The Betrayal of Truth: Nikol Pashinyan`s Disqualifying Remarks on the  Armenian Genocide - Vartan Oskanian

ArmInfo. Nikol Pashinyan's recent remarks questioning the veracity of the Armenian Genocide and its scale are not just shocking-they are outright disqualifying for someone tasked with leading Armenia, Armenia's ex-FM Vartan Oskanian wrote in a Facebook post. 

By insinuating that Armenians themselves might bear responsibility,  Pashinyan has aligned himself with one of the most harmful narratives  of genocide denial-the kind propagated by the Turkish state for over  a century. This betrayal of historical truth and national dignity is  an affront to the memory of 1.5 million Armenians systematically  exterminated by the Ottoman Empire.

The Armenian Genocide is one of the most thoroughly documented  atrocities of the 20th century. The evidence is incontrovertible:  official Ottoman documents explicitly outline plans to eliminate  Armenians; testimonies from survivors, foreign diplomats, and  missionaries detail the mass killings, forced marches, and  starvation; and population data irrefutably demonstrates the  near-erasure of Armenian communities in Anatolia. To question these  facts is not a matter of intellectual curiosity or debate-it is to  completely ignore a historical consensus upheld by scholars,  international organizations, many states, and the Armenian people  themselves.

For decades, Turkey has relied on a carefully constructed narrative  to deny the genocide, reframing it as mutual suffering during  wartime, dismissing evidence as propaganda, and lobbying aggressively  to suppress recognition. Pashinyan's statements eerily echo this  playbook, casting doubt on established history and sowing division  among Armenians at home and abroad. By suggesting that Armenians need  to investigate "why" the genocide occurred, he shifts blame from the  perpetrators to the victims-an insidious tactic often employed by  genocide denialists to justify the atrocities.

Such rhetoric is more than historical revisionism; it is a moral  abduction. As prime minister, Pashinyan is entrusted with defending  Armenia's sovereignty, its identity, and the legacy of its people.  His words, however, undermine that very responsibility. To publicly  downplay the genocide is to weaken Armenia's position in its ongoing  struggle for justice, embolden those who seek to erase the truth, and  fracture the unity of the Armenian nation. It is a betrayal that  cannot be excused or overlooked.

Leadership requires moral clarity, especially for a nation like  Armenia, whose modern identity is deeply intertwined with the  genocide and its aftermath. A leader who casts doubt on this defining  chapter of history cannot claim to represent the Armenian people.  Such behavior not only disqualifies Pashinyan from leading Armenia  but also raises serious questions about his motivations. Is this a  misguided attempt at diplomacy with Turkey? A cynical ploy to sow  divisions? Whatever the reasoning, it is unacceptable.

The Armenian Genocide is not just a historical event; it is a wound  that continues to shape Armenian identity and its place in the world.  It is a moral duty for any Armenian leader to honor that history and  advocate for recognition and justice. Pashinyan's statements betray  that duty, dishonor the victims, and risk undermining decades of  efforts to secure acknowledgment and accountability.

By embracing the language of denial, Nikol Pashinyan has  forfeited-yet again-his moral authority to lead Armenia. His words  are not just a personal failing-they are a dangerous affront to the  truth, the memory of the victims, and the integrity of the Armenian  nation. Armenia deserves a leader who will uphold the dignity and  history of its people, not one who calls it into question

The Prime Minister of Armenia, at a meeting with representatives of  the Armenian community in Switzerland, questioned the fact of the  Armenian Genocide in the Ottoman Empire. "We must understand what  happened and why it happened. And how we perceived it, through whom  we perceived it: how did it happen that in 1939 there was no agenda  for the Armenian Genocide, but in 1950 it appeared? How this  happened, we should understand or should not understand," the  Armenian Prime Minister noted.  Independent experts are inclined to  believe that he is apparently either unaware that the term Genocide  was introduced into circulation by genocide scholar Raphael Lemkin  only in 1944, or he is deliberately trying to create a narrative that  "this issue was artificially raised by the Soviet Union to put  pressure on Turkey."

Earlier, in October last year, Armenian Foreign Minister Ararat  Mirzoyan stated in parliament that the issue of promoting the agenda  of international recognition of the Armenian Genocide in the Ottoman  Empire is not the prerogative of the Armenian Foreign Ministry. He  then repeated the narratives promoted by Ankara for decades that this  issue should be dealt with by historians. In fact, with this  statement, Mirzoyan confirmed the concerns of experts previously  expressed that the current Armenian authorities will do anything to  normalize relations with Turkey, while trampling on their own  national interests, including in terms of international recognition  of the Armenian Genocide.

The Armenian Genocide in the Ottoman Empire was the first genocide in  the 20th century. Armenians remember the victims of the tragedy every  year on April 24. Turkey traditionally denies accusations of the mass  extermination of more than 1.5 million Armenians. The fact of the  Armenian Genocide is recognized by many states and a number of  authoritative international organizations. The first country to  recognize the Genocide in 1965 was Uruguay. This fact was then  recognized by Cyprus, Russia, Greece, Canada, Lebanon, Belgium,  France, Paraguay, Argentina, Sweden, Bolivia, Great Britain, Holland,  Slovakia, Germany, Lithuania, Venezuela, Poland, Chile, Switzerland,  Brazil, Luxembourg, Austria, the Vatican, the Czech Republic,  Denmark, Portugal, as well as the interim government of Libya, the  USA, Syria, the European Parliament, and the World Council of  Churches.