 ³Ù¿Ý ÇÝ㠵ݳ- éáõë»ñáõÝ, Ù»ñ ÃßݳÙÇÝ»ñáõÝ Ñ»ï, Ï³Ý ¿ñ ѳÛ-Ãñù³Ï³Ý Û³ñ³µ»ñáõ- Ù»Ýù ³É ¦ëïÇåáõ³Í§, ù³ÛÉ»ñ ¸³ñ³õáñ ùÝÇó, ÃÇõÝÝ»ñáõÝ Ù¿ç: ²Û¹ ù³Õ³ù³Ï³- ³éÇÝù ³ÝáÝó Ýϳïٳٵ »õ ÝáÛÝ- ²Ý³Ùûù ó³õÇó, ÝáõÃÇõÝÁ Ùß³Ïáõ³Í ¿ñ 1915 Ãáõ³- ù³Ý ³É Ãáõñù»ñ Ù»é³Ý ². гٳß- ØÇ ûñ ϳñÃÝ³Ý³Ý Ï³Ý¿Ý ß³ï ³é³ç: гÙÇï å³ñ½³- ˳ñѳÛÇÝ å³ï»ñ³½ÙÇÝ ÁÝóóùÇÝ: Ø»ñ ݳËÝÇÝ»ñÁ, å¿ë Ó³ËáÕ³Í ¿ñ Çñ ³Û¹ ù³Õ³ù³- ´Ý³Ï³Ý³µ³ñ ß³ï Ëáó»ÉÇ ¿ ºñµ ÑáÕÝ Ñ³Ûñ»ÝÇ Ï³ÝáõÃÇõÝÁ ѳëóÝ»É Çñ ÉñáõÙÇÝ, Ãñù³Ï³Ý ³Ûë ï»ë³Ï¿ïÁª Çñ ϳñ- ʳéÏáõ³Í ãÇ ÉÇÝÇ, áñáíÑ»ï»õ ÙÇßï Çñ ¹¿Ù ·ï³Í ¿ñ »õ- ·ÇÝ: ê³Ï³ÛÝ »ñµ ß»ßïÁ ¹Ý»Ýù úë- êÇñáÛ ï»Õ å³Õ³Í ñáå³Ï³Ý ³½¹áõ ÙÇç³ÙïáõÃÇõÝÝ»ñ: ٳݻ³Ý ϳÛëñáõû³Ý Ùß³Ï³Í Ñ³- ØáËÇñ ãÇ ÉÇÝÇ… ØÇÝã¹»é ÆÃÃÇѳïÇ å³ñ³·³ÛÇÝ, Ï³Ñ³Û ù³Õ³ù³Ï³Ýáõû³Ý íñ³Û, ÝÙ³Ý ÙÇç³Ùïáõû³Ý Ëûëù ³Ý·³Ù »õ ǵñ»õ ÷³ëï Éáõë³ñÓ³ÏÇ ï³Ï ÏÁ ܳËÝÇÝ»ñÁ Ù»ñ ã¿ñ Ïñݳñ ÁÉɳÉ, áñáíÑ»ï»õ ÙÇç³Ù- å³Ñ»Ýù ѳÙÇï»³Ý ûñ»ñáõ 300,000 γñÃÝ³Ý³Ý ÙÇ ûñ ïáÕÝ»ñÁ Çñ»Ýù ½Çñ»Ýù ÷ñÏ»Éáõ ûñ- ½áÑ»ñÁ ݳ»õ, ³Û¹ å³ñ³·³ÛÇÝ Æñ»Ýó »ñ³½³Í ѳë³Ï³Ý å³ï»ñ³½ÙÇ Ù¿ç ¿ÇÝ Ãñù³Ï³Ý ÏáÕÙÇ ù³ñá½ã³Ï³Ý ÷³- ºñ·»ñÇ Ó³ÛÝÇó, 1914-1918 ï³ñÇÝ»ñáõÝ: ËáõëïÇ Û³õ»É»³É ׳ٵ³Ý»ñ ÷³Ï³Í à·»Õ¿Ý ÛáÛëÁ гÛÏ³Ï³Ý ò»Õ³ëå³Ýáõû³Ý »õ ÏÿÁÉɳÝù: ì»ñ ÏÁ ѳٵ³éݳÛ, ³ñ¹³ñ ѳïáõóáõÙÇ Ù³ëÇÝ Ñ³Ûϳ- ܳ»õ, ϳÛëñáõÃÇõÝ, ³Ûë µ³éÁ âùÝ³Õ Ø³ëÇëÇ Ï³Ý ÏáÕÙÇ, ³ÛëÇÝùÝ Ù»ñ ù³ñá½ãáõ- å¿ïù ã¿ ÙáéݳÝù ·áñͳͻÉáõ, ÄåïáõÝ ßáÕ»ñÇó… ÃÇõÝÁ ͳÝñ³ó³Í ¿ 1915-21 Ãáõ³- áñáíÑ»ï»õ, ÇÝãå¿ë í»ñÁ ÁëÇÝù, ϳÝÝ»ñáõÝ íñ³Û, ³ÝѳëÏݳÉÇûñ¿Ý ϳÛëñáõÃÇõÝ ÙÁ ÙÇßï Ïÿ»Ýó¹ñ¿ ößéáõ³Í ÏÁ ÉÇÝ»Ý ÞÕóݻñÁ Ïáõé, (*) ØÇÝã ¶ñ. úï»³Ý µÝ³Ï³Ý Ù³Ñ ÙÁ áõÝ»ó³õ, ³Ý¹ÇÝ ë³Ï³ÛÝ, Çñ ´³óáõ³Í ÏÁ ÉÇÝ»Ý Ãáõñù ·áñÍÁÝÏ»ñÁ ÝáÛÝ µ³Ëï³õáñáõÃÇõÝÁ ãáõÝ»ó³õ áõ ϳñ× ³ï»Ý ÙÁ ¸é»ñÝ ³ñ»õÇ, »ïù ëå³ÝÝáõ»ó³õ ëáõÉóÝÇÝ ·áñͳϳÉÝ»ñáõÝ ÏáÕÙ¿: ÚáÛë »ñ³½Ý»ñÁ ²ÛÝï»Õ ûõ Ïÿ³éÝ»Ý, (**) ²Ûë Ù³ëÇÝ Ù»Í³å¿ë ûɳ¹ñ»ÉÇ ¿ ¼³ñ»õ³Ý¹Ç ¦Ødzó»³É ³ÝÏ³Ë Èáõë³ÍÇÝ áõÅáí Ãáõñ³Ýdz§ ·áñÍÁ, áñ Çñ ï»ë³ÏÇÝ Ù¿ç ó³ñ¹ ÏÁ ÙÝ³Û ³Ý·»ñ³½³Ýó»ÉÇ: ²ÝÙ³ñ ½³ñÃûÝùÇ…

(***) ²ï³Ý³ÛÇ Ïáïáñ³ÍÝ»ñáõÝ Ï³å³Ïóáõû³Ùµ ûëٳݻ³Ý ËáñÑñ- ²ÛÝų٠ÏÁ ÑÝã»Ý ¹³ñ³ÝÇ Ï³½Ù³Í ùÝÝÇã Û³ÝÓݳËáõÙµÇ ³Ý¹³Ù Ú³Ïáµ ¿ý¿ÝïÇ ä³åÇÏ- Üáñ Ñáñáí»ÉÝ»ñ, »³ÝÇ (¾ïÇñÝ¿¿Ý, ÇÃÃÇѳï³Ï³Ý) å³ïñ³ëï³Í ï»Õ»Ï³·ÇñÁ, Çñ »½ñ³- ÎñÏÇÝ ÏÁ ÍÝáõ»Ý ϳóáõû³Ý Ù¿ç, Ûëï³Ïûñ¿Ý ÏÁ Ù³ïݳÝß¿ ÆÃÃÇѳï Ïáõë³ÏóáõÃÇõÝÁ, г۳½·Ç ù³ç»ñ… ǵñ»õ ³Ûë Ïáïáñ³ÍÝ»ñáõÝ å³ï³ë˳ݳïáõ: î»Õ»Ï³·ÇñÁ Ññ³ï³ñ³Ï- ²ôÆÎ î¾ÚÆðؾÜÖº²Ü áõ³Í ¿ äáÉÇë, 1919ÇÝ:

вÚðºÜÆø—10 äºîàôÂÆôÜ ºô òºÔ²êä²ÜàôÂÆôܪ Êܸð²Ú²ðàÚò ڲ𲴺ðàôÂÆôÜ ØÀ

Ê. î¿ñ Ôáõϳ뻳Ý

î³ëÁ ï³ñÇ ³é³ç, èáå»ñà øá- ÃÇõÝÁ Ù»ñ ³½·³ÛÇÝ Çñ³Ï³Ýáõû³Ý å³Ñ³Í ¿ ѳñóÇÝ ßáõñç, ³å³ 1965ÇÝ ã³ñ»³Ý ÏÁ ëï³ÝÓÝ¿ñ г۳ëï³ÝÇ Ù¿ç »Õ³Í ¿ Ëݹñ³Û³ñáÛó£ Û³çáñ¹³Í ¿ ùë³Ý ï³ñÇ ï»õ³Í »õ гÝñ³å»ïáõû³Ý ݳ˳·³ÑÇ å³ß- ä³ïÙ³µ³Ý ¶É¿ñ Øáõñ³ï»³Ý ³Ûë Ãáõñù-ËáñÑñ¹³ÛÇÝ Û³ñ³µ»ñáõÃÇõÝ- ïûÝÁ »õ ÑÇÙÝ³Ï³Ý »ñ»ù ÷á÷áËáõ- Ù³ëÇÝ ³Ý¹ñ³¹³ñÓ³Í ¿ ¦Ð³Ûáó ò»- Ý»ñáõ ½³ñ·³óÙ³Ý Ñ»ï»õáÕ ¦·áñÍÇ- ÃÇõÝÝ»ñ ÏÁ ÙïóÝ¿ñ Çñ ݳËáñ¹Çݪ Õ³ëå³Ýáõû³Ý ³ÛÅÙ¿³Ï³Ýáõ- ù³Ûݳóáõ³Í§ (¿ÝëÃñÇõÙ³ÝóÉǽ¿) È¢áÝ î¿ñ ä»ïñá뻳ÝÇ ù³Õ³ù³Ï³Ý ÃÇõÝÁ§ ·Çï³ÅáÕáíÇÝ, êáñåáÝÇ Ñ³- ÛÇßáÕáõÃÇõÝ ÙÁ, ÇëÏ í»ñçÇÝ ï³ëÁ áõÕ»·ÇÍÇÝ Ù¿ç. ³ñó³Ë»³Ý ѳϳ- Ù³Éë³ñ³ÝÇÝ Ù¿ç, 16-18 ²åñÇÉ ï³ñÇÝ»ñáõÝ, ÑÇÙݳϳÝûñ¿Ý ³ñ- Ù³ñïáõû³Ý Ù¿ç Ïþáñ¹»·ñ¿ñ í×é³- 1998ÇÝ£ ¶Çï³ÅáÕáíÇÝ Ý»ñϳ۳ó- ó³Ë»³Ý ß³ñÅáõÙáí ëÏë³Í ³ÝÏ³Ë Ï³Ù Ï»óáõ³Íù, ѳٳ·áñͳÏóáõ- áõ³Í áõëáõÙݳëÇñáõÃÇõÝÝ»ñÁ ÉáÛë å»ï³Ï³Ýáõû³Ý í»ñ³Ñ³ï³ïÙ³Ý Ã»³Ý Ó»éù ÏÁ å³ñ½¿ñ ê÷ÇõéùÇÝ, ï»ë³Í »Ý Ð³Û ¸³ïÇ ä³ßïå³Ýáõ- ·áñÍÁÝóóÇÝ Å³Ù³Ý³Ï, ³ÝÛëï³Ï »õ гÛáó ò»Õ³ëå³Ýáõû³Ý ÙÇç³½- û³Ý Ú³ÝÓݳËáõÙµÇ Ññ³ï³ñ³- Ï»óáõ³ÍùÝ»ñ áñáÝù ÏÁ ï»Õ³¹ñáõÇÝ ·³ÛÇÝ ×³Ý³ãáõÙÁ ÏÁ ÙïóÝ¿ñ ³ñï³- Ï³Í ÝáÛݳÝáõÝ Ëáñ³·ñáí ·ñùÇÝ Û»ïËáñÑñ¹³ÛÇÝ ³ÝóáõÙÇ ¹Åáõ³ñ ùÇÝ ù³Õ³ù³Ï³Ýáõû³Ý ûñ³Ï³ñ- Ù¿ç (¾ïÇ÷áÉ Ññ³ï³ñ³Ïã³ïáõÝ, áÉáñïÇÝ Ù¿ç£ Øáõñ³ï»³Ý ÏÁ ·áñ- ·ÇÝ£ ¶ñ»Ã¿ÛÉ, üñ³Ýë³, 1999), áñáõÝ Ý³- ͳͿ ¦Ð³Û³ëï³Ý§ ѳëϳóáÕáõ- ²åñÇÉ 9ÇÝ, èáå»ñà øáã³ñ»³Ý ˳µ³ÝÁ ëïáñ³·ñ³Í ¿ üñ³Ýë³ÛÇ ÃÇõÝÁ, ë³Ï³ÛÝ Ûëï³Ï ¿ áñ Ïþ³é³- ݳ˳·³Ñáõû³Ý å³ßïûÝÁ ÷á˳Ý- Øß³ÏáÛÃÇ »õ ÎñÃáõû³Ý ݳËÏÇÝ ç³¹ñ¿ ùÝݳñÏ»É å»ï³Ï³Ý ù³Õ³- ó»ó ê»ñÅ ê³ñ·ë»³ÝÇÝ, »õ ѳϳé³Ï ݳ˳ñ³ñ »õ ûñÇÝ ²½·³ÛÇÝ ÄáÕá- ù³Ï³Ýáõû³Ý ³ñ¹ÇõÝùÁ£ ö»ïñáõ³ñ 19Ç ÁÝïñáõÃÇõÝÝ»ñáõÝ íÇ ²ñï³ùÇÝ Ú³ñ³µ»ñáõÃÇõÝÝ»ñáõ ²Ûë ÇÙ³ëïáí, ·ñ»Ã¿ ³ÝËáõë³- Û³çáñ¹³Í Ý»ñ³·³ÛÇÝ ×·Ý³Å³ÙÇ Ú³ÝÓݳÅáÕáíÇ Ý³Ë³·³Ñ ij· ÷»ÉÇ ÏÁ ¹³éÝ³Û Æëñ³Û¿ÉÇ å»ï³- ß³ñáõݳÏáõáÕ É³ñáõ³Íáõû³Ý Ø»Í È³ÝÏ£ ¶Çï³ÅáÕáíÇ ½áõ·³¹ÇåáõÙÁ Ï³Ý ù³Õ³ù³Ï³Ýáõû³Ý Ñ»ï µ³Õ- ºÕ»éÝÇ 93³Ù»³ÏÇ ³éÇÃáí ³ÝÑñ³- øáã³ñ»³ÝÇ Çß˳Ýáõû³Ý ѳëÝ»- ¹³ï³Ï³ÝÁ, »õ Øáõñ³ï»³ÝÇ Ñ³Ù³ñ Å»ßï ¿ ÏñÏÇÝ ³Ý¹ñ³¹³éÝ³É ò»Õ³ë- ÉáõÝ »õ å»ï³Ï³Ý ù³Õ³ù³Ï³Ýáõ- Ñ³Û å»ïáõû³Ý »õ ò»Õ³ëå³Ýáõ- å³Ýáõû³Ý ÙÇç³½·³ÛÇÝ ×³Ý³ã- û³Ý Ù¿ç ò»Õ³ëå³Ýáõû³Ý ѳñ- û³Ý ѳñóÇÝ Û³ñ³µ»ñáõû³Ý Ù³Ý Ð³Û³ëï³ÝÇ ä»ïáõû³Ý Û³ÝÓ- óáí í»ñáÛÇß»³É ÷á÷áËáõû³Ý Çñ³- Ëݹñ³Û³ñáÛó µÝáÛÃÁ Ý³Ë »õ ³é³ç ݳéáõû³Ý ËݹñÇÝ£ ƱÝã Û³é³ç- ϳݳóÙ³Ý Çõñ³Û³ïáõÏ Ï³ñ»õáñáõ- ÏÁ µ³ó³ïñáõÇ å»ïáõû³Ý ëï»ÕÍ- ˳ճóù ³ñӳݳ·ñáõ»ó³õ ³ÝóÝáÕ ÃÇõÝ Ïáõ ï³Û Øáõñ³ï»³ÝÇ áõëáõÙ- Ù³Ý Ù¿ç ó»Õ³ëå³Ýáõû³Ý ¹»ñÇ ï³ëݳٻ³ÏÇÝ, DZÝã Ùï³¹Çñ ¿ ÁÝ»É Ý³ëÇñáõû³Ý, áñ áã ³ÛÝù³Ý ³Ý³ÏÝ- ·Ý³Ñ³ïÙ³Ý ï³ñµ»ñáõû³Ùµ. ÙÇÝã ÝáñÁÝïÇñ ܳ˳·³ÑÁ£ Ï³É Ó»õáí Ïþ³Ý¹ñ³¹³éÝ³Û Ð³Û³ë- Ññ¿³Ý»ñáõÝ Ñ³Ù³ñ àÕç³ÏǽáõÙÁ гñó³¹ñáõÙÁ, ³Ûá°, ê÷Çõéù¿Ý ¿£ ï³ÝÇ Ð³Ýñ³å»ïáõû³Ý ÛÇßáÕáõ- ³½·³ÛÇÝ å»ïáõû³Ý ëï»ÕÍÙ³Ý ´³Ûó ãþ»Ýó¹ñ¿ñ áã Ù¿Ï Ñ³ïáõ³- û³Ý »õ ¦ù³Õ³ù³Ï³Ýáõû³Ý ѳ- ϳ٠í»ñ³ÍÝáõÝ¹Ç ûñÇݳϳݳóÙ³Ý Í³Ï³ÝáõÃÇõÝ£ Àݹѳϳé³ÏÁ, ϳëáõÃÇõÝÝ»ñáõݧ£ Îþ³ñÅ¿ í»ñ ³é- ¿³Ï³Ý ÑÇÙݳõáñáõÙ »Õ³Í ¿ ÙÇßï, ËݹñÇÝ ¿³å¿ë ³½·³ÛÇÝ µÝáÛÃÝ ¿, Ý»É ³Ýáñ ·É˳õáñ Ùïù»ñÁ áñå¿ë áõ- ѳۻñáõÝ Ñ³Ù³ñ ò»Õ³ëå³ÝáõÃÇõÝÁ áñ ³ÝÑñ³Å»ßï ÏÁ ¹³ñÓÝ¿ å»ïáõ- Õ»óáÛó ³Ûë Ûû¹áõ³ÍÇ ³é³ç³ñÏ³Í áã ÿ å»ïáõû³Ý ³ÛÉ ê÷ÇõéùÇ Ã»³Ý ³ÙµáÕç³Ï³Ý Û³ÝÓݳéáõ- ûٳÛÇ ßáõñç ËáñÑñ¹³Íáõû³Ý Ûáõ- ÍÝáõÝ¹Ç Çñ³¹³ñÓáõÃÇõÝ Ýϳïáõ³Í ÃÇõÝÁª ò»Õ³ëå³Ýáõû³Ý ÙÇç³½- ë³Éáí áñ ³ÛÝ ³éÇà ÁÉÉ³Û ³½·³ÛÇÝ ¿£ ÜáÛÝÇëÏ »Ã¿ êÇáÝ³Ï³Ý ß³ñÅáõ- ·³ÛÇÝ ×³Ý³ãÙ³Ý »õ ѳïáõóÙ³Ý, Ù³ëßï³åáí µ³Ý³í¿×Ç í»ñ³ñͳñÍ- ÙÁ ëÏǽµ ³é³Í ¿ ¹»é»õë 19ñ¹ ¹³- ÇÝã áñ ÏÁ Ý߳ݳϿ ³ÛÝ µÝáõó·ñ»É Ù³Ý ñáõÝ, àÕç³ÏǽáõÙÁ ³éÇà ïáõ³Í ¿ áã ³õ»ÉÇ »õ áã å³Ï³ë ù³Ý ³½·³- üñ³Ýë³Ñ³Û å³ïÙ³µ³ÝÁ ãÇ í³- Æëñ³Û¿ÉÇ å»ïáõû³Ý ëï»ÕÍáõÙÁ ÛÇÝ ³Ýíï³Ý·áõû³Ý ËݹÇñ£ ê³- ñ³ÝÇñ Çñ áõëáõÙݳëÇñáõÃÇõÝÁ ÑÇÙ- µ³Ý³Ó»õ»Éáõ áñå¿ë ³½·³ÛÇÝ ³Ýí- ϳÛÝ, »°õ ³é³çÇÝ Ñ³Ýñ³å»ïáõ- Ý»É ³Ûɳå¿ë ·³ÛóÏÕÇã ÃáõáÕ µ³- ï³·áõû³Ý ·»ñ³·áÛÝ »ñ³ßËÇù£ û³Ý, »°õ ËáñÑñ¹³ÛÇÝ í³ñã³Ï³ñ- ó³Û³ÛïáõÙÇ ÙÁ íñ³Û£ г۳ëï³ÝÁ, ÜáÛÝ ïñ³Ù³µ³Ýáõû³Ùµ ϳñ»ÉÇ ¿ ·Ç ï³ñÇÝ»ñáõÝ, Ù³ë³Ùµ ûñáõ³Ý ÏþÁë¿ Øáõñ³ï»³Ý, áñáß å³ï³ë˳- »½ñ³Ï³óÝ»É, áñ ÿ»õ êÇáÝ³Ï³Ý å³ÛÙ³ÝÝ»ñáõ å³ñï³¹ñ³Ýùáí »õ ݳïáõáõÃÇõÝ áõÝÇ ò»Õ³ëå³Ýáõ- ß³ñÅáõÙÁ ³ß˳ñѳóñÇõ Ññ¿³Ý»ñáõ Ù³ë³Ùµ ³É áñå¿ë Ñ»ï»õ³Ýù ù³Õ³- û³Ý ÅËïáõÙÇ Û³ñ³ï»õÙ³Ý Ñ³ñ- ѳٳËÙµáõÙÁ ³ñ¹¿Ý ·áñÍÝ³Ï³Ý ù³Ï³Ý áñáßáõÙÇ, å»ïáõû³Ý »õ ò»- óÇÝ Ù¿ç. ËáñÑñ¹³ÛÇÝ í³ñã³Ï³ñ·Á Íñ³·ñÇ í»ñ³Í³Í ¿ñ àÕç³ÏǽáõÙ¿Ý Õ³ëå³Ýáõû³Ý ѳñóÇ Û³ñ³µ»ñáõ- ³ÙµáÕç ÛÇëáõÝ ï³ñÇ ù³ñ ÉéáõÃÇõÝ ³é³ç, ºñÏñáñ¹ гٳß˳ñѳÛÇÝ

вÚðºÜÆø—11 ä³ï»ñ³½Ù¿Ý Û»ïáÛ Ý³óÇ³Ï³Ý Ù³Ñ- ñ»É ºÕ»éÝÇ Ýϳïٳٵ£ ê³Ï³ÛÝ Ð³- ÖÇß¹ ¿, ËáñÑñ¹³ÛÇÝ í³ñã³Ï³ñ- áõ³Ý ׳ٵ³ñÝ»ñ¿Ý í»ñ³åñáÕÝ»ñáõ Û³ëï³ÝÇ Ù¿ç ò»Õ³ëå³Ýáõû³Ý ·Ç áÉáñïÇÝ Ù¿ç ³Ù¿Ý ÇÝã Ïþáñáßáõ¿ñ í»ñ³µÝ³Ï»óáõÙÁ ûñÇÝ ³Ý·ÉÇ³Ï³Ý ³Ûë Û³ñ³µ»ñ³Ï³Ý ¦Ùáé³óٳݧ ØáëÏáõ³£ ´³Ûó ¹ÇõñÇÝ ¿ ³Ûë µ³- Ù³Ýï³ÃÇ ï³Ï ·ïÝáõáÕ ä³Õ»ëïÇ- ÑÇÙÝ³Ï³Ý å³ï׳éÁ ³Ýßáõßï ݳӻõÙ³Ý íñ³Û ³ñ¹³ñ³óÝ»É Ð³- ÝÇ Ù¿ç áã ÙdzÛÝ ³ñ¹³ñ Ýϳïáõ»- ËáñÑñ¹³ÛÇÝ Ï³ñ·»ñáõ ѳëï³- Û³ëï³ÝÇ ËáñÑñ¹³ÛÇÝ Çß˳Ýáõ- ó³õ ÙÇç³½·³ÛÇÝ Ñ³Ù³ÛÝùÇÝ ÏáÕÙ¿ ïáõÙÝ ¿ñ, ëóÉÇÝ»³Ý ù³Õ³ù³Ï³- ÃÇõÝÝ»ñáõ í³ñù³·ÇÍÁ ò»Õ³ëå³- ³ÛÉ Ý³»õ ³Ùñ³åݹ»ó ³ÝÏ³Ë å»- ÝáõÃÇõÝÁ »õ ³Ýáñ Ù»Õë³ÏÇó Ñ³Û Ýáõû³Ý ѳñóÁ å»ï³Ï³Ý ù³Õ³- ïáõû³Ý ëï»ÕÍÙ³Ý É»ÏÇïÇÙáõ- åáÉߢÇÏÝ»ñÁ, áñáÝù, ѳÛñ»ÝÇùÇ Ù¿ç ù³Ï³Ýáõû³Ý ûñ³Ï³ñ·ÇÝ µ»ñ»Éáõ ÃÇõÝÁ, ѳϳé³Ï, ÇÝãå¿ë ͳÝûà ¿, ÿ ê÷ÇõéùÇ, ãí³ñ³Ý»ó³Ý ºÕ»éÝÇ Ëݹñáí£ ²Ûá°, 1965¿Ý Û»ïáÛ ÌÇÍ»é- ³ÛÝ ³Ý³ñ¹³ñáõû³Ý áñ ·áñͳ¹ñ- ÛÇß³ï³ÏáõÙÁ Ýϳï»É ³½·³ÙÇç»³Ý Ý³Ï³µ»ñ¹Ç Ûáõß³ñÓ³ÝÁ ϳéáõóáõ»- áõ»ó³õ å³Õ»ëïÇÝ»³Ý ÅáÕáíáõñ¹ÇÝ ³ï»ÉáõÃÇõÝ Ññ³ÑñáÕ Ó»éݳñÏ£ ó³õ, ³Ù¿Ý ²åñÇÉ 24ÇÝ Ð³Û³ëï³ÝÇ Ýϳïٳٵ£ ØáëÏáõ³Û¿Ý å³ñï³¹ñáõ³Í ³Ûë ÎáÙáõÝÇëï³Ï³Ý Îáõë³Ïóáõû³Ý Æ ï³ñµ»ñáõÃÇõÝ Æëñ³Û¿ÉÇ, г- ¦Ùáé³óáõÙÁ§, áñáõÝ ³ÝϳëÏ³Í Õ»Ï³í³ñÝ»ñÁ Çñ»Ýó Ù³ëݳÏóáõ- Û³ëï³ÝÇ ³é³çÇÝ å»ïáõÃÇõÝÁ, Ù»Õë³ÏÇó ¿ÇÝ Ý³»õ áñáß ËáñÑñ¹³- ÃÇõÝÁ ÏÁ µ»ñ¿ÇÝ å³ßïûÝ³Ï³Ý ³ñ³- 1918-20 гÝñ³å»ïáõÃÇõÝÁ, ÇÝã áñ Ñ³Û Õ»Ï³í³ñÝ»ñ, ѳëï³ï³·ñáõ»- ñáÕáõÃÇõÝÝ»ñáõ, å³ïÙ³µ³Ý³Ï³Ý ¹Åáõ³ñáõÃÇõÝ áõÝ»ó³õ ºÕ»éÝÇ Å³- ó³õ ÙÇÝã»õ 1965, »ñµ, ÇÝãå¿ë ͳ- ³Ñ³·ÇÝ ³ß˳ï³Ýù ï³ñáõ»ó³õ® é³Ý·áõû³Ý ³ÙµáÕç³Ï³Ý å³ï³ë- Ýûà ¿, ¦Ø»ñ ÑáÕ»ñÁ, Ù»ñ ÑáÕ»ñÁ§ µ³Ûó, ¹³ñÓ»³É, ³ñ¹»±ûù ³Ûë µáÉá- ˳ݳïáõáõÃÇõÝÁ ëï³ÝÓÝ»Éáõ£ ²Ý- Ïáãáí ºñ¢³ÝÇ ÷áÕáóÝ»ñÁ óï»ñ³- ñÁ ÏÁ Ý߳ݳϿ ÿ ûñÇÝ »Õ³õ ³ÛÝ Ï³Ë Ð³Û³ëï³ÝÇ Ù¿ç ò»Õ³ëå³Ýáõ- µ»Ù ѳݹÇë³ó³Ý ½³Ý·áõ³Í³ÛÇÝ ÇÝã ϳñ»ÉÇ ¿ñ ÁÝ»É ÙdzÛÝ, ³ñ¹»±ûù û³Ý ݳѳï³ÏÝ»ñáõÝ ÛÇß³ï³ÏÁ ³é³çÇÝ µáÕáùÇÝ£ Âáõ³Ï³Ý ÙÁ, áñ Çëϳå¿ë ³Ýϳñ»ÉÇ ¿ñ ³õ»ÉÇ áõ½»É Ýßáõ»ó³õ 28 سÛÇë 1919ÇÝ, ³Ýϳ- Çñ³õٳٵ ³ÝÏÇõݳ¹³ñÓ ÏÁ ѳٳñ- ØáëÏáõ³Û¿Ý, ϳ٠ÿÏáõ½ »õ ÙdzÛÝ Ëáõû³Ý Ñéã³ÏÙ³Ý ³é³çÇÝ ï³ñ»- áõÇ ÁݹѳÝñ³å¿ë Ñ³Û ÅáÕáíáõñ¹Ç ÊáñÑñ¹³ÛÇÝ Ð³Û³ëï³ÝÇ ë³ÑÙ³Ý- ¹³ñÓÇÝ Å³Ù³Ý³Ï, »õ Áëï Øáõñ³ï- å³ïÙ³Ï³Ý ·áñÍÁÝóóÇÝ Ù¿ç£ Ý»ñ¿Ý Ý»ñë ²åñÇÉ 24Á å³ßïûݳå¿ë »³ÝÇ ·Ý³Ñ³ïÙ³Ý, áñå¿ë å³ï³ë- ÊáñÑñ¹³ÛÇÝ Ð³Û³ëï³ÝÇ å³ñ³·³- í»ñ³Í»É ³½·³ÛÇÝ ë·³ïûÝÇ Ý³Ë- Ë³Ý ÝáÛÝ ï³ñáõ³Û ö»ïñáõ³ñÇÝ ÛÇÝ, »Ã¿ Ù¿Ï ÏáÕÙ¿ 1965Á »Ï³õ óáÛó ù³Ý Õ³ñ³µ³Õ»³Ý ß³ñÅÙ³Ý ÍÝáõݹ ºñ»õ³ÝÇ Ù¿ç ï»ÕÇ áõÝ»ó³Í ï³Éáõ ÿ ѳϳé³Ï ѳٳÛݳí³ñ ³éÝ»ÉÁ£ Æëϳ忱ë Êáññ¹³ÛÇÝ Ð³- ²ñ»õÙï³Ñ³Ûáó ºñÏñáñ¹ гٳ·áõ- í³ñã³Ï³ñ·ÇÝ »õ ëóÉÇÝÇ Ñ³É³- Û³ëï³ÝÇ Çñ»ñ³Û³çáñ¹ ջϳí³ñáõ- Ù³ñÇÝ, áñ å³Ñ³Ýç ¹ñ³Í ¿ñ ѳÛáó ͳÝùÝ»ñáõÝ Ï³ñ»ÉÇ ã¿ñ Ñ³Û ÅáÕá- ÃÇõÝÝ»ñÁ, µ³Ûó Û³ïϳå¿ë ³ÝáÝù ¹¿Ù ·áñͳ¹ñáõ³Í á×ñÇ å³ï³ë˳- íáõñ¹Ç ѳõ³ù³Ï³Ý ÛÇßáÕáõÃ»Ý¿Ý áñáÝù Çß˳Ýáõû³Ý »Ï³Ý 1965¿Ý ݳïáõÝ»ñÁ ÙÇç³½·³ÛÇÝ ³ï»³ÝÝ»- å³ñ½³å¿ë çÝç»É ò»Õ³ëå³Ýáõû³Ý Û»ïáÛ, Û³ïáõÏ é¿³É÷áÉÇÃÇùÇ ÏÁ ñáõ Ù¿ç ¹³ï»Éáõ, ÇÝãå¿ë ݳ»õ á×- ÛÇß³ï³ÏÁ, Û³çáñ¹ 23 ï³ñÇÝ»ñÁ, ѻÇÝ, ÿ± ÛÇëáõÝ ï³ñÇÝ»ñáõ ñÇ Ñ³ïáõóÙ³Ý »õ Çñ»Ýó û׳ËÝ»ñÁ ÙÇÝã»õ 22 ÜáÛ»Ùµ»ñ 1988 »ñµ ûñáõ³Ý ëóÉÇݳϳÝáõÃÇõÝÁ ³ñ¹¿Ý Çñ í»ñ³¹³ñÓÇ£ ò»Õ³ëå³Ýáõû³Ý ¶»ñ³·áÛÝ êáí»ïÁ ²åñÇÉ 24Á Û³Û- Ûëï³Ï ³Ý¹ñ³¹³ñÓÁ áõÝ»ó³Í ¿ñ »õ á·»ÏáãÙ³Ý, ¦²åñÇÉ 24§Ç ÛÇß³ï³Ï- ï³ñ³ñ»ó ³½·³ÛÇÝ ë·³ïûÝ, »Ï³Ý ³Û¹ 鿳É÷áÉÇÃÇùÁ ËáñùÇÝ Ù¿ç ò»- Ù³Ý ³õ³Ý¹áõÃÇõÝÁ ÍÝáõݹ ³é³õ óáÛó ï³Éáõ, ѳٳӳÛÝ Øáõñ³ï»³- Õ³ëå³ÝáõÃÇõÝÁ å»ï³Ï³Ý ѳñó ÝáÛÝ ï³ñÇÝ, 1919ÇÝ, µ³Ûó г۳ë- ÝÇ í»ñÉáõÍáõÙÇÝ, ÿ áñù³°Ý Ãáõñù- í»ñ³Í»Éáõ áã é³½Ù³í³ñáõÃÇõÝ áã ï³Ý¿Ý ¹áõñë ¸³ßݳÏÇóÝ»ñáõ ѳ- ËáñÑñ¹³ÛÇÝ Û³ñ³µ»ñáõÃÇõÝÝ»ñÁ ÏÁ ³É ù³Õ³ù³Ï³Ý ïñ³Ù³¹ñáõÃÇõÝ Ï³ÏßéÇÝ ï³Ï ·ïÝáõáÕ äáÉëáÛ »õ å³Ûٳݳõáñ¿ÇÝ ò»Õ³ëå³Ýáõû³Ý áõÝ¿ñ£ ì³ÛÙ³ñÇ Ñ³Ýñ³å»ïáõû³Ý Ù³Û- ѳñóÇÝ ³ñͳñÍáõÙÁ£ ²Ûë ·ñ»Ã¿ ·ñ·éÇã ѳñó³¹ñáõÙ- ñ³ù³Õ³ù ä»ñÉÇÝÇ Ù¿ç£ ØdzÛÝ Ù¿Ï ê÷ÇõéùÇ Ù¿ç Ð³Û ¸³ïÇ å³Ûù³- Ý»ñÁ ³Ùµ³ëï³Ýáõû³Ý Ù³ï »ñϳ- ï³ñÇ Û»ïáÛ, 1920ÇÝ ¿, áñ ¾çÙdzÍÝÇ ñÇ ³Û¹ ³Ù»Ý³µáõéÝ »ñÏáõ ï³ëݳÙ- ñ»Éáõ Ýå³ï³Ï ã»Ý Ñ»ï³åݹ»ñ£ سÛñ î³×³ñÇÝ Ù¿ç Ñ᷻ѳݷëï- »³ÏÇÝ, ò»Õ³ëå³Ýáõû³Ý ׳ݳã- ¶É¿ñ Øáõñ³ï»³ÝÇÝ áõëáõÙݳëÇñáõ- »³Ý Û³ïáõÏ ³ñ³ñáÕáõû³Ùµ ÙÁ Ù³Ý Ñ³ñóÁ å³ñ½³å¿ë Ù³ÏÁÝó- ÃÇõÝÁ ãÇ Ëáñ³Ý³ñ ³Ûë ѳñóáí »õ ¶¿áñ· º. êáõñ¿Ý»³Ýó ϳÃáÕÇÏáëÁ, óáõÃÇõÝ ³åñ»ó³õ ËáñÑñ¹³ÛÇÝ ³ÝÑñ³Å»ßï ¿ å³ïÙ³Ï³Ý ³ÙµáÕç Ç Ý»ñϳÛáõÃÇõÝ Ï³ÃáÕÇÏ¿ »õ ³õ»- áÉáñïÇÝ Ù¿ç£ Ø¿Ï ÏáÕÙ¿ ϳëÏ³Í áõëáõÙݳëÇñáõÃÇõÝ ÙÁ, áñ ûñ»õë ï³ñ³Ý³Ï³Ý Û³ñ³Ýáõ³Ýáõû³Ýó ãÏ³Û Ã¿ ³éÏ³Û ¿ñ ѳë³ñ³Ï³Ï³Ý ÇÝã áñ ã³÷áí Éáõë³µ³Ý¿ г۳ëï³- Ý»ñϳ۳óáõóÇãÝ»ñáõ, ÏÁ Û³Ûï³ñ³- ×ÝßáõÙÁ, Ùï³õáñ³Ï³ÝÝ»ñáõ Û³ÝÓ- ÝÇ »ñÏñáñ¹ ³ÝÏ³Ë Ñ³Ýñ³å»ïáõ- ñ¿ ²åñÇÉ 24Á ³½·³ÛÇÝ ë·³ïûÝ Ý³éáõÃÇõÝÁ, ÙÇõë ÏáÕÙ¿ ÇñáÕáõ- û³Ý ³é³çÇÝ Ï³é³í³ñáõû³Ý Ñéã³Ï»Éáõ áñáßáõÙÇÝ Ù³ëÇÝ£ ÃÇõÝ ¿ áñ ò»Õ³ëå³Ýáõû³Ý ѳñóÁ Ï»óáõ³ÍùÁ ò»Õ³ëå³Ýáõû³Ý ѳñ- ä³ñ½ ¿, áñ г۳ëï³ÝÇ ³é³çÇÝ å»ï³Ï³Ý ûñ³Ï³ñ· ãÙï³õ áã óÇÝ Ýϳïٳٵ£ ²ÛÉ Ëûëùáíª È»õáÝ ³ÝÏ³Ë Ð³Ýñ³å»ïáõû³Ý ջϳ- ÊáñÑñ¹³ÛÇÝ Ð³Û³ëï³ÝÇ Çß˳Ýáõ- î¿ñ ä»ïñá뻳ÝÇ áñ¹»·ñ³Í áñå¿ë í³ñÝ»ñÁ ûñÇÝ ³éÇÃÁ ãáõÝ»ó³Ý ÝáÛ- ÃÇõÝÝ»ñáõ ٳϳñ¹³Ïáí, áã ³É, ³Ý- ÿ 鿳É÷áÉÇÃÇùÇ ïñ³Ù³µ³Ýáõ- ÝÇëÏ Ùï³Í»Éáõ ÿ Ç°Ýã ù³Õ³ù³Ï³- ßáõßï, ØáëÏáõ³ÛÇ Ý»ñùÇÝ Ã¿ ³ñï³- ÃÇõÝÁ ÂáõñùÇáÛ Ñ»ï Û³ñ³µ»ñáõ- ÝáõÃÇõÝ å¿ïù ¿ »õ ϳñ»ÉÇ ¿ áñ¹»·- ùÇÝ ù³Õ³ù³Ï³Ýáõû³Ý Ù¿ç£ ÃÇõÝÝ»ñáõ µÝ³Ï³ÝáݳóÙ³Ý Ñ³ñ-

вÚðºÜÆø—12 óáí, ³Ûë åñ³ÕÙ³ïǽÙÁ ÇÝãå¿ë ûñÇÝ å¿ë áñå¿ë µáÕáùÇ Ý߳ݣ ê³Ï³ÛÝ áÉáñïÇÝ Ù¿ç ³ñͳñÍ»Éáõ£ ²õ»ÉÇ°Ý, ÏÁ ëÇñ¿ñ Áë»É ³Ý, ³ñ¹»±ûù ³ñ¹ÇõÝ- å³ñ½ ¿, áñ »Ã¿ ³Ý Çß˳Ýáõû³Ý ÏñÝ³Û ÝáÛÝÇëÏ Ã³Ï³ñ¹ ÙÁ ÁÉɳÉ. ³Ý- ùÁ ã¿ ËáñÑñ¹³ÛÇÝ ï³ñÇÝ»ñ¿Ý Ùݳ- ѳë³Í ÁÉɳñ åÇïÇ ÷áË¿ñ ݳ»õ øá- ·³Ù ÙÁ áñ Û³ñ³µ»ñáõÃÇõÝÝ»ñÁ ó³Í å»ï³Ï³Ý í³ñù³·ÍÇ ÙÁ ß³ñáõ- ã³ñ»³ÝÇ ù³Õ³ù³Ï³ÝáõÃÇõÝÁ ëï»ÕÍáõÇÝ, ò»Õ³ëå³Ýáõû³Ý ѳñ- ݳÏٳݣ ݳ»õ ò»Õ³ëå³Ýáõû³Ý Ëݹñáí£ óÇÝ ³ñͳñÍáõÙÁ ÏñÝ³Û Û³õ»ñųϳ- ²Ù¿Ý å³ñ³·³ÛÇ, »Ã¿ 1991-1998 ¸¿Ù ۳ݹÇÙ³Ý Ð³Û³ëï³ÝÇ ù³- Ýûñ¿Ý Û»ï³Ó·áõÇÉ ³õ»ÉÇ ³é³çݳ- ï³ñÇÝ»ñáõÝ ÷áñÓ³ñÏáõ³Í å»ï³- Õ³ù³Ï³Ý ßñç³Ý³ÏÝ»ñáõ ÿ ѳë³- Ñ»ñà ѳñó»ñáõ -³é»õïáõñ- ³éϳ- Ï³Ý ù³Õ³ù³Ï³ÝáõÃÇõÝÁ ò»Õ³ë- ñ³Ïáõû³Ý Ù¿ç ÇÝù½ÇÝù ѳëï³ï»- Ûáõû³Ý£ å³Ýáõû³Ý ѳñóáí г۳ëï³ÝÇ Éáõ Ñ»ï³Ùáõï ³Ûë ³ñÙ³ï³Ï³Ý áõ- ²Ýßáõßï, ù³Õ³ù³Ï³Ý ³Ûë Ï»ó- ³é³çÇÝ Ü³Ë³·³ÑÇÝ »õ Çñ ßáõñçÇ Õ»·ÇÍÇÝ, 1998¿Ý 2008 ï³ëݳٻ³- áõ³ÍùÇÝ µ³ñá۳ϳÝÝ áõ ÇÙ³ëïáõ- ù³ÝÇ ÙÁ µ³Ëï³ËݹÇñÝ»ñáõ ѳõ³- ÏÇÝ ò»Õ³ëå³Ýáõû³Ý ѳñóÁ ÝáÛÝ- ÃÇõÝÁ å³ßïå³ÝáÕ µ³Ý³Ó»õáõÙÝ»ñ ï³ó³Í ¦ä»ï³Ï³Ý Ùï³ÍáÕáõ- ù³Ý ³ñÙ³ï³Ï³Ýûñ¿Ý å¿ïù ¿ñ ã»Ý å³ÏëÇñ ½áõï ù³Õ³ù³Ï³Ý- û³Ý§ ï»ëáõû³Ý ӳ˳õ»ñ ·áñÍ- ÙïÝ»ñ å»ï³Ï³Ý ù³Õ³ù³Ï³Ýáõ- ¹Çõ³Ý³·Çï³Ï³Ý áÉáñïÇÝ Ù¿ç£ ²õ»- ݳϳݳóáõÙÁ ÁÉɳñ ÙdzÛÝ Ã»ñ»õë û³Ý Ù¿ç£ Î³ëÏ³Í ãϳÛ, áñ ï³ñµ»- ÉÇ ¹Åáõ³ñ ¿ Û³Ûïݳµ»ñ»É ³Ýáñ »Ý- Û³ñ³µ»ñ³µ³ñ ¹ÇõñÇÝ ÁÉɳñ »½ñ³- ñáõÃÇõÝÁ ß³ï Ù»Í ¿ Ù¿Ï ÏáÕÙ¿ ϳñ- óÑáÕ Ñ³Ý¹Çë³óáÕ ÝÇõóϳÝ- ϳóÝ»É áñ ëñµ³·ñáõÃÇõÝÁ áã ÙdzÛÝ Í»ë Ãñù³Ï³Ý ϳé³í³ñáõû³Ý ³é³ñÏ³Û³Ï³Ý ß³Ñ³·ñ·éáõÃÇõÝÝ»- ϳñ»ÉÇ ¿ ³ÛÉ ³ÝÑñ³Å»ßï³µ³ñ ³ñ- ÅËïáõÙÇ ù³Õ³ù³Ï³Ýáõû³Ý í»ñ- ñáõ ѳٳϳñ·Á, áñ ·³Õ³÷³ñ³Ëû- Ù³ï³Ï³Ý å¿ïù ¿ ÁÉɳۣ ²Û¹å¿ë çÇÝ Ã¿½ÇÝ ³ñÓ³·³Ý·áÕ ò»Õ³ëå³- ë³Ï³Ýûñ¿Ý ѳõ³ï³ñÇÙ ³ñï³óáɳ- ã»Õ³õ ë³Ï³ÛÝ£ ÊáñùÇÝ Ù¿ç, È»õáÝ Ýáõû³Ý ѳñóÁ å³ïÙ³µ³ÝÝ»ñáõ óáõÙÝ ¿ È»õáÝ î¿ñ ä»ïñá뻳ÝÇ ûñáí î¿ñ ä»ïñá뻳ÝÇ, »õ ÁݹѳÝñ³å¿ë Ó·»Éáõ ïñ³Ù³¹Çñ È»õáÝ î¿ñ ä»ï- ѳëï³ïáõ³Í »õ ÙÇÝã»õ ³Ûëûñ ß³- гÛáó гٳ½·³ÛÇÝ Þ³ñÅÙ³Ý, Ï»ó- ñá뻳ÝÇ »õ زÎÇ µ»Ù¿Ý ÿ Âáõñù- ñáõݳÏáõáÕ ïÝï»ë³Ï³Ý ѳë³ñ³- áõ³ÍùÁ áã ÿ ÊáñÑñ¹³ÛÇÝ Ð³Û³ë- ÇáÛ Ù¿ç ò»Õ³ëå³Ýáõû³Ý ׳ݳã- ϳñ·ÇÝ »õ ù³Õ³ù³Ï³Ýáõû³Ý£ ï³ÝÇ Çß˳ݳõáñÝ»ñáõ ·áñÍÝ³Ï³Ý Ù³Ý å³Ñ³ÝçÇÝ íñ³Û ѳëï³ï Ùݳ- ê³Ï³ÛÝ ÙdzÛÝ ³Û¹ ѳٳϳñ·Ç 鿳É÷áÉÇÃÇùÇÝ Ùûï ¿, ³Ûɪ åáÉߢÇÏ- Éáõ Ï»óáõ³Íù áñ¹»·ñ³Í èáå»ñà ïñ³Ù³µ³Ýáõû³Ùµ ϳñ»ÉÇ ¿ ѳëÏ- »³Ý ³å³½·³ÛÇÝ, »õ ÝáÛÝÇëÏ Ñ³Ï³- øáã³ñ»³ÝÇ ÙÇç»õ£ ê³Ï³ÛÝ å»ï³- Ý³É áã ÙdzÛÝ Ãñù³Ï³Ý ³åñ³ÝùÝ»- ³½·³ÛÇÝ, Ùï³ÍáÕáõû³Ý, ÿÏáõ½ ¢ Ï³Ý Ù³Ï³ñ¹³Ïáí ¹»é»õë ã»Ý ³éÝ- ñáõÝ áÕáÕáõÙÁ ѳÛÏ³Ï³Ý ßáõϳÛ, ·³Õ³÷³ñ³Ëûë³Ï³Ýûñ¿Ý 180 ³ë- áõ³Í ³ÛÝåÇëÇ ù³ÛÉ»ñ, áñáÝù î¿ñ Ý»ñ³é»³É »ñÏñ³·áñÍ³Ï³Ý ³ñï³¹- ïÇ×³Ý Ñ³Ï³é³Ï ¹Çñù»ñ¿£ ÎïñÇ× ä»ïñáë»³Ý³Ï³Ý áõÕ»·ÇÍÇ ÙÁ Çß- ñáõÃÇõÝÝ»ñ Ç Ñ»×áõÏë Ñ³Û »ñÏñ³- ê³ñ¹³ñ»³ÝÝ»ñáõ, ²ßáï äÉ¿Û»³ÝÝ»- ˳Ýáõû³Ý ѳëÝ»Éáõ å³ñ³·³ÛÇÝ ·áñÍÇÝ »õ ³ñï³¹ñáÕÇÝ, ³ÛÉ Ý³¢ ñáõ, ²ñ³ ê³Ñ³Ï»³ÝÝ»ñáõ »õ ê÷Çõé- ÇëÏ ³Ýϳñ»ÉÇ ¹³ñÓÝ»Ý ò»Õ³ëå³- ³Ù¿Ý ³Ù³é ¹¿åÇ Ãñù³Ï³Ý Íáí³÷- ùÇ Çñ»Ýó Ñá·»Õµ³ÛñÝ»ñáõÝ »õ ·áñ- ÝáõÃÇõÝÁ ûñ³Ï³ñ·¿Ý ¹áõñë ѳݻÉáõ Ý»ñ ¹ÇÙáÕ áõÝ»õáñ ѳïáõ³ÍÇ Ñá·»- ͳÏÇóÝ»ñáõÝ Ñ»ï³åݹ³Í Ýå³ï³- áñ»õ¿ ݳ˳ÝÓ³ËݹñáõÃÇõÝ£ µ³ÝáõÃÇõÝÁ, Ç Ù³ëݳõáñÇ »Ã¿ ÝáÛÝ ÏÁ áã ÙdzÛÝ å»ï³Ï³Ý ù³Õ³ù³Ï³- ²Ûëå¿ë, ѳϳé³Ï ÝáÛÝÇÝùÝ øá- ³Û¹ ³½³ï ßáõϳÛÇ ë³ÝÓ³ñÓ³Ïáõ- Ýáõû³Ý, ³ÛÉ ³½·³ÛÇÝ å³ïÙáõ- ã³ñ»³ÝÇ í»ñçÇÝ ï³ñÇÝ»ñáõÝ Ï³- û³Ý Ñ»ï»õ³Ýùáí г۳ëï³ÝÇ Ù¿ç û³Ý »õ ÇÝùÝáõû³Ý ³ñÙ³ï³Ï³Ý ï³ñ³Í ù³ÝÇ ÙÁ Û³Ûï³ñ³ñáõÃÇõÝ- ³ñÓ³Ïáõñ¹Ç »ñóÉÁ ÝáÛÝù³Ý »Ã¿ í»ñ³ï»ëáõû³Ý ÏÁ Ó·ïÇ£ Ý»ñáõÝ, áõñ ò»Õ³ëå³Ýáõû³Ý ׳- áã ³õ»ÉÇ ëáõÕ ¿ ù³Ý Ãñù³Ï³Ý Íá- »ñ»õë ϳñ»ÉÇ ¿ Áë»É, áñ ²ñÙ³ï ݳãáõÙÁ ÏÁ ¹ÇïáõÇ áñå¿ë ³½·³ÛÇÝ í³÷£ Ï»¹ñáÝÇ ßáõñç ѳõ³ùáõ³Í ³Ûë ³Ýíï³Ý·áõû³Ý ËݹÇñ, ¹»é»õë ÏÁ ²½·³ÛݳÙáÉáõÃÇõÝ ãÏ³Û ³Ûë ËÙµ³ÏÁ ÷áùñ³Ù³ëÝáõÃÇõÝ ¿, »õ ÙÝ³Û ¦ÂáõñùÇáÛ Ñ»ï ³é³Ýó ݳ˳- ËáñÑñ¹³ÍáõÃÇõÝÝ»ñáõ »ïÇÝ£ º·- ò»Õ³ëå³Ýáõû³Ý ϳñ»õáñáõû³Ý å³ÛÙ³ÝÇ Û³ñ³µ»ñáõÃÇõÝÝ»ñ ѳë- ¿³Ï³Ý Íáíáõ »½ñÇÝ Ã¿ ØÇç»ñÏ- ¹áÛ½Ý Ýë»Ù³óÙ³Ý ³Ù¿Ý ÷áñÓ, ÇÝã- ï³ï»Éáõ§ å³ïñ³ëï³Ï³ÙáõÃÇõÝÁ, ñ³Ï³ÝÇ Ãñù³Ï³Ý Íáí³÷Ý»ñÁ å¿ë ÇñáÕáõÃÇõÝÝ»ñÁ óáÛó Ïáõ ï³Ý, áñáõÝ Ù³ëÇÝ ²ØÜÇ Ù³ÙÉáÛ Ù¿Ï ûñ- ³ÝϳëÏ³Í áñ ·»Õ»óÇÏ »Ý »õ ϳ- Ó³ËáÕáõû³Ý ¹³ï³å³ñïáõ³Í ¿£ ·³ÝÇÝ Ù¿ç ·ñ³Í ¿ ݳ˳·³Ñ ê»ñÅ ñ»ÉÇ ¿ »Ýó¹ñ»É ß³ï ù³ßáÕ³- ê³Ï³ÛÝ Ï³ñ»õáñ ¿ ¹Çï»É ï³É, áñ ê³ñ·ë»³Ý£ ¸Çõ³Ý³·Çï³Ï³Ý ¹³ñÓ- Ï³Ý ³ñÓ³Ïáõñ¹Ý»ñáõ ѳٳñ£ È»õáÝ î¿ñ ä»ïñáë»³Ý ê»åï»Ùµ»ñ áõ³Íùáí ³Ûë ëϽµáõÝùÁ ÏÁ µ³ó³- гñó ãÏ³Û µÝ³õ ¹¿åÇ Âáõñùdz 2007ÇÝ ù³Õ³ù³Ï³Ý ³ëå³ñ¿½ Çñ é¿ ²Ý·³ñ³ÛÇ »ñ»ù å³Ûٳݳõá- ³ñÓ³Ïáõñ¹Ç »ñóÉáõ Çñ³õáõÝùÁ í»ñ³¹³ñÓáí ϳëÏ³Í ãÓ·»ó ÿ áñ- ñáõÙÝ»ñ¿Ýª ò»Õ³ëå³Ýáõû³Ý ѳñ- ³ñ·ÇÉ»Éáõ£ àã ³É Ãñù³Ï³Ý Íá- ù³Ý ³Ùáõñ ÏÁ ÙÝ³Û Çñ ѳÙá½áõÙ- óÇ Ñ»ï³åݹáõÙ¿Ý Ññ³Å³ñÙ³Ý ÁÝ- í³÷Ý»ñÁ åáÛùáÃÇ »ÝóñÏ»Éáõ Ý»ñáõÝ íñ³Û, Ý»ñ³é»³É ò»Õ³ëå³- ¹áõÝáõÙÁ Û³ñ³µ»ñáõÃÇõÝÝ»ñ ëï»Õ- Ïáã ÙÁÝ »Ý ³Ûë ïáÕ»ñÁ£ Î³Û Ùï³- Ýáõû³Ý ѳñóÇÝ Ýϳïٳٵ£ Æñ»Ý Í»Éáõ ѳٳñ£ ê³Ï³ÛÝ ãÇ Ý߳ݳϻñ Ñá·áõÃÇõÝ å»ï³Ï³Ý ù³Õ³ù³- Ó³ÛÝ ïáõ³Í 27 ïáÏáëÁ ÏñÝ³Û ³Û¹ áñ ºñ»õ³Ý Û³ÝÓݳéáõÃÇõÝ ÏÁ í»ñó- ϳÝáõû³Ý µ³óÃáÕáõÙÝ»ñáõÝ »õ ù³ÛÉÇÝ ¹ÇÙ³Í ÁÉÉ³É áã ³Ýå³ÛÙ³- Ý¿ Û³ñ³µ»ñáõÃÇõÝÝ»ñ ѳëï³ï»É¿ ³Ýï»ëáõÙÝ»ñáõÝ Ýϳïٳٵ, Ý»- Ýûñ¿Ý µ³ÅÝ»Éáí Çñ ï»ë³Ï¿ïÁ ò»- Û»ïáÛ ò»Õ³ëå³Ýáõû³Ý ѳñóÁ »ñÏ- ñ³é»³É ò»Õ³ëå³Ýáõû³Ý ѳñ- Õ³ëå³Ýáõû³Ý ѳñóáí »õ å³ñ½³- ÏáÕÙ³ÝÇ Û³ñ³µ»ñáõÃÇõÝÝ»ñáõ óáí£

вÚðºÜÆø—13 ²ð¸²ð²¸²îàôº²Ü Ýáõû³Ý Çñ³õ³Ï³Ý Ñ»ï³åÝ¹Ù³Ý Ýå³ï³Ï³¹ñáõû³Ùµ: ²ÛëÇÝùÝ, ֲβîàôØÆ êºØÆÜ ò»Õ³ëå³Ýáõû³Ý àõËïÇÝ ïñ³- Ù³¹ñ³Í å³ïÅáõÙÇ ëϽµáõÝùÁ, áñ 꺸ú äàÚ²Öº²Ü ÇÝùÝÁëïÇÝù»³Ý ÏÁ Ý»ñ³éÝ¿ ݳ»õ ѳïáõóÙ³Ý å³ÛÙ³ÝÝ»ñÁ, »õ г۳ë- ²ÝóÝáÕ ³ÙÇë, سñï 28ÇÝ, ÄÁÝ»- ¹»·ñÙ³Ý 60-³Ù»³ÏÁ ÏÁ ѳݹÇë³- ï³ÝÇ ÏáÕÙ¿ ³Û¹ ëϽµáõÝùÇÝ å»ï³- õÇ Ù¿ç Ødzó»³É ²½·»ñáõ γ½Ù³- Ý³Û ³Ûë ï³ñÇ, г۳ëï³ÝÇ ³é³- Ï³Ý Ñ»ï³åÝ¹Ù³Ý áõ гÛÏ³Ï³Ý ò»- Ï»ñåáõû³Ý سñ¹Ï³ÛÇÝ Æñ³õ³Ýó ç³ñÏáí زÎÇ Ñ³Ù³Ï³ñ·ÇÝ Ù¿ç åÇ- Õ³ëå³Ýáõû³Ý ÏÇñ³ñÏÙ³Ý Ý³Ë³- ÊáñÑáõñ¹Á áñ¹»·ñ»ó ó»- Ó»éÝáõÃÇõÝÁ ÏÁ ÙÝ³Ý ï³- Õ³ëå³Ýáõû³Ý ϳÝ˳ñ- ñ³Ýç³ïáõ³Í µÝ³·³õ³é- ·ÇÉÙ³Ý í»ñ³µ»ñáÕ µ³Ý³- Ý»ñ: ê³Ï³ÛÝ Å³Ù³Ý³ÏÝ ¿ Ó»õ ÙÁ (A/HRC/7/L.26): áñ ѳÛáõÃÇõÝÁ, Çñ ѳÛñ»ÝÇ êáÛÝ áñáßáõÙÁ ÏÁ Ýå³ï³- å»ï³Ï³Ýáõû³Ùµ áõ ϳ¹ñ¿ ùÝÝ»É Ï³Ý˳ñ·ÇÉ- ë÷Çõéù»³Ý ϳñáճϳÝáõ- Ù³Ý ËݹÇñÝ»ñáí ó³ñ¹ ½µ³- û³Ùµ, ëÏëÇ í»ñç ¹Ý»É ³Û¹ ÕáÕ Ï³éáÛóÝ»ñáõ ·áñÍáõÝ¿- ï³ñ³Ýç³ïÙ³Ý áõ í×é¿ áõû³Ý Ý»ñ¹³ßݳÏÙ³Ý ·áñÍݳϳݳóÝ»É ó»Õ³ë- ѳñó»ñÁ, ÇÝãå¿ë ݳ»õ ó»- å³Ý³Ï³Ý ³ñ³ñùÇ å³ï- Õ³ëå³Ý³Ï³Ý ³ñ³ñùÝ»ñáõ ÅáõÙÇ Çñ³õ³Ï³Ý ëϽµáõÝ- ݳ˳½·áõß³óÙ³Ý Ýß³ÝÝ»- ùÁª гÛÏ³Ï³Ý ò»Õ³ëå³- ñáõ Ùß³ÏÙ³Ý ËݹÇñÝ»ñÁ: Ýáõû³Ý å³ñ³·³ÛÇÝ: Àëï ¿áõû³Ý, µ³Ý³Ó»õÇÝ ä³ñ½ áõ Ù¿ÏÇÝ, ³é³ç³¹- Ïǽ³Ï¿ïÁ ÏÁ ѳݹÇë³Ý³Û زÎÇ ·É˳õáñ ù³ñïáõÕ³ñ »õ ó»Õ³ëå³Ýáõû³Ý ñáõÃÇõÝÁ ÏÁ í»ñ³µ»ñÇ ÙÇ- زÎÇ 1948Ç ò»Õ³ëå³Ýáõ- ϳÝ˳ñ·ÇÉÙ³Ý Ñ³ñó»ñáõ Û³ïáõÏ ËáñÑñ¹³Ï³Ýª ç³½·³ÛÇÝ ûñ¿ÝùÇ ÑÇٳٵ, û³Ý àõËïÇÝ Ï³Ý˳ñ·ÇÉ- ëáõï³ÝóǪ üñ³ÝëÇë î¿ÝÏ ÙÇç³½·³ÛÇÝ ³ï»³ÝÇ Ù³Ý ëϽµáõÝùÁ: ê³Ï³ÛÝ, Çñ Û³é³- ïÇ Ï³Û³Ý³Ý Ûáµ»ÉÇÝ³Ï³Ý ÙÇçáó³- í×é³¹³ïáõû³Ùµ »õ ûñÇÝ³Ï³Ý ç³µ³ÝÇ µ³ó³ïñ³Ï³ÝÇ »ñÏñáñ¹ éáõÙÝ»ñ: ²Ûë Ýå³ï³ÏÇÝ Ñ³Ù³ñ ³ñ- ÏáÕÙÇ ÙÁ ݳ˳ӻéÝáõû³Ùµª гÛ- å³ñµ»ñáõû³Ý áõ áñáßáõÙÝ»ñáõ ¹¿Ý ÇëÏ Ð³Û³ëï³ÝÇ Ý³Ë³Ó»éÝáõ- Ï³Ï³Ý ò»Õ³ëå³Ýáõû³Ý ³ñ¹³ñ³- µ³ÅÝÇ ³é³çÇÝ Ï¿ïáí µ³Ý³Ó»õÁ û³Ùµ سñ¹Ï³ÛÇÝ Æñ³õ³Ýó Êáñ- ¹³ïáõû³Ý: ØÇç³½·³ÛÇÝ ûñ¿ÝùÇ Ý³»õ ÏÁ í»ñ³Ñ³ëï³ï¿ ò»Õ³ëå³- Ñáõñ¹Ç سñï ³Ùëáõ³Ý Ýëï³ßñç³- ÑÇÙùÇÝ ÏÁ ·ïÝáõÇ Ø²ÎÇ ò»Õ³ëå³- Ýáõû³Ý àõËïÇ ó»Õ³ëå³Ý³Ï³Ý ÝÇÝ Ññ³õÇñáõ³Í áõ »ÉáÛà áõÝ»ó³Í Ýáõû³Ý àõËïÁ: ØÇç³½·³ÛÇÝ ³ï- ³ñ³ñùÇ å³ïÅáõÙÇÝ ëϽµáõÝùÁ: ¿ زÎÇ ·É˳õáñ ù³ñïáõÕ³ñ »õ ó»- »³ÝÇ Ñ³Ý·³Ù³ÝùÇÝ Çñ³õ³óÇáõ- Õ³ëå³Ýáõû³Ý ϳÝ˳ñ·ÇÉÙ³Ý ÃÇõÝÁ ÏÁ å³ïϳÝÇ Ø²ÎÇ ØÇç³½- ȳÛÝ ½ûñ³ÏóáõÃÇõÝ í³Û»ÉáÕ áñ- ѳñó»ñáõ Û³ïáõÏ ËáñÑñ¹³Ï³Ýª ·³ÛÇÝ ²ñï³ñ³¹³ï³Ï³Ý ²ï»³- ¹»·ñáõ³Í ³Ûë µ³Ý³Ó»õÁ ѳٳѻ- üñ³ÝëÇë î¿ÝÏ: ÝÇÝ: ÆëÏ ¹³ï³Ï³Ý ѳñóÇ Û³ñáõó- ÕÇÝ³Ï³Í »Ý 58 »ñÏÇñÝ»ñ, Ù³ëݳÏ- гÛÏ³Ï³Ý ò»Õ³ëå³Ýáõû³Ý ÛÇ- Ù³Ý Ý³Ë³Ó»éÝáÕ ûñÇÝ³Ï³Ý ÏáÕÙÁ óáõû³Ùµ ºõñáÙÇáõû³Ý µáÉáñ ³Ý- ß³ï³ÏÙ³Ý ³Ûë ûñ»ñáõÝ, í»ñáÝß»³É ÏñÝ³Û Ñ³Ý¹Çë³Ý³É г۳ëï³ÝÇ å»- ¹³ÙÝ»ñáõÝ áõ г۳ëï³ÝÇ: Ú³ï- ݳ˳ӻéÝáõÃÇõÝÝ»ñÁ Éáõë³ñÓ³ÏÇ ïáõÃÇõÝÁª áñå¿ë ò»Õ³ëå³Ýáõû³Ý ϳÝß³Ï³Ý ¿ áñ г۳ëï³Ý ·áñÍûÝ ï³Ï ÏÁ µ»ñ»Ý »ñÏáõ ϳñ»õáñ ïáõ- àõËïÇ ëïáñ³·Çñ ³Ý¹³Ù: Ù³ëݳÏóáÕÝ áõ ݳ˳ӻéÝáÕÁ »Õ³Í »³ÉÝ»ñ, áñáÝó ³ÝÙÇç³Ï³ÝáõÃÇõÝÁ ´Ý³Ï³Ý³µ³ñ ·áÛáõÃÇõÝ áõÝÇÝ ¿ ³Ûë µ³Ý³Ó»õÇÝ: Àëï ѳÛñ»ÝÇ ²ñ- Ïÿ³Õ»ñëáõÇ å³Ñ³Ýç³ïÇñ³Ï³Ý Ù»ñ Ýáõ³×»ÉÇ ¹Åáõ³ñáõÃÇõÝÝ»ñ: ØÇ- ï³ùÇÝ ¶áñÍáó ݳ˳ñ³ñáõû³Ý, ù³Õ³ù³Ï³Ý ³ß˳ï³ÝùÇÝ: ²é³- ç³½·³ÛÇÝ ¹³ï³Ï³Ý ÁÝóó³Ï³ñ·Ç г۳ëï³Ý ݳ»õ µ³Ý³Ó»õÇÝ ÙÇçá- çÇÝÁ, زÎÇ ò»Õ³ëå³Ýáõû³Ý àõË- Û³ñáõóÙ³Ý ¹¿Ù ³ÝÙÇç³Ï³Ýûñ¿Ý ÏÁ óáí ³é³ç³ñÏ³Í ¿ زÎÇ Ñ³Ù³Ï³ñ- ïÇÝ Ý»ñϳ۳óáõó³Í ϳñ»õáñáõ- óóáõÇÝ »ñÏáõ ËáãÁݹáïÝ»ñ: ²é³- ·áí ³Ûë ï³ñáõ³Ý ÁÝóóùÇÝ Ï³½- ÃÇõÝÝ áõ ³ÛÅÙ¿³Ï³ÝáõÃÇõÝÝ ¿: ÆëÏ çÇÝ, гÛÏ³Ï³Ý ò»Õ³ëå³Ýáõû³Ý ٳϻñå»É ó»Õ³ëå³Ýáõû³Ý ϳÝ- »ñÏñáñ¹Á, г۳ëï³ÝÇ å»ï³Ï³Ý å³ñ³·³ÛÇÝ ò»Õ³ëå³Ýáõû³Ý ˳ñ·ÇÉÙ³Ý í»ñ³µ»ñáÕ ùÝݳñÏáõÙ- ù³Õ³ù³Ï³Ýáõû³Ý áõ ·áñÍáõÝ¿áõ- àõËïÇ ÏÇñ³ñÏ»ÉÇáõÃÇõÝÁ: ºñÏñáñ¹, Ý»ñª Ù³ëݳÏóáõû³Ýµ زÎÇ Ù³ñ- û³Ý Ù¿ç ó»Õ³ëå³Ýáõû³Ý ûñ³- гÛñ»ÝÇ å»ïáõû³Ý ¹³ï³Ï³Ý ÁÝ- ÙÇÝÝ»ñáõ, ù³Õ³ù³óÇ³Ï³Ý Ñ³ë³- ϳñ·Ç Ñ»ï³åÝ¹Ù³Ý Ý³Ë³Ó»éÝáõ- óó³Ï³ñ·Á ݳ˳ӻéÝ»Éáõ ϳٻ- ñ³Ïáõû³Ý áõ ·Çï³Ï³Ý ßñç³Ý³Ï- ÃÇõÝÁ: óáÕáõÃÇõÝÁ: ²é³çÇÝ ËáãÁݹáïÁ Ý»ñáõ: ²Ûë »ñÏáõ ïáõ»³ÉÝ»ñÁ ó³ñ¹ ½áõ- Çñ³õ³Ï³Ý Ù»Ïݳµ³Ýáõû³Ýó ѳñó ØdzųٳݳÏ, ÝϳïÇ áõݻݳÉáí ·áñ¹áõÙÇ áõ ·áñÍݳϳݳóáõÙÇ ã»Ý ¿, áõñ ÏÇñ³ñÏ»ÉÇáõÃÇõÝÁ ѳëï³- áñ ò»Õ³ëå³Ýáõû³Ý àõËïÇ áñ- »ÝóñÏáõ³Íª гÛÏ³Ï³Ý ò»Õ³ëå³- ïáÕ ëϽµáõÝù³ÛÇÝ, ݳËÁÝóó³ÛÇÝ

вÚðºÜÆø—14 ·áÛáõÃÇõÝ áõÝÇÝ ³ñ¹¿Ý: ºñÏñáñ¹ ÏÇ ¸³ï³í³ñáõû³Ýó ѳٳñ: ºï- ñ³ñ»óÇÝ úëٳݻ³Ý ϳé³í³ñáõ- ËáãÁݹáïÁ ù³Õ³ù³Ï³Ý ѳßáõ³ñÏ- ù¿Ý, 1985ÇÝ Ø²ÎÇ Ø³ñ¹Ï³ÛÇÝ Æñ³- ÃÇõÝÁ, ÿ Çñ Ñ³Û µÝ³Ïãáõû³Ý ¹¿Ù Ù³Ý áõ ѳÙá½Ù³Ý ËݹÇñ ¿, áñáõ áõÕ- õ³Ýó Ú³ÝÓݳÅáÕáíÁ ÁݹáõÝ»ó ò»- ϳï³ñáõáÕ ëå³Ý¹Ý»ñÁ åÇïÇ Ñ³- Õáõû³Ùµ µáÉáñÇë å³ñï³Ï³Ýáõ- Õ³ëå³Ýáõû³Ý à×ÇñÇ Î³Ý˳ñ·ÇÉ- Ù³ñáõÇÝ ¦Ù³ñ¹Ïáõû³Ý ¹¿Ù á×Çñ§: ÃÇõÝÁ åÇïÇ ÁÉÉ³Û Ûáñ¹áñ»É ѳÛñ»- Ù³Ý í»ñ³µ»ñáÕ ï»Õ»Ï³·ÇñÁ, áõñ ÝÇ å»ïáõÃÇõÝÁ áñå¿ë½Ç Çñ³õ³Ï³Ý ÏñÏÇÝ ÏÁ íϳ۳ÏáãáõÇ Ð³ÛÏ³Ï³Ý ºñÏñáñ¹, 1920Ç ê»õñÇ ¸³ßݳ·Ç- ݳ˳ӻéÝáÕÇ ×Çß¹ áñáßÙ³Ý Û³Ý·Ç: ò»Õ³ëå³ÝáõÃÇõÝÁ: î»Õ»Ï³·ñáí ñÁ: ê»õñÇ ¸³ßݳ·ñÇ 230ñ¹ Ûû¹áõ³- гÛáõû³Ý å³ñ³·³ÛÇÝ ·Íáí ò»- Ú³ÝÓݳ- ÍÁ ÏÁ ïñ³Ù³¹ñ¿ ¹³ï³Ï³Ý ³ï»³Ý- Õ³ëå³Ýáõû³Ý àõËïÇ ÏÇñ³ñÏ»- ÅáÕáíÁ ÏÁ Ý»ñáõ ѳëï³ïáõÙÁª ѳÛÏ³Ï³Ý ç³ñ- ÉÇáõÃÇõÝÁ ѳëï³ïáÕ áõ ÑÇÙݳõá- ѳëï³ï¿, ¹»ñáõÝ Ñ³Ù³ñ, ÇëÏ 144ñ¹ Ûû¹áõ³ÍÁ ñáÕ ¿ ÷ñáý. ²Éýñ¿ï î¿ ¼³Û³ëÇ Ã¿ ¦Ü³- ÏÁ ïñ³Ù³¹ñ¿ ѳÛáõû³Ý Éù»³É 2003ÇÝ Ññ³å³ñ³Ï³Í ¦1915¿Ý 1923 óÇÝ»ñáõ ·áÛù»ñáõÝ í»ñ³¹³ñÓÁ Çñ»Ýó Çñ³- гÛáõû³Ý ¹¿Ù ·áñͳ¹ñáõ³Í ó»- ³åûñÇÝáõ- õ³ïÇñáç: Õ³ëå³ÝáõÃÇõÝÁ »õ 1948Ç ò»Õ³ë- ÃÇõÝÁ å³Ýáõû³Ý àõËïÇ ÏÇñ³ñÏ»ÉÇáõ- ¹Åµ³Ë- ºññáñ¹, Ø»ÍÝ ´ñÇï³ÝÇáÛ 1919Ç ÃÇõÝÁ§ í»ñï³éáõû³Ùµ Ù³ëݳ·Ç- ï³µ³ñ áñáßáõÙÁ: ÚáõÝáõ³ñ 18, 1919ÇÝ ï³Ï³Ý ³ß˳ï³ëÇñáõÃÇõÝÁ: ²ëáñ 20ñ¹ ¹³- Ø»ÍÝ ´ñÇï³ÝÇáÛ ³ÝáõÝáí ¾ïÙÇñÁÉ ÏáÕùÇÝ, áõÝÇÝù ݳ»õ ѳݷáõó»³É ñáõ ó»Õ³ë- ²ñÃÁñ ø¿ÉÃñá÷ å³ßïûݳå¿ë ÇÙ³- ÷ñáý. Þ³õ³ñß ÂáñÇÏ»³ÝÇ ¦Ð³Ûϳ- å³Ýáõ- óáõó úëٳݻ³Ý ϳé³í³ñáõû³Ý Ï³Ý Ð³ñóÁ »õ ØÇç³½·³ÛÇÝ úñ¿Ý- û³Ý ÙÇ- ³ÛÝ áñáßÙ³Ý Ù³ëÇÝ, ÿ ´ñÇï³Ý³- ùÁ§ Ëáñ³·ñ»³É ÏáÃáÕ³Ï³Ý ·ÇñùÁ: ³Ï å³ñ³- Ï³Ý Ï³é³í³ñáõÃÇõÝÁ ѳٳå³- ²Ûë »ñÏáõ ·áñÍ»ñÁ áã ÙdzÛÝ Ñ³ñÏ öñáý. ²Éýñ¿ï î¿ ¼³Û³ë ·³Ý ã¿ñ: ï³ëË³Ý å³ïÇÅÝ»ñ åÇïÇ ïÝûñÇÝ¿ »Õ³Í ÝÇõûñÁ ÏÁ ѳÛóÛÃ»Ý ¹³- ²ÛÉ Ñ³Ù³- гÛÏ³Ï³Ý ç³ñ¹»ñáõ å³ï³ë˳ݳ- ï³Ï³Ý µáÕáù³·ñÇ ÙÁ µáí³Ý¹³Ïáõ- å³ï³ë˳ÝáÕ ûñÇݳÏÝ»ñáõ ß³ñ- ïáõÝ»ñáõÝ Ýϳïٳٵ: û³Ý, ³ÛÉ»õ ³Ýëå³é ³ÕµÇõñ ÏÁ ѳÝ- ùÇÝ ÏÁ å³ïϳÝÇÝ ... 1915-1916ÇÝ ¹Çë³Ý³Ý ¹³ï³í³ñáõû³Ý ÁÝóó- гۻñáõÝ ¹¿Ù ·áñͳ¹ñáõ³Í úëÙ³Ý- âáññáñ¹, 1945Ç ÈáÝïáÝÇ Ð³Ù³- ùÇÝ Ñ³ÛÏ³Ï³Ý ÏáÕÙÇ Çñ³õ³Ï³Ý áõ »³Ý ç³ñ¹»ñÁ:§ Ó³Ûݳ·ÇñÁ: гٳß˳ñѳÛÇÝ ºñÏ- ÷³ëï³Ï³Ý ÑÇÙݳõáñáõÙÝ»ñáõÝ: ò»Õ³ëå³Ýáõû³Ý àõËïÁ ݳ»õ ñáñ¹ ä³ï»ñ³½Ù¿Ý »ïù ¸³ßݳÏÇó- ò»Õ³ëå³Ýáõû³Ý àõËïÇ áñ- ûñÇÝ³Ï³Ý Û»ï³¹³ñÓ áõÅÇ (ex post Ý»ñÁ ú·áëïáë 8, 1945ÇÝ Ñ³ëï³ï»- ¹»·ñÙ³Ý áõ ½³ñ·³óÙ³Ý Ù³ëÇÝ Ñ³- facto) Ù¿ç ¿: ²Ý ÏÇñ³ñÏ»ÉÇ ¿ ó»Õ³ë- óÇÝ ÈáÝïáÝÇ Ð³Ù³Ó³Ûݳ·ÇñÁ, áñ ñ»õ³ÝóÇ ³ÏݳñÏ ÙÁ µ³õ³ñ³ñ ¿ å³Ý³Ï³Ý áñ»õ¿ á×ÇñÇ å³ñ³·³ÛÇÝ‘ Ïÿáñ¹»·ñ¿ñ ØÇç³½·³ÛÇÝ ¼ÇÝáõáñ³- ѳëï³ï»Éáõ, ÿ ³Ý Ç ½ûñáõ »õ ÏÇ- ³ÝÏ³Ë ³Ýáñ ·áñͳ¹ñÙ³Ý Ãáõ³Ï³- Ï³Ý ²ï»³ÝÇ ÙÁ ëï»ÕÍáõÙÁ å³ï»- ñ³ñÏ»ÉÇ ¿ гÛÏ³Ï³Ý ò»Õ³ëå³Ýáõ- Ý¿Ý: ²õ»ÉÇÝ, زÎÇ ÜáÛ»Ùµ»ñ 26, ñ³½Ù³Ï³Ý á×ÇñÝ»ñáõ ѳٳñ: ²Ûë û³Ý å³ñ³·³ÛÇÝ: Ƶñ»õ ò»Õ³ë- 1968Ç ä³ï»ñ³½Ù³Ï³Ý à×ÇñÝ»ñáõ ѳٳӳÛݳ·ñÇÝ 6· Ûû¹áõ³ÍÁ ÏÁ í»- å³Ýáõû³Ý àõËïÇ ÁݹáõÝÙ³Ý Ý³- »õ سñ¹Ïáõû³Ý ¸¿Ù ¶áñÍáõ³Í ñ³µ»ñÇ ò»Õ³ëå³Ýáõû³Ý á×ÇñÇ Ë³¹ñ»³É áñáßáõÙ, زÎÇ Àݹѳ- à×ÇñÝ»ñáõ ¶Íáí ijٳݳÏÇ ê³ÑÙ³- ¹³ï³í³ñÙ³Ý: Ƶñ»õ ݳËÁÝóó, Ýáõñ ÄáÕáíÁ ¸»Ïï»Ùµ»ñ 11, 1946ÇÝ Ý³÷³ÏáõÙÝ»ñáõ ²ÝÏÇñ³ñÏ»ÉÇáõ- ѳٳӳÛݳ·ñÇÝ Ñ»ÕÇݳÏÝ»ñÁ Ýϳ- áñ¹»·ñ»ó ÂÇõ 95(1) ´³Ý³Ó»õÁ »õ û³Ý гٳӳÛݳ·ÇñÁ ѳëï³ï»ó ïÇ áõÝ¿ÇÝ 1915Ç Ð³ÛÏ³Ï³Ý ç³ñ¹»- ³å³ ¸»Ïï»Ùµ»ñ 9, 1948ÇÝ‘ ò»Õ³ë- ó»Õ³ëå³Ýáõû³Ý á×ÇñÝ»ñáõ ³Ýų- ñÁ: ÐÇÙݳõáñ»Éáõ ѳٳñ 6· Ûû¹áõ³- å³Ýáõû³Ý àõËïÁ: ºñÏáõ áñáßáõÙ- Ù³Ýó»ÉÇáõû³Ý ûñ¿ÝùÁ: ÍÁ, ѳٳӳÛݳ·ñÇÝ Ñ»ÕÇݳÏÝ»ñÁ Ý»ñÝ ³É ÏÿÁݹáõÝÇÝ Ð³ÛÏ³Ï³Ý ò»- ØÇ³Å³Ù³Ý³Ï ·áÛáõÃÇõÝ áõÝÇÝ Çµñ»õ ݳËÁÝóó íϳ۳Ïáã»óÇÝ Õ³ëå³ÝáõÃÇõÝÁ áñå¿ë ³ÛÝ µÝáÛÃÇ ò»Õ³ëå³Ýáõû³Ý àõËïÁ ϳÝËáÕ 1920Ç ê»õñÇ ¸³ßݳ·ñÇ 230ñ¹ Úû¹- á×Çñ ÙÁ, áñ زΠÏÁ Ýå³ï³Ï³¹ñ¿ µ³½Ù³ÃÇõ ù³Õ³ù³Ï³Ý »õ Çñ³õ³- áõ³ÍÁ »õ ½³ÛÝ Ýϳï»óÇÝ ïÇå³ñ ³ñ·Çɻɑ áñ¹»·ñ»Éáí ³ñ¹¿Ý ÇëÏ ·á- Ï³Ý ³ùûñ, áñáÝù Û³õ»É»³É ÑÇÙݳ- ûñÇÝ³Ï ÙÁ Ù³ñ¹Ïáõû³Ý ¹¿Ù á×Çñ- ÛáõÃÇõÝ áõÝ»óáÕ ÙÇç³½·³ÛÇÝ õáñáõÙ ÏÁ ïñ³Ù³¹ñ»Ý ³Ýáñ Û»ï³- Ý»ñÁ ¹³ï»Éáõ Ïáãáõ³Í ½ÇÝáõáñ³- ûñ¿ÝùÝ»ñÁ: ¹³ñÓ áõÅÇÝ áõ ѳÛÏ³Ï³Ý å³ñ³·³- Ï³Ý ³ï»³ÝÇ ÙÁ ѳëï³ïÙ³Ý: ÆëÏ Ø²ÎÇ ä³ï»ñ³½Ù³Ï³Ý à×Çñ- ÛÇ ÏÇñ³ñÏ»ÉÇáõû³Ý: ¸³ï³Ï³Ý Û³ñáõóÙ³Ý ·áñÍÁÝ- Ý»ñáõ Ú³ÝÓݳÅáÕáíÁ Çñ 1948Ç ÝÇë- óóÇÝ Ñ³Ù³ñ ò»Õ³ëå³Ýáõû³Ý ïÇÝ íϳ۳Ïáã»ó гÛÏ³Ï³Ý ò»Õ³ë- ²é³çÇÝ, гٳß˳ñѳÛÇÝ ²é³- àõËïÁ ÏÁ å³ñáõݳϿ »ñÏáõ ³Ýç³ï å³ÝáõÃÇõÝÁ, ½³ÛÝ Ýϳï»Éáí ×Çß¹ çÇÝ ä³ï»ñ³½³ÙÇ ¸³ßݳÏÇó å»- ïñ³Ù³¹ñáõÃÇõÝÝ»ñª Úû¹áõ³Í 8 »õ ³ÛÝ µÝáÛÃÇ ³ñ³ñùÝ»ñ¿Ý, áñ ÏÁ Ý»- ïáõû³Ýó Ùdzï»Õ Û³Ûï³ñ³ñáõ- Úû¹áõ³Í 9: ñ³éÝáõÇ ¦Ù³ñ¹Ïáõû³Ý ¹¿Ù á×Çñ- ÃÇõÝÁ: سÛÇë 28, 1915ÇÝ, üñ³Ýë³, Úû¹áõ³Í ÃÇõ 8 ÏÁ ïñ³Ù³¹ñ¿ ÿ Ý»ñáõ§ ³ñ¹Ç µÝáñáßáõÙÇÝ Ù¿ç »õ Ø»ÍÝ ´ñÇï³Ýdz, »õ èáõëdz Ùdzó- زÎÇ ÁÝѳÝáõñ ÅáÕáíÁ, ÑÇÙ áõÝ»- ݳËÁÝóó ÏÁ ÝϳïáõÇ ÜÇõñ¿Ýå¿ñ- »³É Û³Ûï³ñ³ñáõû³Ùµ ÙÁ ³½¹³- ݳÉáí زÎÇ Ï³Ýáݳ¹ñáõû³Ý

вÚðºÜÆø—15 96ñ¹ Úû¹áõ³ÍÁ, ÏñÝ³Û Ëݹñ»É ØÇ- ³ç³½·³ÛÇÝ ²ñ¹³ñ³¹³ïáõû³Ý ²ï»³Ý¿Ý, áñå¿ë½Ç Çñ³õ³Ï³Ý ï»- ²Úê ø²ðºðÀ... ºê äÆîÆ ë³Ï¿ï ï³Û ¹³ï³Ï³Ý ѳñóÇ ÙÁ îºêÜºØ ·Íáí ò»Õ³ëå³Ýáõû³Ý àõËïÇ Û»- ï³¹³ñÓ ÏÇñ³ñÏ»ÉÇáõû³Ý: ²Ûë г½³ñ áõ ÙÇ Ññáí ³Ýó³Í ìëï³Ñ »Ù, ·Çï»Ù Ëݹñ³ÝùÇÝ Ñ³Ù³ñ, ò»Õ³ëå³Ýáõ- г½³ñ ¹³õáí ï³é³å³Í úñ»ñÇó ÙÇ ûñ, û³Ý àõËïÇ ëïáñ³·Çñ áñ»õ¿ å»- ²Ûë ù³ñ»ñÁ í³Õáõó Ç í»ñ ÆÙ »ñ³½Ý»ñÇ ïáõÃÇõÝ Çñ³õáõÝùÁ áõÝÇ ¹ÇÙ»Éáõ ÜáñÇó ÝáÛÝÝ »Ý Ùݳó³Í… ÈáÛëÁ åÇï í³éáõÇ, زÎÇ ÁݹѳÝáõñ ÅáÕáíÇÝ: ÜáÛÝÇëÏ Ø³ù³éáÕ Ñá·áí ³é³Ýó ÝÙ³Ý ¹ÇÙáõÙÇ, Úû¹áõ³Í ÃÇõ ÆÙ³ëïáõû³Ý óáÕáí ûÍáõ³Í ä³Ûù³ñáí ³ñ¹³ñ, 9 ÏÁ ïñ³Ù³¹ñ¿ ÿ ò»Õ³ëå³Ýáõ- ÊáñÇÝ ËáñÑáõñ¹, ï³×³ñ ¹³ñÓ³Í Ü³ÛÇñ»³Ý µ³ñ¹ÇÝ Ã»³Ý àõËïÇ ëïáñ³·Çñ å»ïáõÃÇõÝ ø³ñ»ñ áñáÝù ٳﻳÝÝ»ñ »Ý ÜáñÇó åÇï ͳÕÏÇ… ÙÁ Çñ³õáõÝù áõÝÇ ¹ÇÙ»Éáõ áõÕÕ³- ÏÇ ØÇç³½·³ÛÇÝ ²ñ¹³ñ³¹³ïáõ- Ú³õ»ñųó³Í »õ ëñµ³ó³Í… û³Ý ²ï»³ÝÇݪ ó»Õ³ëå³Ý³Ï³Ý ³ñ³ñùÇ Çñ³õ³Ï³Ý í×éáõÙÇÝ Ñ³- ²Ûë ëñµ³ï³ß µÇõñ ù³ñ»ñÇ Ù³ñ: ÀÝͳÛáõû³Ùµ á·»ßÝãáõ»Ù àõ »ë åÇï ß³ñ»Ù ´Ý³Ï³Ý³µ³ñ ¹ÇÙáÕ ÏáÕÙÁ àñå¿ë ³ÕûÃù, ³Ý³Ýó Ýß˳ñ àñÙÝ Ç٠ѳõ³ïÇ, å¿ïù ¿ ëïáñ³·Çñ ³Ý¹³Ù ÁÉÉ³Û ÆÙ ·³ÉÇùÇ »ñ³ÙÝ ÑÇõë»Ù… ÆÝùݳϳÙûñ¿Ý ò»Õ³ëå³Ýáõû³Ý àõËïÇÝ: ÆëÏ ²Ýã³é, ³Ýí³ñ³Ý, г۳ëï³Ý ÁݹáõÝ³Í ¿ áõ ëïá- Ø»Í Ñ³õ³ïùáí åÇï å³Ñå³Ý»Ù àõ åÇïÇ ï»ëݻ٠ñ³·Çñ Ù¿Ï ³Ý¹³ÙÝ ¿ áõËïÇÝ: ʳãù³ñ»ñÝ ÇÙ Ù³ëáõÝù ¹³ñÓ³Í Ø»ñ ÑÇÝ ÎÇÉÇÏ»³Ý, ØÇõë ÏáÕÙ¿, ØÇç³½·³ÛÇÝ ²ñ¹³- äÇï ãÃáÕÝ»Ù, ù³Ý¹»Ý, åÕÍ»Ý àñï»Õ ÝÝçáõÙ »Ý ñ³¹³ï³Ï³Ý ²ï»³ÝÇ Çñ³õ³ëáõ- ÎáÃáÕÝ»ñÝ ÇÙ, á·áõ Ï»ñï³Í… ø³ç»ñÁ ÙdzÛÝ… ÃÇõÝÁ »õ í×ÇéÇÝ ·áñͳ¹ñáõ- ÃÇõÝÁ Ç ½ûñáõ »õ áõÅÇ Ù¿ç ÏñÝ³Û ÁÉÉ³É ÙdzÛÝ ò»Õ³ëå³Ýáõû³Ý ²Ýå³ñï Ñ»ñáëÝ»ñ àõËïÇ ³Ý¹³Ù å»ïáõû³Ý ÙÁ ¼áÑáõ³Í ѳ۳½·Ç, ¹¿Ù: Âáõñùdz »õë Çñ ϳñ·ÇÝ ÏÁ ´²ÔÒ²Üø ÊáñáõÝÏ í¿ñù»ñáí ѳݹÇë³Ý³Û áõËïÇÝ ëïáñ³·Çñ ²Ýϳñϳï»ÉÇ, Ù¿Ï ³Ý¹³ÙÁ: Êáñ³ËáñÑáõñ¹ Ç٠ѳÛñ»ÝÇù ²Ù»Ý³Ýáõß ïáõÝ ÇÙ ÷áùñÇÏ ºÕ³Ý ݳѳï³Ï ²ñ¹, ÏÁ ÙÝ³Û Û³Õóѳñ»É »ñÏ- Âßáõ³é áõ í³Ýáõ³Í, ñáñ¹ ËáãÁݹáïÁ, áñáõÝ Ýáõ³×áõÙÁ ¶áõñ·áõñ³Ýùáí ÇÝÓ Ñ³ë³Í ÐáÕ áõ ÅáÕáíáõñ¹ í»ñ³å³Ñáõ³Í ¿ Ù»ñ ѳÛñ»ÝÇ å»- Ðá·áõë »ñ·Ý »ë, ¹áõ ·áÕïñÇÏ£ Æñ³ñÇó ½³ïáõ³Í… ïáõû³Ý: Æñ ³ñï³ùÇÝ ù³Õ³ù³- ϳÝáõû³Ý Ù¿ç ó»Õ³ëå³Ýáõ- ¸áõ µ»ÏáñÝ »ë, Ù»ÍÝ Ð³ÛùÇ Ã»³Ý ÛÇß³ï³ÏÙ³Ý áõ ϳÝ˳ñ- ÐÝã»Õ »ñ·Ý »ë, ²õ³ñ³ÛñÇ ·ÇÉÙ³Ý áõÕÕáõû³Ý ѳñÏ »Õ³Í ¸áõ ëáõñµ µ³éÝ »ë, ѳۻóÇ ù³çáõÃÇõÝÝ áõ ³ßËáõÅáõÃÇõÝÁ öñÏáõ³Í ³÷Ý »ë, Ù»Í ºÕ»éÝÇ£ ÎÁ ·³Û ³ÛÝ ûñÁ óáõó³µ»ñ³Í ¿ ³ñ¹¿Ý Ù»ñ ѳÛñ»- ºñ³Ý»Éáõû³Ý ÝÇùÁ: ²ÛÅÙ Ñ»ñÃÁ »Ï³Í ¿ å³ï- γåáÛï ÍáíáõÙ ÇÙ ³ñóáõÝùÇ ì³é ûñÇݳÏáí ÅáõÙÇ »õ ѳïáõóÙ³Ý Ñ³Ý·ñáõ³- Èáõé ϳÝã»ñáí ݳËÝÇÝ»ñÇ Ð½ûñ ²ñó³Ë»³Ý ÝÇÝ: ¸áõ ϳÝûÕÝ »ë, ëáõñµ ËáñѳÝÁ ÎÁ ï»ëݻ٠å³ÑÁ ø³Õ³ù³Ï³Ý áõ ½ÇÝáõáñ³Ï³Ý Ø»Í µ³ÕÓ³ÝùÝ »ë, ÇÙ å³å»ñÇ£ ²Ý¹³õ ÝáõÇñÙ³Ý ×³Ï³ïáõÙÝ»ñáõÝ Ù¿ç ³Ý˳Ëï ¹Çñ- ¿Ïáõ½ »õ ·»ñÇ ùáñáßáõÙÝ»ñ óáõó³µ»ñáÕ Ù»ñ ѳÛ- àõݻ٠ÙÇ áõËï, ëáõñµ, ëñµ³½³Ý ¸³éݳ٠»ë Ù³Ñáõ³Ý… ñ»ÝÇ å»ïáõÃÇõÝÁ ãÇ Ïñݳñ í³ñ³- ì»Ñ³·áÛÝ ÇÕÓ, ³Ý½áõ·³Ï³Ý Ýáï Ùûï»óáõÙ áõÝ»Ý³É Ð³ÛÏ³Ï³Ý Â»Ïáõ½ í»ñçÇÝ, ßÝãáí ³Ý·³Ù ò»Õ³ëå³Ýáõû³Ý å³ïÅáõÙÇÝ áõ سëáõÝùÝ»ñÝ ÇÙ, ²ôÆÎ î¾ÚÆðؾÜÖº²Ü ѳïáõóÙ³Ý ³ñ¹³ñ³¹³ï³Ï³Ý ׳- ïáõÝ åÇï ¹³éݳ݅ äáëÃÁÝ Ï³ïáõÙÇÝ: سݳõ³Ý¹ »ñµ ³Û¹ å³Ñ³ÝçÝ ¿ Ù»ñ ݳѳï³ÏÝ»ñáõ Ïï³ÏÇÝ:

вÚðºÜÆø—16 ´²è²Ê²Ôºðàô ²Üìºðæ²Ü²ÈÆ ä²îØàôÂÆôÜ

ì²ð¸²Ü زî¾àêº²Ü àñáß ï³ñÇùÇ Ù³ñ¹ÇÏ Ã»ñ»õë ÛÇ- Ù³Ý³Ï ¹»é äáõ¿Ýáë ²Ûñ¿ë Ïÿ³å- Éáõë³ÝϳñÝ»ñ£ (´áÉáñë ·Çï»Ýù, ÿ ß»Ý Ø»Í ºÕ»éÝÇ 60³Ù»³Û ï³ñ»ÉÇ- ñ¿Ç), ¾Éǽ ²ÛÉÁÝïÇ Ã³Ý·³ñ³ÝÁ ³Û- áñù³¯Ý ¦½·³Ûáõݧ »Ý ³Ù»ñÇϳóÇ- óÁ ÜÇõ ºáñùÇ Ù¿ç£ ²Ûɳå¿ë, ÁÝûñ- ó»É»óÇ£ êÏÇÑÇÝ ÛÇß³ï³ÏÁ ÙÇïùë ¿ñ, Ý»ñÁ, »ñµ ËûëùÁ ÏÁ í»ñ³µ»ñÇ áõÅ»Õ óáÕÁ ÏñÝ³Û Ã»ñóï»É »ñÏÉ»½áõ ÿ»õ ã¿Ç ³ÏÝϳɻñ ½³ÛÝ ï»ëݻɣ µ³é»ñáõ »õ áõÅ»Õ å³ïÏ»ñÝ»ñáõ©©©)£ å³ïÏ»ñ³- àõñÇß µ³Ý»ñ ï»ë³Û, ë³Ï³ÛÝ£ ²Û¹ гٳÛÝù³ÛÇÝ µ³½Ù³ÏáÕÙ³ÝÇ ½³ñ¹ ѳ- ³éÇÃáí Ûû¹áõ³Í ÙÁ ·ñ»óÇ ö³ñÇ½Ç å³ïáõÇñ³Ïáõû³Ý ÙÁ ÙÇç³Ùïáõ- ïáñ ÙÁª ¦Ú³é³ç§ ûñ³Ã»ñÃÇÝ Ù¿ç (23-24 û³Ùµ, ËݹÇñÁ ÉáõÍáõ³Í ¿ñ Ç ¦Ð»ñáë³- ²åñÇÉ, 1997), å³ïÙ»Éáõ ѳٳñ Ýå³ëï Ù»½Ç, ϳñ· ÙÁ ÝϳñÝ»ñáõ »õ Ï³Ý Å³- íñ¹áíáõÙë ÑáÝ ï»ë³Í Ù¿Ï Éáõë³Ý- µÝ³·ÇñÝ»ñáõ í»ñ³Ñ³ëï³ïáõÙáí£ é³Ý·áñ¹- ϳñÇÝ Ïóáõ³Í µ³ó³ïñ³·ñÇÝ, áñáõÝ ´³é³Ë³Õ»ñáõ ³Ýí»ñç³Ý³ÉÇ Ý»ñ/ A He- ëϽµÝ³Ï³Ý å³ñµ»ñáõÃÇõÝÁ ÏÿÁë¿ñ å³ïÙáõÃÇõÝ ÙÁ, ³ñ¹³ñ»õ, áñáõÝ roic Poster- (Áݹ·ÍáõÙÁ ÇÙë ¿)©¬ ßáõñç ϳñ»ÉÇ ¿ ï»õ³µ³ñ ËûëÇÉ áõ ity§, áñ “Haigazoon Semerdjian, an Arme- µáÕáù»É, ۳׳˪ ³å³ñ¹ÇõÝ, ù³ÝÇ 1975ÇÝ nian, lived with his family in Konya, áñ Ù»ñ ûñ»ñáõÝ ÑÙáõï ¹³ï³ñϳ- Ññ³ï³- Turkey, where he owned a store ñ³Ïáõ³Í that carried fabrics imported ºÝó¹ñ»³É §Ñ³Û ¿ñ ²½·© from Europe and England. The Ññ»³Ý¦©©© ²é³çÝáñ- Semerdjians lives changed radi- ¹³ñ³ÝÇÝ cally in 1915, when a new wave ÏáÕÙ¿£ ÐáÝ ÏÁ ÛÇßáõÇ, áñ Ñ³Û Ñ³- of violence broke out against Ù³ÛÝùÇÝ ³ÝáõÝáí ³Ù»ñÇÏ»³Ý ¶³Õ- the Armenians in Turkey. óϳÝáõû³Ý ³ݷ³ñ³ÝÇÝ (¾Éǽ Haigazoon opened his home ²ÛÉÁÝïÁ ï³Ï³õÇÝ í»ñ³Ýáñá·áõ³Í to refugees fleeing persecution ã¿ñ) Ýáõ¿ñ ïñáõ³Í ¿ñ ëÏÇÑ ÙÁ, áñ- in the countryside, and distrib- å¿ë ËáñÑñ¹³ÝÇß áõ ÛÇß³ï³Ï ³Û¹ uted American relief funds to ï³ñ»ÉÇóÇÝ£ Ø»Í Ùûñë Ù»Í Ñ³ÛñÁª î© those in need. Eventually, he, his ¶³Éáõëï ùÑÝÛ© Æë¿÷»³ÝÁ, ÍÝáõݹáí wife Verghin, and their four chil- λë³ñÇáÛ ßñç³ÝÇ âûÙ³ËÉáõ ·ÇõÕ¿Ý dren were also forced to flee. áõ í»ñçÇÝ ÑáíÇõÁª ÝáÛÝ ßñç³ÝÇ ºÝÇ- They found safety in î¿ÙÇñ×»³Ý ÁÝï³ÝÇùÁª §Ê³ñµ»ñ¹, ׿ ·ÇõÕÇ ê© Âáñáë »Ï»Õ»óõáÛ, ³Û¹ Constantinople (todayÿs г۳ëï³Ý¦¿Ý©©© ëÏÇÑÁ ·áñÍ³Í³Í ¿ñ »Ï»Õ»ó³Ï³Ý Istanbul), but some of their rela- ³ñ³ñáÕáõÃÇõÝÝ»ñáõ Ù¿ç ÙÇÝã»õ tives, including Verghinÿs parents and ËûëÝ»ñáõ ³ß˳ñÑÇ ÙÁ Ù¿ç Ïÿ³å- ³Ý³ñ· ëå³ÝáõÃÇõÝÝ áõ »Ï»Õ»óõáÛ younger brother, could not escape; they ñÇÝù, áõñ ݳ˳·³Ñ ÙÁ, Çñ ݳËáñ¹- ÑñÏǽáõÙÁª Ø»Í ºÕ»éÝÇ ëϽµÝ³õá- perished along with over a million other Ý»ñáõÝ Ñ»ïù»ñ¿Ý ù³É»Éáí, µ»ñÝÇ ñáõû³Ý£ êÏÇÑÁ Çñ ÑûïÇÝ å¿ë ï³- Armenians”. ³Ý»ñ»õ³Ï³Û»ÉÇ Í³Ù³ÍéáõÃÇõÝÝ»ñ ñ³·ñáõû³Ý ׳ݳå³ñÑÁ µéÝ³Í ¿ñ ºÕ»éÝÁ ¹³ñÓ³Í ¿ñ ¦Ýáñ µñïáõ- ÷áñÓ³Í ¿ »ûÃÁ ï³ñÇ¿ Ç í»ñª ³Ù¿Ý áõ Ññ³ßùáí ÷ñÏáõ³Íª î¿ñ ¶³Éáõë- û³Ý ³ÉÇù ÙÁ§, á°ã ³õ»ÉÇ, áã å³- ï»ë³Ï µ³é»ñáí »ñ»õáÛà ÙÁ µÝáñá- ïÇ ÁÝï³ÝÇùÇÝ ë³Ï³õ³ÃÇõ ³Ý¹³Ù- Ï³ë£ ¼³ñٳݳÉÇ ã¿ñ, ³Ýßáõßï£ ß»Éáõ ѳٳñ, áñáõÝ Ñ³Ù³ñ Ù¿Ï µ³- Ý»ñáõ ÝÙ³Ý, áõ Ïï³Ïáõ³Í ³Ýáñ Íá- ²ÙÇëÝ»ñ »ïù ϳñ¹³óÇ 1997-1998ÇÝ éÁ åÇïÇ µ³õ¿ñ£ é³Ýª î© Øáõß»Õ ²© ùÑÝÛ© ¶³Éáõëï- ÝáÛÝ í³ÛñÇÝ Ù¿ç Ù³ñ¹³µ³Ý سñÏ- (ÆëÏ »Ã¿ ûñ ÙÁ ³Û¹ µ³éÁ ÁëáõDZ£ »³ÝÇÝ, áñ 60³Ù»³ÏÇ ûñ»ñáõÝ áõ ÙÇÝ- ñ¿Ã »Éɳɻ³Ý¬øÇñùáëóëÇ Ï³½- ²ñ¹»ûù ¿³Ï³±Ý ¿, áñ ³Û¹ µ³éÁ Áë- ã»õ Çñ Ãáß³ÏÇ ³ÝóÝÇÉÁ ÜÇõ ºáñùÇ Ù³Ï»ñåáõ³Í ¦Ð³Û³ëï³Ýª ïáõÝ¿ë áõÇ£ ²ñ¹»ûù Ù»Ýù ³É ³Ï³Ù³Û Ý»ñ- ê© Èáõë³õáñÇã سÛñ ºÏ»Õ»óõáÛ Ñá- Ûáõß»ñ§ óáõó³Ñ³Ý¹¿ëÇÝ ßáõñç å³Û- ù³ßáõ³Í ã»±Ýù ÝáÛÝ µ³é³Ë³ÕÇÝ ·»õáñ ÑáíÇõÝ ¿ñ£ Ã³Í ³ÕÙáõÏÇÝ Ù³ëÇÝ© ³Ù»ñÇÏ»³Ý Ù¿ç, áñÙ¿ ã»Ýù áõ½»ñ »ÉÉ»É, áñå¿ë ²õ»ÉÇ ù³Ý ùë³Ý ï³ñÇ »ïù, ÏáÕÙÁ áõÕÕ³ÏÇ ·ñ³ùÝÝ³Í ¿ñ ¦ó»- ³Ý·Çï³ÏÇó å³ïñáõ³Ïª Çëϳå¿ë ö»ïñáõ³ñ 1997ÇÝ, ÜÇõ ºáñù ׳Ù- Õ³ëå³ÝáõÃÇõݧ áõ ¦ç³ñ¹»ñ§ µ³- ¿³Ï³Ý ÑÇÙݳѳñó»ñáõÝ Ù³ëÇÝ µáñ¹áõû³Ý ÙÁ ÁÝóóùÇÝ (³Û¹ ų- é»ñÁ »õ ò»Õ³ëå³Ýáõû³Ý ù³ÝÇ ÙÁ ãËáñÑ»Éáõ ѳٳñ)£

вÚðºÜÆø—17 ´³é³Ë³Õ ÁÝáÕÝ»ñ¿Ý ß³ï ùÇã»- ¿, áñ ºÕ»éÝÇ ³Ï³Ý³ï»ë, ·»ñٳݳ- Éáñ ÏáÕÙ»ñ¿Ý »Ï³Í ·³ÕÃ³Ï³Ý ÁÝ- ñÁ ÏñÝ³Ý Ñ»ï»õáճϳÝáõÃÇõÝ ÙÁ óÇ ·ñ³·¿ï ²ñÙÇÝ ì»ÏÝ¿ñÇ Ñ³õ³- ï³ÝÇùÝ»ñáõ Éáõë³ÝϳñÝ»ñáõ å³- å³Ñ»É »õ í³ñå»ïûñ¿Ý óùóÝ»É ù³ÍáÛÇÝ Ù³ë ÏÁ ϳ½Ù¿£ ²Ýáñ µ³- ïÇ ÙÁ íñ³Û£ à¯í ½³ñÙ³Ýù, ÑáÝ åÇ- Çñ»Ýó µáõÝ Ýå³ï³ÏÁ£ Ø»Í Ù³ëÁ ó³ïñáõÃÇõÝÁ ׳å³Õ µ³é»ñáõ ß³- ïÇ ·ïÝ¿ñ Ñ»ï»õ»³ÉÁ©¬ ½áÑ Ïÿ»ñÃ³Û ë»÷³Ï³Ý ³Ý׳ñ³Ïáõ- ñ³Ý ÙÁÝ ¿, áñ ѳٳ½ûñ ¿ 1997Ç ¦î¿ÙÇñ×»³Ý ÁÝï³ÝÇùÁ ʳñµ»ñ- û³Ý£ ²Ñ³ ³ÛëûñÇÝ³Ï ³Ý׳ñ³Ïáõ- “wave of violence”ÇÝ£ ²Ñ³ óñ·Ù³- ¹Ç Ù¿ç, г۳ëï³Ý, 1905Ç ßáõñç£ ´³- û³Ý ³Ï³Ý³ï»ë »Õ³Û ÐáÏï»Ùµ»ñ ÝáõÃÇõÝÁ©¬ ó³é»Éáí »ñÏáõ Ñá·Ç ¬ å»Ë³õáñ ѳÛ- 16, 2007ÇÝ, »ñµ ï³ëÁ ï³ñÇ »ïù ¦1915-16ÇÝ úëٳݻ³Ý ÂáõñùÇáÛ ñÁ »õ ¹áõëïñÁª ³ç ͳÛñÇÝ ¬, µáÉáñÁ ÏñÏÇÝ ³Ûó»É»óÇ ¾Éǽ ²ÛÉÁÝïÇ Ã³Ý- Ù¿ç ï»ÕÇ áõÝ»ó³Í ѳۻñáõ Ññ³å³- í»ñ³åñ»ó³Ý 1915Ç Ð³ÛÏ³Ï³Ý ò»- ·³ñ³ÝÁ, ³Ûë ³Ý·³Ùª áñå¿ë Õ³ëå³Ýáõû³Ý§£ ÁÝÏ»ñ³ÏÇóÝ»ñ¿Ý Ù¿ÏÁ ÜÇõ γñ»ÉDZ ¿ ¦ó»Õ³ëå³Ýáõ- ÖÁñ½ÇÇ ¦Úáíݳݻ³Ý§ í³ñ- ÃÇõݧ µ³éÁ ·áñÍ³Í»É »õ ²© ųñ³ÝÇ À© ¹³ë³ñ³ÝÇÝ£ ì»ÏÝ¿ñÇ Éáõë³ÝϳñÇÝ ï³Ï гۻñ¿ÝÇ áõëáõóãáõÑÇÝ ß³ñáõ³Í å³ñ³å¬ë³ñ³å ³ß³Ï»ñïÝ»ñáõÝ Û³ÝÓݳñ³- µ³é»ñ¿ Ëáõë³÷ÇÉ£ γñ»ÉÇ° ñ³Í ¿ñ, ǵñ»õ å³ñï³Ï³- ¿£ ´³Ûó ³ëÇϳ »½³ÏÇ ÝáõÃÇõÝ, ï³ëÁ ¦Ñ³Ûϳ- Ññ³ßù ÙÁÝ ¿, ÃáÕ ÁÝûñóá- ϳݧ ÛÇß³ï³ÏáõÙÝ»ñ ÕÁ ß³ï ãáõñ³Ë³Ý³Û£ ·ïÝ»É Ã³Ý·³ñ³ÝÇÝ Ù¿ç£ ÜáÛÝ å³ïÇÝ íñ³Û, ³Ñ³ Ødzëݳµ³ñ Ó»éݳñÏ»- áõñÇß Éáõë³Ýϳñ ÙÁ©¬ óÇÝù ³ñß³õÇÝ£ ºñµ»ÙÝ »ë ¦Î»³õáõñ (Ghavoor) ÁÝ- ¿Ç ¦áñë§ÇÝ ³é³çÇÝ ÝßÙ³- ï³ÝÇùÇ »ñ»ù ë»ñáõݹª ʳñ- ñáÕÁ, áõñÇß ³Ý·³ÙÝ»ñ µáõÃÇ Ù¿ç, Âáõñùdz, 1913Ç Çñ»Ýù ÏÁ ϳÝË¿ÇÝ ½Çë£ ßáõñ秣 ÜáÛÝÇëÏ áñáß µ³Ý»ñ ÷³Ë- ¼·»ëïÝ»ñáõÝ »õ ¹¿Ùù»- óáõóÇÝùª ųٳݳÏÇ ã·áÛáõ- ñáõÝ ÁÝï³ÝÇ ¹ÇÙ³·Í»ñÁ û³Ý å³ï׳éáí, ÇÝãå¿ë λ³íáõñ¥»³Ý¤ ÁÝï³ÝÇùÁª §Ê³ñµáõÃ, ѳÛÏ³Ï³Ý ÏÁ ÃáõÇÝ ÁÉɳɩ ÝÝç³ñ³ÝÝ»ñáõ µ³ÅÝÇÝ å³- Âáõñùdz¦Û¿Ý å³ñ½ ¿, áñ áñ»õ¿ Ãáõñù ï»ñáõÝ ³ñӳݳ·ñáõÃÇõÝÝ»ñÁ, áõñ ñ³Ï³ÛÇÝ Ù³Ñ³å³ïÇÅÝ»ñ¿Ý Ù¿ÏÁ£ ¦Ï»³õáõñ§ ٳϳÝáõÝÁ åÇïÇ ãáõÝ»- ݳ»õ ѳۻñ¿Ý ·ñáõÃÇõÝÝ»ñ ϳݣ 1924Ç ßáõñç, ·ñ»Ã¿ 100.000 ѳۻñ ݳñ£ ²ñ¹»ûù DZÝã »Õ³Ý ³Û¹ »ñ»ù ê³Ï³ÛÝ, ³õ»ÉÇ ù³Ý ï³ëÁ ÛÇß³- Ødzó»³É ܳѳݷݻñ »Ï³Í ¿ÇÝ, ë»ñáõݹݻñÁ£ ²ÝáÝóÙ¿ ù³ÝDZ Ñá·Ç ï³ÏáõÙÝ»ñ ·ï³Ýù, ÇÝã áñ ¹ñ³Ï³Ý áñáÝóÙ¿ ß³ï»ñÁ ÷³Ëáõëï Ïáõ ï³- ³½³ï»ó³Ý ëå³Ý¹¿Ý£ Èáõë³ÝϳñÇÝ »ñ»õáÛà ÙÁÝ ¿£ ÛÇÝ Ãñù³Ï³Ý å³ñµ»ñ³Ï³Ý ç³ñ¹»- µ³ó³ïñáõÃÇõÝÁ áãÇÝã ÏÿÁë¿, ÁÉÉ³Û Üå³ï³Ï ãáõÝÇÙ ÉñÇõ óáõó³ÏÁ ñ¿ áõ ï»Õ³Ñ³ÝáõÃÇõÝÝ»ñ¿, áõñ ³õ»- ï»Õ»ÏáõÃÇõÝÝ»ñáõ µ³ó³Ï³Ûáõ- Ý»ñϳ۳óÝ»Éáõ ϳ٠³Ý¹ñ³¹³éݳ- ÉÇ ù³Ý Ù¿Ï ÙÇÉÇáÝ Ñ³Û»ñ Çñ»Ýó û³Ý ϳ٠ÁÉɳ۩©© ³ÝáÝó ͳÍÏáõÙÇÝ Éáõ ³Ýáñ, ³ÛÉ ÙdzÛÝ Ïÿáõ½»Ù í»ñ ѳ- Ï»³ÝùÁ ÏáñëÝóáõóÇݧ£ å³ï׳éáí£ Ý»É áñáß µ³ó³ïñ³·ÇñÝ»ñáõ µáí³Ý- à»õ¿ ³Ýóáñ¹ ÏñÝ³Û Ñ³ñó ï³É, ÿ ÆëÏ »Ã¿ å³ïÙ³Ï³Ý Ð³Û³ëï³- ¹³ÏáõÃÇõÝÁ£ ìëï³Ñ³µ³ñ, óݷ³- 1915-16ÇÝ ÇÝãá±õ ¦Ññ³å³ñ³Ï³ÛÇÝ ÝÇ ³ß˳ñ¹³·ñáõû³Ý Ù»ñ ¹³ë»ñÁ ñ³ÝÁ µ³ÝÇÙ³ó ѻﳽûïáÕÝ»ñáõ »õ ٳѳå³ïÇÅÝ»ñ§ ÏÿÁÉɳÛÇÝ£ ÆëÏ ë»ñï³Í »Ýù ųٳݳÏÇÝ, ÏñݳÝù ³ß˳ï³ÏÇóÝ»ñáõ ³ÝÓݳϳ½Ù ÙÁ ³õ»ÉÇ ù³Ý Ù¿Ï ÙÇÉÇáÝ Ñ³Û»ñÁ »±ñµ ³Ý¹ñ³¹³éݳÉ, áñ î¿ÙÇñ×»³ÝÝ»ñÝ áõÝÇ£ ´³Ûó »ñµ ËûëùÁ ѳۻñáõÝ ÏÁ ëå³ÝÝáõ»ó³Ý£ ²ñ¹»ûù 1915-24Ç±Ý áõ λ³õáõñ(»³Ý)Ý»ñÁ ѳٳù³Õ³- í»ñ³µ»ñÇ, ³Û¹ µ³ÝÇÙ³óáõÃÇõÝÁ ¿ñ, áñ ·ñ»Ã¿ 100©000 ѳۻñ Ødzó- ù³óÇ »Ý (ʳñµ»ñ¹Ç Ãñù³Ï³Ý Ó»- ß³ï ó³ÛïáõÝ ã¿£ Üϳï³Í ûñ³- »³É ܳѳݷݻñ ѳëï³ïáõ³Í (Ç õÁ©©© ʳñµáõà ¿)£ ´³Ûó ù³ÝDZ ³Ûó»- óáõÙÝ»ñÁ ÏñݳÝù ³Ù÷á÷»É »ñÏáõ ¹¿å, å³ï³ë˳ÝÁ ÅËï³Ï³Ý ¿ñ, ÉáõÝ»ñ ÏñÝ³Ý Ñ³ÛÏ³Ï³Ý ³ß˳ñ- ³ë³óáõ³ÍùÝ»ñáí©- ¦ÐÇÝ ·ÇÝǪ Ýáñ ù³ÝÇ áñ ³Û¹ ÃÇõÁ ÏÁ ѳٳå³ï³ë- ѳ·ñáõû³Ý ͳÝûà ÁÉÉ³É Ï³Ù Ñ³Û- ïÇÏ»ñáõ Ù¿ç§ »õ ¦Ò³Ë Ó»éùÁ ãÇ ·Ç- ˳ݿ 1834-1924 ųٳݳϳßñç³- Ï³Ï³Ý ³ÝáõÝÝ»ñáõ ³Õ³õ³ÕáõÙÇÝ ï»ñ, ÿ ³ç Ó»éùÁ DZÝã ÏÿÁÝ¿§£ ÝÇÝ)£ ³Ý¹ñ³¹³éݳɣ ³ݷ³ñ³ÝÇÝ ³ß- ²Ñ³ ÿ ÇÝãá±õ£ ʻɳѳë áõ å³ï³Ñ³Ï³Ý ³Ý- ˳ï³ÏÇóÝ»ñÁ Ù¿Ï Ñ³ïÇÏ ³Ý·É»ñ¿Ý êÏëÇÝù »ñÏñáñ¹ Û³ñÏ¿Ý, áõñ áñáß óáñ¹ ÙÁ ³Ûëù³Ý ѳñóáõÙ Ïñݳñ µ³- ³ÕµÇõñÇ ã»±Ý ¹Çٳͪ ëïáõ·»Éáõ ѳ- ï»Õ»ÏáõÃÇõÝÝ»ñ ÏÁ ïñáõÇÝ ·³Õó- ݳӻõ»É ³Û¹ ÑÇÝ· ïáÕ»ñÁ ϳñ¹³- Ù³ñ ï»Õ³ÝáõÝÝ»ñáõÝ ÇÝùÝáõÃÇõÝÁ£ ϳÝÝ»ñáõ ï»Õ³ß³ñÅÇÝ ³ÝÙÇç³Ï³Ý Éáí£ ºõ »Õ³õª Éáõë³µ³Ý³Ï³Ý ·ñáõ- ºÃ¿ Ù¿ÏÁ ³Ý¹ñ³¹³ñÓ³Í ÁÉɳÛ, ݳ˳å³ÛÙ³ÝÝ»ñáõÝ Ù³ëÇÝ£ Ø»ñ ÃÇõÝ©©©£ ²Û¹ ³Ý³ÝáõÝ ·ñáÕÁ ɳõ áñ ʳñµ»ñ¹Ý áõ ʳñµáõÃÁ ÝáÛÝ ù³- å³ñ³·³ÛÇÝ, 1915Ç Ï³Ë³Õ³ÝÝ»ñáõ ÏÿÁÝ¿ñ, »Ã¿ »ññáñ¹ Û³ñÏ »ñóñ áõ Õ³ùÝ »Ý, ÏñÝ³Û Ï³ñÍ»É, áñ ù³Õ³- ͳÝûà Éáõë³Ýϳñ ÙÁ Ý»ñϳ۳óáõ³Í ï»ëÝ¿ñ DZÝã ·ñáõ³Í ¿ ³ß˳ñÑÇ µá- ùÁ 1905ÇÝ Ð³Û³ëï³ÝÇ Ù³ë ÏÁ ϳ½-

вÚðºÜÆø—18 Ù¿ñ, ÇëÏ 1913¿Ý ³é³ç Ýáõ³×áõ³Í ¿ñ ¦Ð³Û Ññ»³Û, ¾Éǽ ²ÛÉÁÝï, 1926£ õáñ ¦Ñ³Û Ññ»³Ý§ ·ïÝ»Éáõ ѳٳñ£ ÂáõñùÇáÛ ÏáÕÙ¿£ àõ ³å³ µ³ó³·³Ý- Èáõë³ÝϳñÇãÁ Ýß³Í ¿© “²Ûë Ñ³Û ìëï³Ñ³µ³ñª á°ã£ ´³Ûó, å³Ñ ÙÁ ã»É©¬ ¦ºõñ»Ï³°, ³Ñ³ ÿ ÇÝãá±õ ³Ýáõ- Ññ»³Ý ѳõ³Ý³µ³ñ Éù³Í ¿ Çñ µÝÇÏ »Ýó¹ñ»Éáí, áñ ³Ûë Ù³ñ¹Á Çëϳ- ÝÁ ÷áË³Í ¿§©©©£ »ñÏÇñÁ Û»ïå³ï»ñ³½Ù»³Ý ßñç³ÝÇ å¿ë Ññ»³Û ¿ñ (ÿ»õ, ¹ÇÙ³·ÇÍ¿Ý ¹³- îñ³Ù³µ³Ý³Ï³Ý ·³Õ³÷³ñ ÙÁ Ãñù³Ï³Ý ѳɳͳÝù¿Ý ÷³Ëã»Éáõ ï»Éáí, ³Û¹ ³É ϳëϳͻÉÇ ¿), »Ï¿ù åÇïÇ ãÁÉɳ±ñ£ ¶áÝ¿ ³õ»ÉÇ, ù³Ý ³ÛÝ ù³ÝÇ ÙÁ »Ýó¹ñáõÃÇõÝÝ»ñ ÁÝ»Ýù ¦Ë»É³ÙÇïÝ»ñáõݧ ïñ³Ù³µ³Ýáõ- ³Ýáñ ÇÝùÝáõû³Ý Ù³ëÇÝ©¬ ÃÇõÝÁ, áñáÝù Ù¿Ï Û³ñÏÇ íñ³Û ³) г۳ëï³Ý ÍÝ³Í Ññ»³Û ¦Ãñù³Ï³Ý ç³ñ¹»ñ áõ ï»Õ³Ñ³Ýáõ- ÙÁ£ ²ÛëÇÝùݪ г۳ëï³ÝÇ ³é³çÇÝ ÃÇõÝÝ»ñ§ ÏÁ ·ñ»Ý, ÇëÏ ÙÇõë Û³ñÏÇÝ Ð³Ýñ³å»ïáõû³Ý Ù¿±ç£ 1918¿Ý íñ³Ûª ¦Ð³ÛÏ³Ï³Ý ò»Õ³ëå³ÝáõÃÇõݧ£ »ïù áõñÇß Ð³Û³ëï³±Ý Ï³ñ, áõñ (²Ûë ïáÕ»ñÁ ·ñÇ ³éÝ»Éáõ ųٳ- Ãáõñù»ñÁ ϳñ»Ý³ÛÇÝ Ññ»³Ý»ñ ѳ- Ý³Ï Ïÿ³Ý¹ñ³¹³éݳÙ, áñ ÙÇïù¿ë ɳͻɣ ²Ûɳå¿ë, ÇÝãå¿±ë ¿ áñ ã³Ýó³õ ³Û¹ å³ÑáõÝ µ³Õ¹³ï³Ï³Ý ÂáõñùÇ³Ý ¦Ñ³Û Ññ»³Ý»ñ§ Ñ³É³Í³Í ÙÁ Áݻɩ ³ñ¹»ûù Ññ»³Ý»ñáõÝ Ù³ëÇÝ ¿ Û»ïå³ï»ñ³½Ù»³Ý ßñç³ÝÇÝ, »ñ- ³Ù¿Ý ï»Õ ¦àÕç³Ï¿±½§ ·ñáõ³Í ¿, ÿ ÏÇñ ÙÁª áñ 1492¿Ý Ç í»ñ Ññ»³Ý»ñáõ ÑÇõ- Ù¿Ï ï»Õ ¦áÕç³Ï¿½§, ÙÇõëÁ ¦ó»Õ³ë- ñÁÝÏ³É »Õ³Í ¿, ÇÝãå¿ë Ù»ñûñ»³Û Ãáõñù å³ÝáõÃÇõݧ, ÇëÏ ³Ý¹Çݪ ¦ç³ñ¹§£ å»ïáõû³Ý íÉíÉáõÏÁ ÏÁ åݹ¿£ ºÃ¿ ÝÙ³Ý ëË³É ÙÁ ·áñÍáõ³Í ÁÉɳñ, µ) Ð³Û Ñûñ »õ Ññ»³Û Ùûñ ½³- íëï³Ñ »Ù áñ Ññ¿³Ï³Ý å³ïÏ³Ý Î³Ë³Õ³Ý Ñ³Ýáõ³Í ѳۻñáõ õ³Ï ÙÁ£ ´³Ûó ÝÙ³Ý ³ÝÓ ÙÁ, ³é³Ýó Ù³ñÙÇÝÝ»ñáõÝ Ó³ÛÝÁ ÜÇõ ºáñù¿Ý Éáõë³ÝϳñÁ ¥²ñÙÇÝ ì»ÏÝ¿ñÇ ³ÛÉ»õ³ÛÉÇ, Ññ»³Û ¿ª Ññ¿³Ï³Ý ã³÷³- ÙÇÝã»õ àõ³ßÇÝÏÃÁÝ åÇïÇ Éëáõ¿ñ ѳõ³ù³Íáۿݤª Çñ ¹³ñÓ¹³ñÓÇÏ ÝÇßÝ»ñáí£ ÆÝãá±õ ¦Ñ³Û§Á ÛÇ߻ɣ µ³ó³ïñáõû³Ùµ ÙÇÝã»õ ÑÇÙ³©©©)£ ·) г۳ëï³ÝÇ Ð³Ýñ³å»ïáõ- ø³ÝÇ áñ »ññáñ¹ Û³ñÏÇÝ íñ³Û û³Ý ³ÝÓݳ·Çñ áõÝ»óáÕ Ññ»³Û »Ýù, ³Ñ³ ³Û¹ ÝáÛÝ å³ïÇÝ »ññáñ¹ ѳٳñ£ Æñ ÙûñáõùÁ µÝáñáß ¿ ºõñá- ÙÁ£ â»Ýù Ïñݳñ »ñ»õ³Ï³Û»É ïñ³- ѳÛÏ³Ï³Ý ÝϳñÁ©¬ å³ÛÇ »õ Ø»ñÓ³õáñ ²ñ»õ»ÉùÇ áõÕ- Ù³µ³Ý³Ï³Ý å³ï׳é ÙÁª ÝÙ³Ý »ñ»- ¦²µñ³Ñ³Ù »õ Þáõß³Ý Ú³ñáõÃÇõÝ- Õ³÷³é Ññ»³Ý»ñáõÝ£ õáÛÃÇ ÙÁ ѳٳñ, µ³Ûó©©© ³Ûë Ýϳ- »³Ý Çñ»Ýó ÑÇÝ· ½³õ³ÏÝ»ñáí سñ³ßÇ ÈáõÇë àõ© гÛÝ Ñ³õ³ù³ÍáÛ, ÜÇõ ñÇÝ µ³ó³ïñáõÃÇõÝÁ ïñ³Ù³µ³Ýáõ- Ù¿ç (Âáõñùdz)£ Ð³Û ÁÝï³ÝÇùÁ ²ØÜ ºáñùÇ Ð³Ýñ³ÛÇÝ ¶ñ³¹³ñ³Ý§£ ÃÇõÝ ÙÁ áõÝDZ£ ·³ÕÃ³Í ¿ 1922Çݪ Ãñù³Ï³Ý ѳɳͳÝ- ³ݷ³ñ³ÝÁ, Áëï »ñ»õáÛÃÇÝ, ù¿Ý Ëáõë³÷»Éáõ ѳٳñ§£ ³é³ÝÓÇÝÝ Ñ³Û Ï³Ù Ññ»³Û ·³Õó- * * * 1920ÇÝ Ñ³Ýáõ³Í ÝϳñÁ ͳÝûà ¿ ϳÝÇ ÙÁ Éáõë³Ýϳñ ãáõÝ¿ñ »õ, Ù¿Ï ì»ñ© Ú³ñáõÃÇõÝ»³ÝÇ ³Ý·É»ñ¿Ý Ûáõ- ù³ñáí »ñÏáõ ÃéãáõÝ ½³ñÝ»Éáõ ²Ûë Ûû¹áõ³ÍÁ ÁÝï³Ý»Ï³Ý ÛÇß³ï³- ß³·ñáõûݿݪ ¦à°ã Ëݹ³É »õ áã ³É Ùï³¹ñáõû³Ùµ, ѳÝ׳ñ»Õ ÙÇïù Ïáí ÙÁ ëÏë³õ »õ ÏÁ ϳñÍ»Ù, áñ ï»ÕÇÝ É³É§£ Àëï Ó»õÇ, ÁÝï³ÝÇùÁ ËáÛë ÙÁ »ñÏáõùÇÝ Ñ³Ù³¹ñáõÃÇõÝÁ ·ïÝ»- ¿ ³ÝÓÝ³Ï³Ý Ñ³ñóáõÙáí ÙÁ ÷³Ï»É£ ïáõ³Í ¿ سñ³ßÇ 1920Ç ç³ñ¹¿Ý, Éáõ ÷³ÛÉáõÝ ·³Õ³÷³ñÁ ÛÕ³ó³Í ¿£ Îÿ»Ýó¹ñ»Ù, áñ 1975ÇÝ ê© Âáñáë µ³Ûó Áëï ¿áõû³Ýª ò»Õ³ëå³Ýáõ- ºÃ¿ Éáõë³ÝϳñÇãÁ ÝÙ³Ý µ³ó³ïñáõ- »Ï»Õ»óõáÛ ï³ñ³·Çñ ëÏÇÑÁ ѳݷñ- û³Ý í»ñ³åñáÕ ¿ñ, ÇÝãå¿ë ÏÁ ÃÇõÝ ·ñ³Í ¿, ÇëÏ Ù¿çµ»ñáõÙÁ ³ÝÑ- áõ³Ý³Í ¿ óݷ³ñ³ÝÇ å³Ñ»ëïÝ»- å³ïÙ¿ Ûáõß³·ñáõÃÇõÝÁ£ àõëïÇ, ³Ûë ñ³Å»ßï ¿ñ Û³ÝáõÝ ·Çïáõû³Ý, ñ¿Ý Ù¿ÏáõÝ Ù¿ç£ ²ñ¹»ûù ûñ ÙÁ Ýå³- ³É å¿ïù ¿ ·áõÙ³ñ»É Ï³Ù³Û Ã¿ ·Çï³ß˳ïáÕ ÙÁ Ïñݳñ µ³ó³ï- ï³Ï áõÝÇ±Ý óáõó³¹ñ»Éáõ ½³ÛÝ Çµ- ³Ï³Ù³Û ³å³ÏáÕÙÝáñáßáÕ ï»Õ»- ñáõÃÇõÝ ÙÁ ·ñ»É©©© Û³ÝáõÝ ÙïùÇ ñ»õ Ùݳóáñ¹ª öáùñ ²ëÇáÛ ³ÝͳÝûà ÏáõÃÇõÝÝ»ñáõ ÏáÛïÇÝ íñ³Û£ ³éáÕçáõû³Ý£ Æ í»ñçáÛ, µ³ó³ï- »Ï»Õ»óÇÇ ÙÁ©©© ÙáËÇñÇ í»ñ³Íáõ³Í ôçÝ»Ýù ¹³ñÓ»³É »ñÏñáñ¹ Û³ñÏ, ñáõÃ»Ý¿Ý ³ÛÝå¿ë Ïÿ»ñ»õÇ, áñ Éáõ- ³ÝͳÝûà ӻéù»ñáõ ÏáÕÙ¿©©© ³Ýͳ- áõñ ï³ñµ»ñ »ñÏÇñÝ»ñ¿ ³é³Ý- ë³ÝϳñÇãÁ ã¿ ï»ë³Ïó³Í ËݹñáÛ Ýûà Ãáõ³Ï³ÝÇ ÙÁ©©©£ γ٠í»ñç ï³É ÓÇݬ³é³ÝÓÇÝ ·³ÕóϳÝÝ»ñáõ Éáõ- ³é³ñÏ³Û ³ÝÓÇÝ Ñ»ï (»Ã¿ áã, åÇ- µ³é³Ë³Õ»ñáõÝ »õ Çñ»ñÁ Ïáã»É ë³ÝϳñÝ»ñ óáõó³¹ñáõ³Í »Ý£ ÐáÝ ïÇ ã·ñ¿ñ, ÿ ¦Ñ³õ³Ý³µ³ñ Éù³Í Çñ»Ýó ³ÝáõÝá±í£ ѳݹÇå»ó³Ýù ³Ù»Ý¿Ý ³é»ÕÍáõ³Í³- ¿§, »õ³ÛÉÝ), ³ÛÉ ÝϳñÁ Ñ³Ý³Í »õ â³÷¿Ý ³õ»ÉÇ Ñ³ñóáõÙÝ»ñ ·áõ- ÛÇÝ ÝϳñÇݪ ѳÛÏ³Ï³Ý ÝÇõûñáõ ³Ù»- ³å³ ¹³ïáÕáõÃÇõÝÝ»ñ Áñ³Í, Ù³ñáõ»ó³Ý ³Ûë ïáÕ»ñáõÝ Ù¿ç£ ì»ñ- Ý¿Ý µ³ÝÇÙ³ó Ù³ñ¹áõÝ Ñ³Ù³ñ ÇëÏ£ ÑÇÙÝáõ³Íª ÙûñáõùÇ Ó»õÇÝ íñ³Û çÇÝÁ áõÕÕ»Ýù Ù»ñ å³ïÏ³Ý Ù³ñÙÇÝ- ºñ»õ³Ï³Û»ó¿ù »Ã¿ ëáíáñ³Ï³Ý, (ÙdzÛÝ Ññ»³Ý»±ñÁ ³Û¹åÇëÇ Ùû- Ý»ñáõÝ© ³ñ¹»ûù ųٳݳÏÁ 㿱 å³ß- ѳÛáõÝ ³ÝáõÝÁ ³Û¹ ûñÁ ׳ÝãóáÕ ñáõù ÏÁ ·áñͳͻÝ)£ ïûݳå¿ë å³ï³ë˳ÝÝ»ñ »õ ëñµ³·- Ù³ñ¹ ÙÁ ÁÉɳñ ¹ÇïáÕÁ£ ƱÝã ˳é- ²ñ¹»ûù óݷ³ñ³ÝÇ ³ß˳ï³- ñáõÃÇõÝÝ»ñ å³Ñ³Ýç»Éáõ ³ÛÝ ï»Õ¿Ý, ݳß÷áà åÇïÇ ëï»ÕÍ¿ñ Ñ»ï»õ»³É ÏÇóÝ»ñ¿Ý Ù¿ÏÁ åñåï³±Í ¿ 1926Ç ·³Õ- áñ å¿ïù ¿ ½³ÝáÝù Ññ³ÙóÝ¿© ¾Éǽ µ³ó³ïñáõÃÇõÝÁ©¬ óϳÝÝ»ñáõ ó³ÝÏ»ñÁª ³Ûë ËáñÑñ¹³- ²ÛÉÁÝïÇ Ã³Ý·³ñ³ÝÁ£

вÚðºÜÆø—19 ¸¾äÆ ºðÎÆÜø ÊàÚ²òàÔ Ú²ôºðÄàôÂÆôÜ... ²åñÇÉ ¿... Úáñ¹³é³ï »÷ñ³ïÇ ³ÉÇùÝ»ñÁ ÏÁ µ³µ³Ë»Ý ³ÝûñÇÝ³Ï ¹³éÝáõû³Ùµ... ¶»ï³÷Çݪ ϳϳãÝ»ñ ϳÝ... γñÍñáõû³Ùµ ëÝ³Í ´áÕµáç ϳϳãÝ»ñ, ²ñ»õáõÝ Ñ»ï áÕç³·áõñáõáÕ Üáñ³÷ÃÇà ͳÕÇÏÝ»ñ... ÐáÕÇÝ Ï³Ýã¿Ý ³ñµ»ó³Í ì³é µáó³ßáõÝã Ñëϳݻñ... Ü. ØÎðîÆ⺲Ü-î²ÔȺ²Ü гÛáó Ø»Í ºÕ»éÝÇ ÛÇß³ï³ÏÇÝ ÅáÕáíáõñ¹Ç í»ñ³ÍÝáõݹÁ, ³Ýáñ Ñá- ï³ÏÇ Û³õ»ñÅáõÃÇõÝÁ£ ÝáõÇñáõ³Í ºñ»õ³ÝÇ ÑÇõëÇë³ÛÇÝ ·»õáñ »õ ýǽÇù³Ï³Ý í»ñ»ÉùÁ£ Ú³õ»ñÅáõû³Ý ³ÝͳÍÏ ï³×³ñÇ ³ñ»õÙï»³Ý Ù³ëÇ Ù¿çª ÌÇÍ»éݳϳ- ÎáÃáÕÁ, áñ »ñ»ë³å³ïáõ³Í ¿ ѳٳñ, ǵñ»õ å³ï»ñ ÏÁ ͳé³Û»Ý µ»ñ¹ ³ÝáõÝÁ ÏñáÕ µÉáõñÇ µ³ñÓñáõÝ- Ïñ³ÝÇï¿ áÕáñÏ ë³É»ñáí, ËáñáõÝÏ ï³ëÝ»ñÏáõ å³½³É¹³Ïáõé ÙáÛûñÁ, ùÇÝ í»ñ ËáÛ³óáÕ Ûáõ߳ѳٳÉÇñÁ ³Ïáëáí µ³ÅÝáõ³Í ¿ »ñÏáõ ѳï- áñáÝù ÛÇß»óÝ»Éáí ³õ³Ý¹³Ï³Ý ˳ã- ϳéáõóáõ³Í ¿ ÊáñÑñ¹³ÛÇÝ ù³ñ¬ù³é³ÏáÕ ÏáÃáÕÝ»ñ, г۳ëï³ÝÇ µÝ³Ïãáõû³Ý ÙÇ³Å³Ù³Ý³Ï ù³ñ³ó³Í, å³Ñ³Ýçáí, »ñµ 1965 Ãáõ³- ÏÁ Ó·»Ý Çñ»Ýó ½áÑ»ñáõ ³é- ϳÝÇ ²åñÇÉ 24ÇÝ áÕç ѳ- ç»õ ËáݳñÑáÕ íßï³·ÇÝ ÛáõÃÇõÝÁ ï³ñµ»ñ »ñÏÇñÝ»- ë·³õáñÝ»ñáõ ïå³õáñáõ- ñáõ Ù¿ç Ýß»ó ѳÛáó Ø»Í ÃÇõÝ, (ï³ñ³Íáõ³Í ¿ ݳ»õ ºÕ»éÝÇ ÛÇëáõÝ ³Ù»³ÏÁ£ ÃÇõñ ϳñÍÇù, áñ ³Ûë ÙáÛ- Úáõ߳ѳٳÉÇñÁ, áñ ². ûñÁ ÏÁ ËáñÑñ¹³Ýß»Ý Â³ñ˳ݻ³ÝÇ »õ ê. ø³É³ß- å³ïÙ³Ï³Ý Ð³Û³ëï³ÝÇ »³ÝÇ Ý³Ë³·ÇÍÝ ¿, Çñ ݳѳݷݻñ)£ ³õ³ñïÇÝ Ñ³ë³õ 1967 гñÃ³Ï¿Ý ÇçÝáÕ µ³ó- Ãáõ³Ï³ÝÇ ÝáÛ»Ùµ»ñÇ í»ñ- áõ³ÍùÝ»ñáõ µ³ñÓñ ³ëïÇ- çÁ£ ׳ÝÝ»ñÁ, áñ ÏÁ ï³ÝÇÝ ¹¿- ÌÇÍ»éݳϳµ»ñ¹Á µ³Õ- åÇ Û³õ»ñÅ³Ï³Ý ç³ÑÁ, ÏÁ ϳó³Í ¿ »ñ»ù ÑÇÙÝ³Ï³Ý ëïÇå»Ý ³Ûó»ÉáõÝ»ñáõÝ, áñ ÏáÃáÕÝ»ñ¿£ ØÇÝã»õ Ûáõ߳ѳٳÉÇñÇ áõ³ÍÝ»ñáõ, áñ ÏÁ ËáñÑñ¹³Ýß¿ ³ÝáÝù ËáݳñÑ»Éáí Ççݻݣ Ï»¹ñáÝ³Ï³Ý Ù³ëÁ ѳëÝÇÉÁ, ³Ûó»- ë÷ÇõéùÇ »õ ѳÛñ»ÝÇùÇ Ñ³Ûáõû³Ý 1988-1990 Ãáõ³Ï³ÝÇÝ Ø»Í ºÕ»é- ÉáõÝ Çñ Ó³Ë ÏáÕÙÇ íñ³Û ÏÁ ï»ëÝ¿ »ñÏáõ ѳïáõ³ÍÝ»ñ (ï³ñ³Íáõ³Í ¿ ÝÇ Ûáõß³ñͳÝÇ Ñ³ñ»õ³Ýáõû³Ùµ ѳñÇõñ Ù»Ãñ »ñϳñáõÃÇõÝ áõÝ»óáÕ, ÃÇõñ ϳñÍÇù, áñ ³ÝáÝù ÏÁ ËáñÑñ- ï»Õ³¹ñáõ»ó³Ý ²ïñå¿Û׳ÝÇ êáõÙ- å³½³É¹¿ ëñµ³ï³ß ù³ñ»ñ¿ ß³ñ- ¹³Ýß»Ý Ø»Í »õ öáùñ سëÇëÝ»ñÁ)£ ϳÛÇÃ, ÎÇñáí³å³ï (¶³ÝͳÏ) »õ áõ³Í Ûáõß³å³ïÁ, áñáõÝ íñ³Û ÷á- ì»ñ ëɳóáÕ ÏáÃáÕÁ Çñ ÙdzÓáÛÉ ä³ùáõ ù³Õ³ùÝ»ñáõ Ñ³Û µÝ³Ïãáõ- ñ³·ñáõ³Í »Ý ²ñ»õÙï»³Ý Ð³Û³ë- í»ñçݳٳëáí, ÏÁ Ù³ñÙݳõáñ¿ Ñ³Û Ã»³Ý Ýϳïٳٵ ÏÇñ³éáõ³Í »Õ»é- ï³ÝÇ »õ úëٳݻ³Ý ÂáõñùÇáÛ ï³- ÅáÕáíáõñ¹Ç ÙdzëÝáõû³Ý »õ Áݹ- ݳ·áñÍáõû³Ý ½áÑ»ñáõ ÛÇß³ï³ÏÁ ñ³ÍùÇ Ù¿ç ·ïÝáõáÕ Ñ³ÛÏ³Ï³Ý ³ÛÝ Ñ³Ýñáõû³Ý ·³Õ³÷³ñÁ, ǵñ»õ í³õ»ñ³óÝáÕ ÏáÃáլ˳ã³ñÓ³ÝÝ»- µÝ³Ï³í³Ûñ»ñáõ ³ÝáõÝÝ»ñÁ, áõñ ï»- ³å³·³ÛÇ Ýϳïٳٵ í³é ѳõ³ïÇ ñÁ£ ÕÇ áõÝ»ó³Í »Ý ç³ñ¹»ñÁ£ ³ñï³Û³ÛïáõÃÇõÝ£ 1995 Ãáõ³Ï³ÝÇÝ Ñ³Ûáó Ø»Í Úáõ߳ѳٳÉÇñÇ Ï»¹ñáÝÇÝ, ÁÝ- Úáõ߳ѳٳÉÇñÇ Ï»¹ñáÝÇÝ, ѳñ- ºÕ»éÝÇ áõÃëáõݳٻ³ÏÇ ûñ»ñáõÝ Ûáõ- ¹³ñÓ³Ï, å³½³ñ¹áí ë³É³ñÏáõ³Í óÏÇ ÁݹѳÝáõñ ٳϳñ¹³Ï¿Ý Ù¿- ߳ѳٳÉÇñÁ Éñ³óáõ»ó³õ гÛáó ó»- áõÕÕ³ÝÏÇõÝ Ñ³ñóÏÇÝ íñ³Û, ³Ýáñ ÏáõÏ¿ë Ù»Ãñ ó³Í, ÏÉáñ ï³ñ³ÍùÇ Õ³ëå³Ýáõû³Ý óݷ³ñ³ÝÇ ÇÝù- ѳñ³õ¬³ñ»õÙï»³Ý ÏáÕÙÁ ¹¿åÇ íñ³Û ϳéáõóáõ³Í ¿ Ú³õ»ñÅáõû³Ý ݳïÇå ß¿Ýùáí, ׳ñï³ñ³å»ïÝ»ñ »ñÏÇÝù ÏÁ ËáÛ³Ý³Û ù³é³ëáõÝ ï³×³ñÁ, áñáõÝ Ï»¹ñáÝÇÝ ·ïÝáõáÕ ê. ø³É³ß»³ÝÇ, È. ØÏñï㻳ÝÇ, ²¬ Ù»Ãñ µ³ñÓñáõÃÇõÝ áõÝ»óáÕ ëɳù³- µáõñí³é¿Ý Ïÿ»ÉÉ¿ ³Ýß¿ç Ïñ³ÏÁª ³ñ- ³ñ˳ݻ³ÝÇ »õ ù³Ý¹³Ï³·áñÍ ý¬ Ó»õ ÏáÃáÕ ÙÁ, áñ ÏÁ Ù³ñÙݳõáñ¿ Ñ³Û ï³Û³Ûï»Éáí »Õ»éÝÇ ½áÑ»ñáõ ÛÇß³- ²é³ù»É»³ÝÇ Ý³Ë³·Íáí£ Â³Ý·³-

вÚðºÜÆø—20 ñ³ÝÇ »ñÏÛ³ñϳÝÇ Ù³ëݳ߿ÝùÇ ³ß˳ñÑÇ ï³ñµ»ñ É»½áõÝ»ñáí Ññ³- ϻݳó ͳéÇ Ó»õáí£ ³é³çÇÝ Û³ñÏÇ Ù¿ç ï»Õ³¹ñáõ³Í »Ý å³ñ³Ïáõ³Í å³ïÙ³·ñ³Ï³Ý »õ òáõó³¹ñáõû³Ý í»ñçÇÝ ëñ³ÑÁ í³ñã³Ï³Ý, ³ß˳ï³Ýù³ÛÇÝ »õ ³ÛÉ Ññ³å³ñ³Ï³Ëûë³Ï³Ý ·ñ³Ï³Ýáõ- ÙÇ³Å³Ù³Ý³Ï ÏÁ ѳݹÇë³Ý³Û óÝ- ëå³ë³ñÏÙ³Ý Í³é³ÛáõÃÇõÝÝ»ñÁ, ÃÇõÝÁ£ ·³ñ³ÝÇ ß¿ÝùÇ Ý»ñùÇÝ µ³ÏÁ, áñ 170 Ýëï³ï»Õáí ¹³ÑÉÇ×Á, áñ ÏÁ Ïáã- ³ݷ³ñ³ÝÇ »ñÏñáñ¹ ëñ³ÑÇ Ù¿ç ËÇëï ³õ³Ý¹³Ï³Ý ¿ Ñݳ·áÛÝ Ñ³Û áõÇ ÎáÙÇï³ëÇ ³Ýáõ³Ý ëñ³Ñ, ³ÛÝ- ÷³Ïóáõ³Í ³ÕÇõë³ÏÝ»ñÁ Ï°³Ù÷á- ׳ñï³ñ³å»ïáõû³Ý ѳٳñ£ ï»Õ ÏÁ ·ïÝáõÇÝ ·Çï³Ï³Ý »õ óÝ- ·³ñ³Ý³ÛÇÝ ³ñÅ¿ùÝ»ñáõ å³ÑáóÝ»- ñÁ »õ ·ñ³¹³ñ³Ý¬ ÁÝûñó³ëñ³ÑÁ£ ºñÏñáñ¹ Û³ñÏÇÝ Ù¿ç ßáõñç ѳ½³ñ ù³é³ÏáõÙÇ Ù»Ãñ ٳϻñ»ëÇ íñ³Û ϳ½Ù³Ï»ñåáõ³Í ¿ óݷ³ñ³Ý³ÛÇÝ ·Çï³Ï³Ý óáõó³¹ñáõÃÇõÝÁ£ ³Ý- ·³ñ³ÝÇ µ³óûû³Û ëñ³ÑÇÝ Ù¿ç ï»- Õ³¹ñáõ³Í ¿ áõà ٻÃñ »ñϳñáõ- û³Ùµ »õ »ñ»ù Ù»Ãñ ɳÛÝáõû³Ùµ å³½³Éï¿ ï³å³Ý³ù³ñÁ, áñ ÏÁ ËáñÑñ¹³Ýß¿ 1915 Ãáõ³Ï³ÝÇ Ý³Ñ³- ï³ÏÝ»ñáõ ÛÇß³ï³ÏÇ Û³õ»ñÅáõÃÇõÝÁ »õ ³ß˳ñѳë÷Çõé ѳÛáõû³Ý ÙÇ- ³õáñÙ³Ý, ã³ñÇ »õ µ³ñÇÇ å³Ûù³ñÇ ·³Õ³÷³ñÁ£ ³ݷ³ñ³ÝÇ Ù³ëݳ߿ÝùÇ ï³ÝÇ- ùÁ ѳñà ¿, ³ÛÝï»Õ¿Ý ï»ë³ñ³Ý ÏÁ µ³óáõÇ ¹¿åÇ ²ñ³ñ³ï É»éÁ£ ³ݷ³ñ³ÝÇ ³é³çÇÝ ëñ³ÑÇ Ù¿ç ÷»Ýª 1914 Ãáõ³Ï³ÝÇ ¹ñáõû³Ùµ Ñ³Û ÎÇë³ÏÉáñ å³½³Éï¿ »ñ»ë³å³ï- гÛÏ³Ï³Ý È»éݳß˳ñÑÇ »õ ѳñ»- µÝ³Ïãáõû³Ý ÁݹѳÝáõñ »õ 1915- áõ³Í å³ïÁ ѳõ³ë³ñ³ã³÷ µ³ÅÝ- õ³Ý »ñÏÇñÝ»ñáõ Ëáñ³ù³Ý¹³Ï ù³ñ- 1922 Ãáõ³Ï³ÝÝ»ñáõ ÁÝóóùÇÝ ï»- áõ³Í ¿ ï³ëÝ»ñÏáõ ѳïáõ³ÍÝ»ñáõ, ï¿½Ý ¿, áõñ ï»Õ³¹ñáõ³Í »Ý ճѳÝáõ³Í ϳ٠áãÝã³óáõ³Í µÝ³Ï- áñáÝóÙ¿ Çõñ³ù³ÝãÇõñÇ íñ³Û ÙÇç- ²ñ»õÙï»³Ý Ð³Û³ëï³ÝÇ »õ úëÙ³Ý- ãáõû³Ý »õ 1922 Ãáõ³Ï³ÝÇ ¹ñáõ- ݳ¹³ñ»³Ý Ñ³Û íÇÙ³·ñáõû³Ý µÝá- »³Ý ÂáõñùÇáÛ ï³ñ³ÍùÇÝ ÙÇÝã»õ û³Ùµ å³Ñå³Ýáõ³Í Ñ³Û µÝ³Ïãáõ- ñáß ï³é³ï»ë³ÏÝ»ñáí ÷áñ³·ñáõ³Í 1915 Ãáõ³Ï³ÝÇÝ ·áÛáõÃÇõÝ áõÝ»- û³Ý Ãáõ³ù³Ý³ÏÇ í»ñ³µ»ñ»³É »Ý ѳÛáó ó»Õ³ëå³Ýáõû³Ý ųٳ- ó³Í ѳ۳µÝ³Ï ³ÛÝ í³Ûñ»ñÁ, áñáÝù ÑÇÙÝ³Ï³Ý ïáõ»³ÉÝ»ñ£ ݳϳÏÇó »õ ³Ï³Ý³ï»ë Ý߳ݳõáñ »ÝóñÏáõ»ó³Ý ½³Ý·áõ³Í³ÛÇÝ ï»- ºññáñ¹ ëñ³ÑÇ Ù¿ç ³Ûó»ÉáõÝ»ñáõÝ ûï³ñ»ñÏñ³óÇ ¹Çõ³Ý³·¿ïÝ»ñáõ, ճѳÝáõû³Ý »õ áõñ ϳ½Ù³Ï»ñå- ÏÁ Ý»ñϳ۳óáõÇ ó»Õ³ëå³ÝáõÃ»Ý¿Ý Çñ³õ³µ³ÝÝ»ñáõ, ·ÇïݳϳÝÝ»ñáõ, áõ»ó³Ý Ñ³Û µÝ³Ïãáõû³Ý »Õ»éÝÁ£ »ïù ºõñáå³ÛÇ, ²ëdzÛÇ, ²÷ñÇÏ¿Ç, Ññ³å³ñ³Ï³ËûëÝ»ñáõ »õ ·ñáÕÝ»ñáõ Ü»ñ³Í³Ï³Ý ëñ³ÑÇ Ù¿ç óáõó³¹- ²Ù»ñÇϳÛÇ »õ ²õëïñ³ÉdzÛÇ ³ß- ùë³Ý»ñáñ¹ ¹³ñáõ ³é³çÇÝ ó»Õ³ë- ñáõáÕ Éáõë³ÝϳñÝ»ñÁ »õ ÅáÕáíñ- ˳ñѳٳë»ñáõ ³é³ÝÓÇÝ »ñÏÇñÝ»- å³ÝáõÃÇõÝÁ ¹³ï³å³ñïáÕ ³ëáÛÃ- ¹³·ñ³Ï³Ý ³ÕÇõë³ÏÝ»ñÁ ÏÁ å³ï- ñáõ Ù¿ç ³åñáÕ Ñ³Û»ñáõ ÃÇõÇ Ù³ëÇÝ Ý»ñÁ£ Ù»Ý úëٳݻ³Ý ïÇñ³å»ïáõû³Ý ïáõ»³ÉÝ»ñ£ ²Û¹ óáõó³ëñ³ÑÇ Ù¿ç ³Ûó»ÉáõÝ»- ï³Ï ·ïÝáõáÕ Ñ³ÛÏ³Ï³Ý Ý³Ñ³Ý·- ÜáÛÝ óáõó³ëñ³ÑÇ Ù¿ç Û³ïáõÏ ñÁ ÏÁ ÑÝã»óÝ»Ý ¹¿åù»ñáõ ³Ï³Ý³- Ý»ñáõ »õ ³ÛÉ ï³ñ³ÍùÝ»ñáõ Ù¿ç 1914 å³ïáõ³Ý¹³ÝÝ»ñáõ íñ³Û ï»Õ³¹ñ- ï»ëÝ»ñáõ Ù»Õ³¹ñ³Ï³Ý Ëûëù»ñÝ áõ Ãáõ³Ï³ÝÇ ¹ñáõû³Ùµ ³åñáÕ µÝ³Ï- áõ³Í µÇõñ»Õ³å³ÏÇ¿ ë³÷áñÝ»ñáõ íϳÛáõÃÇõÝÝ»ñÁ£ ãáõû³Ý, ѳÛÏ³Ï³Ý µÝ³Ï³í³Ûñ»- Ù¿ç, ǵñ»õ ëáõñµ Ù³ëáõÝùÝ»ñ å³Ñ- гÛáó ó»Õ³ëå³Ýáõû³Ý óÝ- ñáõ, ·áñÍáÕ Ñ³ÛÏ³Ï³Ý »Ï»Õ»óÇÝ»- áõ³Í »Ý å³ïÙ³Ï³Ý Ð³Û³ëï³ÝÇ ·³ñ³ÝÁ, ǵñ»õ ·Çï³Ñ»ï³½ûï³Ï³Ý ñáõ »õ ¹åñáóÝ»ñáõ ÃÇõÁ£ ݳѳݷݻñ¿Ý µ»ñáõ³Í ÑáÕÁ »õ î¿ñ- áõëáõÙݳñ³Ý ÏÁ ·áñÍ¿ г۳ëï³- òáõó³Ý³ÏÇ »ñÏñáñ¹, ÑÇÙÝ³Ï³Ý ¼ûñÇ Ù¿ç Û³Ûïݳµ»ñáõ³Í »Õ»éÝÇ ÝÇ Ð³Ýñ³å»ïáõû³Ý ·ÇïáõÃÇõÝ- ëñ³ÑÁ, áñ ÏÁ ½µ³Õ»óÝ¿ 700 ùÙ ï³- ½áÑ ¹³ñÓ³Í »ñÇï³ë³ñ¹ ѳÛáõ Ý»ñáõ ³½·³ÛÇÝ ³Ï³¹»ÙdzÛÇ Ñ³Ù³- ñ³Íù, ³Ûó»ÉáõÝ»ñáõÝ ÏÁ Ý»ñϳ۳ó- ·³ÝÏÝ áõ áëÏáñÝ»ñÁ£ ϳñ·¿Ý Ý»ñë£ Ý¿ å³ïÙ³Ï³Ý Ñ³õ³ëïÇ íϳÛáõ- ÜáÛÝ ëñ³ÑÇ Ù¿ç, ³é³ÝÓÇÝ Ëáñ³- ÃÇõÝÝ»ñ ѳۻñáõ ó»Õ³ëå³Ýáõû³Ý ÝÇ Ù¿ç ï»Õ³¹ñáõ³Í ¿ Ñ³Û ÅáÕáíáõñ- »õ Ãáõñù»ñáõ á×ñ³·áñÍáõû³Ý Ù³- ¹Ç Û³õ»ñÅáõÃÇõÝÁ »õ í»ñ³ÍÝáõݹÁ Ì.Ê.- î»Õ»ÏáõÃÇõÝÝ»ñÁ ëÇÝ£ ȳÛÝûñ¿Ý óáõó³¹ñáõ³Í ¿ ѳ- ËáñÑñ¹³ÝßáÕ Ïñ³ÝÇï¿ ÏáÃáÕ, áñ ïñ³Ù³¹ñáõ³Í »Ý гÛáó ò»- Ûáó ó»Õ³ëå³Ýáõû³Ý í»ñ³µ»ñ»³É ÏÁ Ý»ñϳ۳ݳ۪ ×ÇõÕ»ñÁ ³ñÓ³Ï³Í Õ³ëå³Ýáõû³Ý ³ݷ³ñ³Ý¿Ý

вÚðºÜÆø—21 §Æê²ØäàôÈÀ ìÀðκ²ÈÀØ Àئ

꩸© ¶ðƶàðº²Ü

- سõû°« سõû°« íáõÝóÁë ïÕ³Û íáõñ¹Ç ÙÁ ½³õ³ÏÁ ÁÉÉɳÉÝ ¿« µ³Ûó áñ ûñ ó»ñ»Ïáí Ðñ³Ý¹ îÇÝùÁ ¹Ç³ÏÇ ç³Ý« íáõÝó »Ý ùá ·áñÍ»ñÁ£ »ñµ ²åñÇÉ ¿ ³ÙÇëÁ« ³ñ¹¿Ý áõñÇß »Ý ÏÁ í»ñ³Í¿ »õ ãÇ ëáëϳñ Çñ ·áñÍ³Í - Àëï»Õ »Ù å³å« ÆëóÙåáõÉÁ Ý»ñùÇÝ Ñ»é³õáñáõÃÇõÝÝ»ñ¹ª ßñç³- á×Çñ¿Ý« Ù»Õ³ÛÇ ãÇ ·³ñ Çñ ³ñ³ñùÇÝ íÁñÏ»³ÉÁÙ ÁÙ« ÑÇÙÇ ÏÇ ·»³Ù -« ÏÁ å³ï¿¹ ÿ ³ß˳ñÑÇ íñ³Û ·áÛáõ- Ç ï»ë« »õ ÷áË³Ý³Ï Çñ Ý»ñùÇÝ Ññ¿- å³ï³ë˳ݿ ëï»÷³Ý³Ï»ñïóÇ ÃÇõÝ áõÝ»óáÕ ÙÇõë ³½·»ñ¿Ý©©© ßÁ ¹³ïÇ Ï³Ýã»Éáõ« ½³ÛÝ Çñ Ù¿ç ÑÇÝ· ï³ñ»Ï³Ý سõûÝ Çñ ÝÝç³ñ³- лé³õáñáõÃÇõÝÝ»ñ¹ ë³Ï³ÛÝ ³Ý- ëå³ÝÝ»É ÷áñÓ»Éáõ« ï³Ï³õÇÝ ÏÁ ß³- Ý¿Ý« áõñ ½»ï»Õáõ³Í ¿ ï³Ý ѳٳ- ˳éÝ ã»Ý© ÑáÝ ³Ýå³ÛÙ³Ý Ï»ñå³ñ ñáõݳϿ Çñ ïÙ³ñ¹Ç í»ñ³µ»ñáõÙÁ ϳñ·ÇãÁ£ ²Ý Ù³ÝÏ³Ï³Ý å³ï»ñ³½- ÙÁ Ï³Û Ã³ùÝáõ³Í© Û³Ûï³ñ³ñ»ë ѳݹ¿å îÇÝùÁ ÍÝ³Í ÅáÕáíáõñ¹Ç Ù³Ï³Ý Ë³Õ»ñáõ ·ÉáõËÝ ³Ýó³Í« ³Ý- ϳ٠á㪠ÑáÝ ¿© ÃáõñùÝ ¿ ³Ý© Ï»ó³Íª ³ñ¹³ñ Çñ³õáõÝùÝ»ñáõÝ »õ Ïáõ ·³Û ¹³¹³ñ Ãáõñù ÏÁ ëå³ÝÝ¿« ÆëóÙ- áõÕÇÕ »ï»õ¹« ³ÝÙÇç³å¿ë ÷³Ï³Í áõ ÏÁ ϳݷÝÇ ×Ç°ß¹ ÝáÛÝ ï»ÕÁª í³ë- åáõÉÁ í»ñóÝ»Éáõ ÷áñÓ»ñ ÏÿÁÝ¿ »õ Ñû- ù»½Ç© ѳÛáõÝ ÷³Ï³Í© á°ã Ïñݳë ï³Ï³µ»Ï« Çñ³õ³½ñÏáõ³Í« ݳË×Çñ ñÁ Ñ»ï ûñ³Ï³Ý ¹ñáõû³Ùµ ù³ÝÇ ÙÁ ³½³ïÇÉ ÇñÙ¿« áã ³É ÇÝù ÏÁ Ñ»é³- áõ ëå³Ý¹ ³åñ³Í ѳÛáõÝ áõÕÇ°Õ ³Ý·³Ù ³Ûë ¦Ù³ñ½³Ýù§Á ÏÿÁÝ¿£ ݳ۩ ÑáÝ ¿© »ï»õ¹© ùáõ µáÉáñ Ñ»é³- ÏéݳÏÇÝ£ гÛñÁ ùÇã »ïù Ýáñ¿Ý åÇïÇ Ñ³ñó- õáñáõÃÇõÝÝ»ñ¹« û¹Ç »õ çáõñÇ ³Ýó- Ð³Û »õ Ãáõñù« Çñ³ñáõ ÷³Ï³Í« Ý¿© ¦Ø³õû°« سõû°« íáõÝóÁë ïÕ³Û ù»ñ¹ Ç°ñÁ Áñ³Í »õ ÙÇ°ßï ù»½ ѳñ- ÿ»õ ï»ë³Ý»ÉÇûñ¿Ý ³Ýç³ï« µ³Ûó ç³Ý« íáõÝó »Ý ùá ·áñÍ»ñÁ§« ÇëÏ Ñ³- áõ³Í»Éáõ å³ïñ³ëï£ àñáíÑ»ï»õ ³Ýï»ë³Ý»ÉÇûñ¿Ý ³ÛÝù³Ý Ùûï-Ùûï Ûáõ µÝáñáß ë»õ áõ ·»Õ»óÇÏ ³ãù»ñáí ¹áõÝ Ñ³Û »ë« ÇÝùÁª Ãáõñù© »õ ³ÛÉ Çñ³ñáõ« áñ Ù³ñ¹ ÙdzÛÝ ÏñÝ³Û çÕ³- سõûÝ åÇïÇ å³ï³ë˳ݿª ¦Àëï»Õ Ï»ñå åÇïÇ ãÁÉÉ³Û µÝ³õ ϳñÍ»ë ³Ûë ·³ñÇÉ ëï»ÕÍáõ³Í å³ïÏ»ñÁ Çñ »Ù å³å« ÆëóÙåáõÉÁ íÁñÏ»³ÉÁÙ »ñÏáõ ¿áõÃÇõÝÝ»ñáõÝ Û³ñ³µ»ñáõ- ÙïùÇÝ Ù¿ç ï»Õ³õáñ»É ÷áñÓ»Éáõ ÁÙ« ÑÇÙÇ ÏÇ ·»³Ù§« ³å³ ³Ù¿Ý ³Ý- ÃÇõÝÁ ³Ûë Ï»³ÝùÇÝ Ù¿ç« ³ÛÝù³Ý ³é³çÇÝ í³ÛñÏ»³Ý¿Ý ÇëÏ©©© ·³Ù ùÇã ÙÁ ³õ»ÉÇ åÇïÇ µ³½Ù³- ³ï»Ý áñ ¹áõÝ ãÏ³ë ³é³Ýó Çñ»Ý© Ð³Û »õ Ãáõñù Çñ³ñáõ ÷³Ï³±Í© å³ïÏ¿ Çñ µ³½ÏÇÝ áõÅÁ« áñå¿ë½Ç ãϳ¯ë© ³é³Ýó ÃáõñùÇ Ñ³Û ãϳ۩ ãÿÁÉ- ѳÛáõÝ »ïÇÝ Ãá±õñù ³Ýå³Ûٳݩ ³õ»ÉÇ ×ß·ñÇï ѳñáõ³Í ѳëóÝ¿ Çñ ɳ°ñ© ÇÝã忱ë ÁÉɳ۫ »ñµ ¹áõÝ å³Û- ǯÝã ³Ýѻûà Çñ³Ï³ÝáõÃÇõÝ©©© ÃÇñ³ËÇÝ »õ ³õ»ÉÇ Ù»Í ÃÇõáí Ãáõñù ٳݳõáñáõ³Í »ë Ç°ñ ·áÛáõû³Ùµ© Çñ ´³Ûó »õ ³ÛÝå¿ë« ÁݹáõÝÇÝù ϳ٠½ÇÝáõáñÝ»ñ ëå³ÝÝ¿« Û»ïáÛ í³½»Éáí Ññ¿ßáõû³°Ùµ© å³ïÙ³Ï³Ý Ã¿ Ýá- á㪠ãáñ ïñ³Ù³µ³Ýáõû³Ý µáÉáñ ·³Û »õ Çñ ѳõ³ù³Í Ï¿ï»ñÁ Çñ ÑûñÁ ñûñ»³Û Çñ ³Õ¿ï³ÉÇ° ·áÛáõû³Ùµ£ ïáõ»³ÉÝ»ñÁ« ·Çï³Ï³Ý µáÉáñ ѳß- ͳÝáõó¿« Çñ Ýáñ Ùñó³ÝÇßÁ Ñå³ñ- ºõ ³Ûëûñª á°ã ÙdzÛÝ ë÷Çõéù³Ñ³Û áõ³ñÏÝ»ñÁ ·ÉáÕ-³ÝóÝáÕ Çñ³Ï³Ýáõ- ïáõû³Ùµ ïÝ»óÇÝ»ñáõÝ Ñ³Õáñ¹¿©©© »ñÏñáñ¹-»ññáñ¹ ë»ñáõݹݻñáõÝ Ñ³- ÃÇõÝ ÙÁÝ ¿ ³Ûë« áñáíÑ»ï»õ áõñÇß Åá- гÛñÁª µ³ñÓñ ÏñÃáõû³Ý ï¿ñ« Ù³ñ« áñáíÑ»ï»õ ³Ûëûñ ÝáÛÝ ³Û¹ Õáíáõñ¹Ý»ñáõ ѳٳñ ²åñÇÉÁ ëáëÏ µ³Ý³ëï»ÕÍ »õ ݳËÏÇÝ ³½³ï³- ÃáõñùÁ Ï»ó³Í ¿ ݳ»õ ²ñó³ËÇ µÝ³- ³ÙÇë ¿« áñ µÝáõû³Ý ·áõݳ·»Õáõ- Ù³ñïÇÏ ¿« áñ ·Çï³Ïóûñ¿Ý Çñ ½³- ÏÇãÇÝ áõÕÇÕ »ïÇÝ© ³ÛÝ Ó»õáí áñ Ï»- ÃÇõÝ å³ñ·»õáÕ ·³ñáõÝ ÏÁ ËáñÑñ- õ³ÏÁ ÏÁ ½ÇÝ¿ ÃáõñùÇÝ ¹¿Ù« ûñ³Ï³Ý ó³Í ¿ñ Ù»ñ ݳ˳ѳÛñ»ñáõÝ ¹ÇÙ³ó« ¹³Ýß¿« ÏÁ Ý߳ݳϿ ÷ÃÃÇÉ« Ï»³Ý- ¹ñáõû³Ùµ ÝáÛÝ Ë³ÕÁ ˳ճÉáí Ñ»- ³éç»õ ϳ٠»ï»õ© ×Ç°ß¹ ÝáÛÝå¿ë© ²ñ- ùáí É»óáõÇÉ« ßáõÝã áõ ß³ñÅáõÙ ëï»Õ- ïÁ« áñáíÑ»ï»õ ³Ý Çñ ÏéݳÏÇÝ Ãáõñ- ó³ËÇ µ³ñÓñ³µ»ñÓ É»éÝ»ñáõÝ íñ³Û Í»É ãáñë¹ÇÝ« ÙÇÝã¹»é ѳÛáõÝ Ñ³Ù³ñ ùÁ ÏÁ ½·³Û ³Ù¿Ý í³ÛñÏ»³Ý©©© ¿ ³Ý« ÏÇñ×»ñáõÝ Ù¿ç« û¹ÇÝ Ù¿ç »õ çáõ- ²åñÇÉÁ ÝáÛÝ ÇÙ³ëïÁ ãáõÝǪ ²ñ»õ»É- ñ»ñáõÝ Áݹ»ñùÇÝ£ Âáõñù ÙÁ Ï³Û Ý³- »³Ý« ÿ ²ñ»õÙï»³Ý ÏáÕÙÝ ³ß˳ñ- *** »õ äáÉÇë »õ ϳ٠³Ýáñ ßñç³Ï³ÛùÁ ÑÇ£ àñáíÑ»ï»õ ²åñÇÉÁ Çõñ³ù³Ý- ³åñáÕ Çõñ³ù³ÝãÇõñ ѳÛáõ »ïÇÝ© ãÇõñ ѳÛáõ ѳٳñ Ù¿ÏáõÏ¿ë ÙÇÉÇáÝ Ð³ñóáõÙÁ Ïáõ ·³Û ÇÝùÝ»Ï ÙÕáõ- ûñ»õë ·Çï³ÏÇó Ãáõñù ÙÁ« ûñ»õë Ñ³Û Ý³Ñ³ï³ÏÝ»ñáõ ³Ý·»ñ»½Ù³Ý Ùáí« Ã¿»õ ù»½Ù¿ »ñµ»ù ³É ã¿ Ñ»- ëñï³ÏÇó Ãáõñù ÙÁ« µ³Ûó ³Ýå³Û- ³×ÇõÝÝ»ñÝ »Ý« ÎáÙÇï³ë áõ ì³ñáõ- é³ó³Í© ÑáÝ ¿ ÙÇßï« ï³ñáõ³Ý µá- Ù³°Ý Ãáõñù ÙÁ« áñ ÑáÝ ¿« ѳÛáõÝ Å³Ý ¿« êáÕáÙáÝ Â»ÑÉÇñ»³Ý áõ ÌÇ- Éáñ ûñ»ñáõÝ« ³ÛÝù³Ý ³ï»Ý áñ Ñ³Û »ïÇÝ Ï³Ý·Ý³Í©©© Í»éݳϳµ»ñ¹ ¿« ØáÝûå»ÉÉáÛÇ Ûáõ- ÏÁ ½·³ë »õ ¦Ñ³°Û »Ù§ ÏÿÁë»ë ¹áõÝ ´³Ûó ÑáÝ ¿ ٳݳõ³°Ý¹ Çñ å»ïáõ- ß³ñÓ³ÝÝ áõ ²ñ³ùë ·»ï Ññáõ³Í ù»½Ç ÿ áõñÇßÝ»ñáõÝ Ï³Ù ßñç³å³- û³Ý Ùï³ÍáÕáõÃÇõÝÁ Çõñ³óáõó³Í ܳËÇç»õ³ÝÇ ç³ñ¹áõ÷ßáõñ ˳ãù³- ïǹ ûï³ñÝ»ñáõÝ« áñáÝó ¹ÇÙ³ó ÇÝù- ÃáõñùÁ© ³Ý« áñ Çñ Ñá·ÇÇÝ Ù¿ç ãÇ ·Ç- ñ»ñÝ »Ý« ¾ÏáÛ»³ÝÇ ¦²ñ³ñ³ï§Ý áõ ½ÇÝù¹ ͳÝáõó»Éáõ« ³½·áõÃÇõݹ ï»ñ ³ñ¹³ñáõÃÇõÝ Ïßé»É« ³Ý áñ ϳ- ü³ÃÑÇÛ¿ â»ÃÇÝÇ ¦Ø»ÍÙ³ÛñÇÏë§ Ý»ñϳ۳óÝ»Éáõ ³Ù¿Ý¿Ý ³½¹áõ ÙÇ- Ù³Û Ã¿ ³Ï³Ù³Û Çñ ³ñÇõݳñµáõ ݳ- ·ÇñùÝ ¿« Çñ»Ýó ÇÝùÝáõÃÇõÝÁ óùó- çáóÁ ϳñÍ»ë ó»Õ³ëå³Ýáõ³Í ÅáÕá- ˳ѳÛñ»ñáõÝ ×³Ùµ¿Ý ÏÁ ù³É¿« ³Ý« ÝáÕ ¦äǽÇÙùÇÉ»ñ§Ý áõ ¦´áÉáñë

вÚðºÜÆø—22 Ðñ³Ý¹ îÇÝù »Ýù§ Û³Ûï³ñ³ñáÕ ëïáõ»ñÁ« áñ Ï³Ý·Ý»É ¿ Ù»ñ ÃÇÏáõÝ- Ý»Ýù Ù»ñ »ñÏÇñÁ« Áëï»ÕÇó ¿É ·Ý³- µ³½Ù³Ñ³½³ñ ³ÙµáËÝ »Ý« ºé³·áÛÝ ùÇÝ -« ÏÿÁë¿ ¦¸¿åÇ ²ñ³ñ³ï§ ·áñ- Éáõ »Ýù Âáõñùdz« í»ñóÝ»Éáõ »Ýù ¹ñûßÇÝ Ï³ñÙÇñÝ áõ ºé³µÉáõñÇ Ã¿ ÍÇÝ Ñ»ÕÇÝ³Ï È»éÝÇÏ Ú³Ïáµ»³Ý« áñ ݳ»õ ²ñ»õÙï³Ñ³Û³ëï³ÝÁ« áñÇÝ ²ñó³ËÇ Çõñ³ù³ÝãÇõñ ·ÇõÕÇ ·»- 2006-ÇÝ Ññ³ï³ñ³Ïáõ³Í ³Ûë ³ñÓ³Ï Ñ³ëÝ»Éáõ ÙÇ³Ï ×³Ý³å³ñÑÁ ²ñ- ñ»½Ù³ÝáóÝ»ñáõÝ Ñ³Ù³ï³ñ³Í ·áñÍáí å³ïáõÙÁ ÏÿÁÝ¿ Çñ ³ÝÓݳ- ó³ËÝ ¿« áñï»ÕÇó »õ ѳëÝ»Éáõ »Ýù Ééáõû³Ý Ù¿ç ÙÇÝã»õ ûñë ³Õ³Õ³- Ï³Ý Ï»³ÝùÇݪ Ù³ÝÏáõÃÇõÝ« »ñÇï³- Ù»ñ سëÇëÝ»ñÇÝ« Ù»ñ ØáõßÇÝ« Ù»ñ ÏáÕ ù³ç»ñáõ ѳ½³ñ³õáñ ßÇñÇÙ- ë³ñ¹áõÃÇõÝ« áõë³ÝáÕ³Ï³Ý ï³ñÇ- ì³ÝÇÝ« Ù»½Ù¿ ³Ý³ñ¹³ñûñ¿Ý í»ñó- Ý»ñÝ »Ý« áñáÝóÙ¿ Çõñ³ù³ÝãÇõñÇÝ Ý»ñÝ áõ ²ñó³Ë»³Ý ä³Ñ³Ýç³ïÇñáõ- áõ³Í ÑáÕ»ñÇÝ -« Ùï»ñÙÇÏ ß»ßïáí ÙÁ »ïÇÝ Ãáõñù ÙÁ Ï»ó³Í ¿ ³Ýå³Û- û³Ý Çñ Ù³ëݳÏóáõÃÇõÝÁ Û³ÝÓÝ»- Ïÿ³õ»ÉóÝ¿ ·ñáÕÁ »õ ųٳݳϳÏÇó ٳݩ©© Éáí ÃáõÕÃÇÝ£ ¶áñÍÁ ³õ³ñï³Í 㿠ѳÛáõ µáÉáñ ﳷݳåÝ»ñÁ Ëï³óáõ- ë³Ï³ÛÝ© ³é³çÇÝ Ù³ëÝ ¿ Ññ³ï³- ó³Íª ÇÝÍÇ Ïÿ»ñϳñ¿ ¦¸¿åÇ ²ñ³- *** ñ³Ïáõ³ÍÁ« ӻ鳷Çñ íÇ׳ÏÇ Ù¿ç ¿ ñ³ï§Áª Áë»Éáí© ³Ýáñ ß³ñáõݳÏáõÃÇõÝÁ£ ¦¸¿åÇ - ¿Ïáõ½»õ ³ß˳ñÑÁ áõÝÇ Çñ ²Ûëáõѳݹ»ñÓ« ÷áùñÇÏ Ø³Ýáõ¿- ²ñ³ñ³ï§Á ݳ»õ ²ñ»õÙï³Ñ³Û³ë- ×ßÙ³ñïáõÃÇõÝÁ« µ³Ûó ë³ ¿É Ç°Ù ÉÇݪ سõáÛÇÝ Ñ³ÛñÁ ãÿ»ñÏÙïÇñ Çñ ï³ÝÇ ¹³ïÝ ¿« áñ ÉáÛëÇÝ ÏÁ µ»ñ¿« »õ ×ßÙ³ñïáõÃÇõÝÝ ¿« ÇÙ ½ÇݳÏÇó ÁÝ- ½³õ³ÏÁ ÃáõñùÇÝ ¹¿Ù ѳݻÉáõ« áñ- µ³Ý³ëï»ÕÍÁ ²ñó³ËÁ ÏÁ ÝÏ³ï¿ ÙÇ- Ï»ñÝ»ñÇ« ÇÙ ½áÑáõ³Í ѳٳ·ÇõÕ³- å¿ë½Ç ³Ý å³ïñ³ëï ÁÉÉ³Û ¹Ç- ³Ï ׳ٵ³Ýª ²ñ»õÙï³Ñ³Û³ëï³ÝÇ óÇÝ»ñÇ áõ µáÉáñ ÑÇÝ áõ Ýáñ ݳѳ- Ù³·ñ³õ»Éáõ Çñ ³å³·³Ý« »Ã¿ ³½³ï³·ñáõû³Ý© ï³ÏÝ»ñÇÝÁ© ·ÝáõÙ »Ýù ¹¿åÇ ²ñ³- ÃáõñùÇÝ ¹¿Ù ÏéáõÇÉÁ ³ñó³ËóÇ- - ²ñó³ËÁ å³Ñ»Éáõ ѳٳñ Ù»ñ ñ³ï« ÇëÏ ²ñ³ñ³ï ÏÁ ѳëÝ»Ýù Ù»ñ ÇÝ Ñ³Ù³ñ ³åñ»Éáõ ÙÇ³Ï ÙÇçáóÁ »ñ»Ë³Ý»ñÇÝ å¿ïù ¿ ëáíáñ»óÝ»Ýù ³½·Ç ÙdzëÝ³Ï³Ý á·áõ ½ûñáõû³Ùµ åÇïÇ ÁÉɳ۩ ûñ ³õáõñ Ïéáõ»É ÃáõñùÇ ¹¿Ù© áõñÇß ÙdzÛÝ« ¿ëï»ÕÇó« ²ñó³ËÇó ù³ÛÉ»- - ÆÙ ë»ñáõݹÁ ³½³ï³·ñ»ó ²ñ- »Éù ãϳ۫ ÿÏáõ½ »õ ³ß˳ñÑÁ Ù»½ Éáí ¹¿åÇ ²ñ»õÙï³Ñ³Û³ëï³Ý« ÇÙ ó³ËÁ« ÃáÕ ÇÙ ïÕ¿Ý ¿É å³ïñ³ëï ¹³ï³å³ñï¿ ÃáõñùÇ ÑáÕ ·ñ³õ»Éáõ »ñ¿Ëáõ ³ÛÝ å³ñ½ ïñ³Ù³µ³Ýáõ- ÉÇÝÇ í»ñϳɻÉáõ ÆëóÙåáõÉÁ© »ë Ù»Õùáí© á±õÙ ³ å¿ïù ³ß˳ñÑÝ áõ û³Ùµ« ÿª ¦·Çݳ٠ÆëóÙåáõÉÁ áõñÇß ×³Ý³å³ñÑ ã»Ù ï»ëÝáõÙ Ù»½- Çñ ÙÇïù»ñÁ© Ù»°Ýù »Ýù ³åñáõÙ ¿ë í»ñÏ»³ÉÁÙ å³å ç³Ý« Û»ïáÛ ÏÇ ÝÇó Ñ»é³óÝ»Éáõ ѳٳñ ÃáõñùÇ ÑáÕÇ íñ³Û« Ù»°Ýù ¿É åÇïÇ å³ßïå³- ·»³Ù§©©©

вÚðºÜÆø—23