Armenia Irredenta: Claims and Counterclaims
Posted on February. 7. 2020
“Every man has a map in his heart
of his own country and that the heart
will never allow you to forget this map.”
Alexander McCall Smith
by Z. S. Andrew Demirdjian, Ph.D.
Since ancient times, humankind has been embroiled in territorial conflict. Essentially, land has been the main source of life on Earth. Therefore, here is hardly any nation that does not currently have a territorial claim against another country, and vice versa.
Those present-day states that at one time or another had an empire face a
lion’s share of territorial disputes including minority claims for freedom and independence. Turkey is a great example because of its Ottoman Empire rule over many nations for 600 plus years. Another example is Azerbaijan. Since it attained statehood for the first time in 1918 in an area historically belonging to many indigenous people, minority strive for freedom and self-determination is always on the verge of explosion.
On December 12, 2019, when the U.S. Senate unanimously recognized the Armenian Genocide, it sparked hope in the minds and hearts of many Diaspora Armenians who have been living in psychological exile of their ancestral lands. The United States of America, supposedly being the most powerful nation in the world, being the so-called champion of democracy, has finally liberated itself from Turkey’s gag rule to side with the truth and justice that the Ottoman Empire massacres constitutes a bona fide genocide, an act of inhumanity against humanity. The action was taken to spite Turkey for attacking the Kurds in Syria in 2019 and not out of love for Armenians.
If the official ruling of the major countries is genocide, then it has grave implications for the perpetrator nation, the present-day Turkey. As a result, Armenia is rightfully irredenta without waiting for Israel or United Kingdom to accept the Armenian Genocide. Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland have already recognized the Armenian Genocide, except for the United Kingdom. The English government has more Jewish politicians of Turkish origin (i.e., Khazars) than the United States has them in the House of Representatives and the Senate combined. England’s PM Boris Johnson’s family is from the Ottoman Turkey. Armenia does not have to wait for Israel or for the United Kingdom to recognize the Genocide before claiming officially the Armenian lands from Turkey. Armenia now is irredenta, in a high state of motivation to claim its lost lands and we should all ride on the momentum.
To avoid any confusion, let us clarify Armenia irredenta: “Irredenta” comes
from Italian, meaning Armenia is “unredeemed, unrecovered” and claims its occupied lands from foreign rule, such as annexing Nakhichevan.
In this article, the purpose is to delineate the claims of Armenia against its
neighboring countries and the counterclaims of those neighbors against Armenia.
Furthermore, what psychological compliance approaches to use in demanding the occupied Armenian lands? Each and every Armenian should know his or her rightful claim to lost lands. Otherwise, we would be shooting in the dark and creating confusion as it happened at the Paris Peace Conference table in 1919 between the Armenian delegation representatives Avetis Aharanion ( who claimed Western Armenia)
and Boghos Nubar (who claimed “The Integral, United Armenia” which
included the Armenian Kingdom of Cilicia to be granted by the victorious Allied nations of WW I. Aharonian was the head of the Armenian delegation at the Paris Peace Conference with Boghos Nubar when he signed the Treaty of Sevres formulating the “Wilsonian Armenia” in direct collaboration with the Armenian Diaspora.
As for Boghos Nubar, he was the head of the Armenian National Delegation
(which was formed under the presidency of Boghos Nubar), declared the independence of Integral, United Armenia comprising of all of the historical lands of the Armenian people (AKA Armenia from Sea to Sea). In the beginning of the peace talks both of these Armenian representatives were at variance in terms of their demands.
As a result, the other peace participants were frustrated and even had left
the peace table never to come back. Armenia has always needed unity, unity, and nothing –but unity most of all.
Hopefully, this article will serve as a forum to discuss and to determine as to what we Armenians should demand in unison through the same psychological compliance technique, and in united front for providing the information to our new millennial generation.
Of all the places, the old world is beset with innumerable territorial conflicts.
Comparatively, the boundary lines are better drawn of the countries in the New World. Western Asia seems to be stricken with current and frozen conflicts. The Caucasus region is a hot, acute place when it comes to irredentism on account of Soviet Union’s mess of creating new boundaries and new artificial states, such as Azerbaijan was established as a new country for the first time in 1918.
The present-day Republic of Armenia is a small landlocked, parliamentary
democratic republic. It is a minute fraction of what it used to be close to the size of Texas in the United States. It is surrounded by four countries, such as Georgia in the north, Iran in the south, Azerbaijan in the East, and Turkey in the west. Armenia presently maintains very positive relations with every country in the four hemispheres of the world, with the exception of Turkey and Azerbaijan. Both of these countries are responsible for genocides, massacres, and pogroms of the Armenian
people and the usurpation of their ancestral lands. The following listing shows Armenia’s territorial claims and the claims against it:
Armenia’s Claims against Azerbaijan: 1. Utik province 2. Shahumyan district 3. Martakert dist. 4. Martuni dist. 5. Nakhitechvan
Azerbaijan’s Counterclaim: 1. Nagorno Karabakh (Artsakh) 2. Present-day Republic of Armenia Armenia’s claim against Turkey – Minima: 1. Kars, Ardahan 2. Wilsonian Armenia (four provinces) -Armenia Maxima: 1. Greater Armenia (sixteen provinces) 2. Armenian Kingdom of Cilicia 3. Integral, United Armenian State (Combination of Greater Armenia
and Cilicia) Turkey’s counterclaim: None (for the time being) Armenia’s claim against Georgia -Minima: Javakh-Maxima: 1. Javakh 2. Nothern
Lori 3. Borchaly district Georgia’s counterclaim: Lori province Armenia’s claim against Iran: 1. Urmiyah province 2. Urmiyah Lake (West. part)
Iran’s counterclaim: None (for the time being)
Armenia cannot become an island surrounded by belligerent neighbors. It must have access to the sea. Therefore, for the time being, Armenia should not declare any claim of lost lands both from Georgia and Iran. However, Armenia should actively try to annex lands stolen by Turkey and Azerbaijan — both are sworn enemies of the Armenian nation. Therefore, let us have a brief discussion of the territorial conflicts between Armenia and its current hostile neighbors, namely Azerbaijan and Turkey.
Azerbaijan — In the 2014s, Azerbaijan’s official irredentism consisted of Lake Sevan and Khanate Erevan. Only the land above Gyumeri was left for Armenia.
Then, in a speech, Ilham Aliyev also referred to the Zangezur region in the Armenian Syunik province (Turkey’s dream bridge to Central Asia). Aliyev also emphasized the region around Lake Sevan (called by Azerbaijanis as the Goyce region) as “our historical lands.” “Azerbaijanis’ return to those territories,” he added, “is our political and strategic goal, and we need to work step-by-step to get closer to it.”
During his official meeting in Gyanja on January 21, 2018, President Ilham
Aliyev claimed: “The present-day Armenia is actually located on historical lands of Azerbaijan. Therefore, we will return to all our historical lands in the future. This should be known to young people and children. We must live, we live, and we will continue to live with this idea.”
It is worth noting that Azerbaijan’s territorial claims against Armenia were initially “minima” (the region around Lake Sevan, the region around Yerevan, and Zangezur). Then, in 2018, it became “maxima” when the “Whole Azerbaijan” concept was adopted as the political and historical union of territories currently and historically inhabited by Azerbaijanis or historically controlled by them. Therefore, the so-called “Western Azerbaijan” (namely the Republic of Armenia) is an irredentist political concept that is used in Azerbaijan mostly to refer to Armenia. In no
uncertain terms, Azerbaijani officials claim that the territory of the modern Armenian republic was lands that once belonged to Azerbaijanis and, hence they should be returned to their rightful owners.
As for Turkey, Armenia’s claim goes back to over a hundred years. Armenians are divided into two groups. One group demands the President Woodrow Wilson’s delineation of territories for Armenia consisting of four provinces (Erzurum, Bitlis, Van, and Trabzon with an outlet to the Black Sea); while, a smaller group wants the restoration of Greater or Great Armenia and the Kingdom of Cilicia. Presently, Turkey is silent about any claims against Armenia, though.
Now that we know what are Armenia’s territorial claims and counterclaims against it, the next question is how effectively to go about asking for our lost lands.
This will take us to the psychology of compliance which has accumulated over 40 years of research evidence. Compliance is a type of social influence where an individual or a group does what someone else wants them to do, following his or her request, demands, or suggestion.
Research on the psychology of compliance has mainly focused on two approaches:
Foot-in-the-Door and Door-in-the-Face strategies.
Foot-in-the-Door(FITD) is a strategy used to persuade people to agree to a particular action, based on the idea that if a respondent will comply with an small initial request then they will be more likely to agree to a later, more significant, request which they would not have agreed to had they been asked it outright.
While, Door-in-the-Face (DITF) is a strategy consisting of a two-step procedure for enhancing compliance in which an extreme initial request is presented before a more moderate target request is asked later. Rejection of the initial request makes people more likely to accept the target request than would have been the case if the latter had been presented on its own.
The psychology of demanding Armenian lands from Turkey is a complex issue.
Let us see what the research findings about the psychology of compliance are. Also, what compliance strategy to employ for demanding Armenian lands from Turkey?
These are important questions to consider. Since we are dealing with real estate to die for, DITF strategy would be more appropriate than FITD strategy. Therefore, let us evaluate the DITF strategy.
There are a number of well- known studies that have explored issues related to compliance, conformity, and obedience. A random-effects meta analysis (i.e., analyses of most studies done on the subject of compliance) was undertaken to examine the effectiveness of the DITF persuasive message strategy on compliance. Results indicate that an overall significant effect of the DITF strategy on verbal compliance, but not so significant effect for behavioral compliance. Compared to the control group, DITF has shown very significant results in terms of effectiveness in persuading a party to compromise in agreeing to grant a request or a demand. Refusing a
large request (e.g., Wilsonian Armenia) increases the likelihood of agreeing to a second, smaller request (e.g., Kars, Ardahan and an outlet to the Black Sea).
What should be our target? It is up to our new generation to decide. However, as a Diaspora member, I would suggest we go for between the minima and maxima claims and shoot for the Wilsonian Armenia.
Armenians have to decide on what they want from Turkey and work toward it diligently with the hope and prayer for the possible dream. Alternatively, claim Great Armenia, and then compromise on the Wilsonian Armenia. This approach would be consistent with the effectiveness of DITF strategy.
Throughout history, territorial boundaries have either expanded or contracted due to geopolitical shifts, wars, and pestilence. Most boundaries have proven to be fluid in the minds of many minorities. Wars play havoc with the boundary lines of old and new states. Consequently, it would be wise to be ready to manage the annexation of a lost land when the opportunity presents itself–and it will, sooner or later. Geopolitical shifts due to war would give Armenia the chance to recover some of its ancestral lands dating back to millennia.
To some politicians, irredentism is equated to opportunism. For most Armenian Diaspora members who would like to look homeward, it is the recovery of a homeland, to put an end to the feeling of living in some sort of exile existence. Even according to ancient Greek philosophers, no one would be happy living away from his or her homeland. Diaspora Armenians’ territorial claims can be justified on the basis of national notions of historic territorial, religious, and ethnic affiliations.
Unlike Azerbaijan’s dictatorial president that uses irredentism as a device for its government to redirect his citizens’ discontent against outsiders (i.e., Armenia), for the Diaspora Armenians political and popular movement is to seek to claim or reclaim and occupy a land that the movement’s members consider to be a “lost” homeland territory from their nation’s past.
The Greek word for “return” is Nostos and Algos means “suffering.” Therefore, nostalgia is the suffering caused by an unfulfilled yearning to return to once ancestral lands. For Armenians “Groong” (a sad song about a White Stork bringing news from home to the exiled Armenians) represents nostalgia. Whenever Groong was sang in our family, sometimes tears would roll down my father’s face. Geographically, he was many miles away from his family house in the Turkish-occupied Armenia, but emotionally he had never been separated from his homeland.
Nostalgia is infectious. Despite almost all of the Armenian Genocide survivors are gone now, but their deep feelings of nostalgia have been transmitted to their new generations. The need, the nostalgia, the dream of the Armenian Highlands is uncannily alive in the mind and heart of each and every Diaspora Armenian around the world. Even though the descendents of the Armenian Genocide survivors are born in foreign lands, they have inherited the patriotism, the love of country, from the social genes of their fathers and mothers. As Oliver Wendell Holmes once said:
“Where we love is home, home that our feet may leave, but not our hearts.” Most of the Diaspora Armenians live prosperously and happily in various lands around the world, but their hearts always yearn for the Armenian Highlands. Our millennial generation will not wait for history to happen, they will make history. With unity and uninterrupted dreams, one day they will rejoin the revered Mount Ararat again as the quintessential spiritual center of the Armenian nation.