Pashinyan is sacrificing historical memory for the illusion of peace
Armenia is undergoing an alarming shift: an unprecedented move to dilute, sideline and even erase the Armenian Genocide from the core of the nation’s political, historical and cultural discourse. This is not a mere tactical repositioning—it is a dangerous gamble that undermines the moral and historical foundation of the Armenian nation, emboldens Turkey and Azerbaijan, and alienates the Armenian Diaspora.
Nowhere is this misguided trend more evident than in a shocking statement by Alen Simonyan, the Speaker of Armenia’s National Assembly, who brazenly declared that the Armenian Genocide is not a priority for the current government and accused the opposition of being preoccupied with mourning—because, in his words, “you can construct your existence off of mourning.” He went so far as to suggest that without mourning, the opposition has no political identity.
Such words are not naive; they represent a gross betrayal of the collective memory of the 1.5 million Armenians whom the Ottoman Empire systematically exterminated between 1915 and 1923. They reveal a willful ignorance of historical trauma, and worse, a willingness to commodify that trauma in exchange for empty promises of peace from an unrepentant adversary, hell bent on erasing any Armenian presence from the world map.
This year, in a deeply disheartening development, President Donald Trump failed to use the term “genocide” in his April 24 address, even though the United States formally recognized the Armenian Genocide just a few years prior. His omission was widely viewed as a nod to Turkish pressure—a notion confirmed when Turkish officials celebrated it as a diplomatic victory. The Armenian National Committee of America (ANCA) led the Armenian-American community’s vehement opposition to this politically motivated erasure, emphasizing that acknowledgment and atonement must be based on historical truth—not the whims of geopolitical interests.
Adding insult to injury, the European Union’s Mission to Armenia also faltered. Initially posting a message that cited the “victims of the Armenian Genocide,” the EU Mission subsequently deleted and replaced it with a watered-down reference to “the Armenian victims of 1915–1923.” Turkish and Azerbaijani media immediately seized upon this as another victory, touting it as evidence that the international community is bending to Turkish revisionist narratives. While the EU claimed the change was bureaucratic or procedural, the real possibility cannot be ignored: that the Pashinyan administration itself may have promoted, influenced or failed to resist these instances of backpedaling, in the futile hope of appeasing Ankara and Baku.
Whether intentional or negligent, these concessions reflect a dangerous misunderstanding of the nature of Turkish and Azerbaijani demands. The notion that historical appeasement will lead to peace is naive and ahistorical. A bully emboldened by concessions does not stop; he demands more. The goalposts shift continuously. Today, it is softening genocide recognition; tomorrow, it will be territorial concessions, compromises on sovereignty or cultural erasure. For Turkey and Azerbaijan, every Armenian retreat signals weakness, not goodwill, and invites further aggression.
History offers ample evidence. For over a century, Turkey has aggressively denied the Armenian Genocide, silenced internal dissent and punished any acknowledgment of historical fact. This failure to confront the truth has fueled a broader culture of impunity, enabling subsequent aggression against Kurds, Cypriots, Greeks, and now, the Armenians of Artsakh.
Meanwhile, Azerbaijan’s ethnic cleansing of Artsakh Armenians in 2023 unfolded with chilling echoes of 1915—aggression enabled, not prevented, by Armenia’s conciliatory stance. Rather than recognizing these realities, the Pashinyan government has chosen the mirage of peace over the hard truths of justice and security. By marginalizing the Armenian Genocide in public discourse, it mistakenly believes that historical amnesia will pave the way for treaties and trade. Yet, this strategy betrays the moral high ground Armenia has rightfully held for over a century and weakens its standing in the international community.
It also severs the bond between Armenia and its Diaspora. For the millions of Armenians around the world—particularly in the United States, France, Argentina, Lebanon and Russia—the memory of the genocide is not merely historical but existential. It defines their families’ survival, identity and sense of justice. To suggest that this memory must be diluted for political convenience is to alienate those who have been Armenia’s most loyal defenders, advocates and benefactors for generations.
The ANCA’s rapid and forceful response to President Trump’s omission underscores the vital role of the Diaspora in holding the line on genocide recognition. Similarly, organizations across the Diaspora strongly condemned the EU Mission’s edited statement. These events remind us that, regardless of the capitulations in Yerevan’s corridors of power, the Armenian people—at home and abroad—remain committed to the truth.
In this context, Pashinyan’s pursuit of an imaginary peace appears detached from reality. True peace cannot be built on lies or silence. It must be built on acknowledgment, justice and mutual respect—values that Turkey and Azerbaijan are unwilling to embrace. Armenia’s future cannot be secured by sacrificing its past at the altar of diplomatic illusions.
Instead, Armenia must return to a position of moral clarity and historical fidelity. This means defending the memory of the Armenian Genocide with the same vigor as its territorial sovereignty. It means teaching future generations that justice delayed is not justice denied. It means understanding that memory is a shield against repetition, not a burden to be cast aside for short-term gain.
The Armenian nation has survived countless attempts at erasure precisely because it refused to forget—because it refused to surrender truth to expediency. In this critical moment, as new threats loom and old traumas are denied anew, Armenia must draw strength from that legacy, not discard it.
Ara Nazarian, PhD
Pashinyan’s efforts to appease our biggest threats, is going to erase our history completely from the whole world. Those of us in the diaspora will keep pleading to others to beg for their care, and our own gov turns its back. The writing is on the wall, we’re going to end up as small a community as the Assyrians.
Ara Nazarian PhD, since May 28, 1918 to this very day, the Republic of Armenia has maintained the same policy. It has not made the Armenian Genocide and the Armenian historical lands relevant to its foreign policy, including of coursethose who head the opposition in Armenia. Refute the statement I made. Yes, indeed, Armenian history and culture are seriously threatened but more so in the Diaspora than in Armenia and that is altogether a different matter.
Thank you for speaking the truth. Regarding diaspora-led advocacy, please check out what our collective is working on and help us spread its reach. @Aghmoogcollective on instagram.
We would really appreciate your support.
Those keeping high moral ground are fully detached from the realities on the ground for the nation state of Armenia. While diaspora may rejoice in multigenerational hatred of the Turks, this approach led precisely to the situation we have on hand, specifically, dislocation of Armenia from Karabakh. If it weren’t for the attempts for conquer parts of what had been Soviet Azerbaijan, the Armenians there could have stayed put, and the nation of Armenia would have been economically much better off had it not been for the war and blockades. Continued unrealistic pasturing would just lead to the extinction of the Armenian state.