With support from the University of Richmond

History News Network puts current events into historical perspective. Subscribe to our newsletter for new perspectives on the ways history continues to resonate in the present. Explore our archive of thousands of original op-eds and curated stories from around the web. Join us to learn more about the past, now.

Christopher Sisserian: A Conflicted Moment for the Armenian Consciousness

Christopher Sisserian is a freelance journalist living in London, and currently a graduate student of International Politics at the School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS).
 

The recent passing of the French bill criminalising denial of the Armenian genocide has been the cause of much celebration for Armenians in France and across the world.  Though celebrated by many as a step towards recognition and justice for a crime committed nearly 100 years ago it is difficult to see how the law presents anything other than another obstacle to the process of reconciliation between Armenians and Turks. Though the formal process of reconciliation has definitely stalled in the past year, informal contacts between Armenians and Turks have continued to grow, maintaining the small possibility of improved neighbourly relations.

The assassinated Turkish-Armenian newspaper editor Hrant Dink, whose murder brought the importance of Turkish-Armenian relations to the forefront of global consciousness, was resolutely against the passing of any such law and even promised to travel to France and deny it himself if it were to ever be passed. That Dink is sadly no longer alive to stand up for the freedom of speech he campaigned for in his native Turkey is testament to the fact that relations urgently need to be improved.

However, rather than provide a step forward the new French law only serves to fuel the seemingly diametrically opposed nationalist identities that can trace their roots back to the events being legislated over. The media storm created by the bill adds to the discourse of presenting the issue as a simple binary, with Armenians claiming one thing and Turks maintaining another. However, it is not Armenians that claim genocide occurred but rather research from scholars of various nations, including Turks that have documented and analysed the history. Conversely it is not Turks that present the counterargument; rather it is the Turkish state that denies the genocide through its official state policy. Many Turks are aware of what happened towards the end of the Ottoman Empire, particularly amongst intellectual circles and those living in the south east of Turkey where the tragedy of what happened in 1915 is maintained in oral histories. Consequently those Armenians and Turks managing to find common ground and come to terms with their shared history are constantly growing...

Read entire article at openDemocracy (UK)