Analysis No : 2023 / 13
36 min read

This is the English translation of a Turkish language article that was originally published by AVİM on 9 May 2023. AVİM Scholar in Residence İrem Akın contributed to the translation of this article.


While the number of parliaments that had adopted resolutions on the Armenian allegations regarding the Events of 1915 was 20 in 2014,[1] it has reached 33 in 2023. However, by 2015, two separate international court judgments concerning the issue had been announced. One of the judgments was the European Court of Human Rights' (ECtHR) judgment on the Perinçek v. Switzerland case.[2] The case concerned whether a conviction for "genocide denial" violated the European Convention on Human Rights. The ECtHR's judgment[3] highlights important issues. Accordingly, it is pointed out that resolutions adopted in parliaments reflect the opinion of those present in that parliament session on that day and are not binding. It is stated in the judgement that the Events of 1915 are the subject of historical research and are open to debate and that no consensus can be reached. In summary, genocide is a legal term, and its definition is very precise, and the crime of genocide can only be determined by competent judicial bodies. The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) had previously agreed with such a judgement. In its judgement of 17 December 2003 (Appeal of 29 October 2004) concerning the "Krikorian and Others" case[4], CJEU stated that the resolution of the European Parliament recognizing the Armenian genocide allegations was a political document, not a legal one, and ruled that parliamentary resolutions cannot have legal consequences.

In its judgment, the Grand Chamber of the ECtHR defined genocide (p. 59) by referring to the International Court of Justice's (ICJ) judgment in the Bosnia and Herzegovina v. Serbia and Montenegro Case on 26 February 2007 and emphasized the specific intent of genocide. On 3 February 2015, ICJ delivered its second important judgment of 2015 in the Croatia v. Serbia Case, in which the specific intent to commit genocide also came to the forefront. Indeed, the Grand Chamber of the ECtHR also referred to the question of the specific intent (dolus specialis) (p. 61) in its judgment. While evaluating Croatia's genocide allegation, ICJ ruled that Serbia's transfer of groups of people to different locations did not constitute the crime of genocide, since genocidal intent could not be determined. As a matter of fact, the Events of 1915 are also related to the "Temporary Law of Relocation and Resettlement" and what happened during the implementation of the Armenian relocation and resettlement. The Court, which is authorized to determine the existence of the crime of genocide, emphasizes that the presented evidence must prove the existence of genocide "beyond any reasonable doubt" and, in addition, it seeks to establish the existence of "the intent to destroy a group in whole or in part" in order for a genocide verdict to be rendered. Therefore, beyond seeing the act itself (actus reus) within the convention definition, the Court seeks to prove beyond any reasonable doubt the existence of specific intent, that is, the intention to destroy the group in its entirety or parts of it.

In fact, any reasonable person or parliamentarian in the parliament of any country, especially on any day after the announcement of these two judgements, would have been expected to refrain from expressing an opinion on genocide, a legal concept with legal consequences. However, it is evident from the parliamentary resolutions of 2015 and thereafter that this was not the case. In terms of date ranges, it is important to note that there were 11 new and 10 renewed recognitions between 2000 and 2014 and 12 new and 10 renewed[5] recognitions between 2015 and 2023. Until 2000, the number of countries that passed resolutions recognizing the Armenian allegations in their parliaments regarding the Events of 1915 was 9. It should be noted that Armenian lobby groups were working to bring the resolutions to the parliaments of other countries, but these draft resolutions were either not debated at all or were rejected. The general attitude was that such an issue was a matter for judicial authorities and not for parliaments. On the other hand, there was also the intention not to damage relations with Türkiye. In this sense, the new recognitions are also noteworthy in the context of Türkiye's political relations. It is also noteworthy that, especially in the statements regarding the post-2000 recognitions, it was pointed out that the decision was not a hostile act against Türkiye and was intended to encourage Türkiye and Armenia to take new steps toward reconciliation. It is understood that this justification was used to convince those present in the parliaments that day. The fact that the resolutions refer to some non-existent documents[6] also shows that the resolutions were prepared in a careless and misleading manner. On the other hand, it is also observed that in recent recognition resolutions, reference is made to those who have already recognized the allegations. What is even more concerning and noticeable in such recognition resolutions is the expression that this has to do with belonging to Western civilization and the signalling of the Europeanization of the issue[7].


Parliaments That Have Recognized the Armenian Allegations:

Following the decision of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Armenia to commemorate the 50th anniversary of 1915 in 1962, the issue began to be introduced to the parliaments various countries, and in 1965, for the first time, the Uruguayan parliament passed a resolution on the issue. In this framework, in chronological order, let us look at the countries that have brought the Armenian allegations to their parliaments and recognized:

  1. Uruguay[8] (Armenian genocide allegations were recognized three times, in 1965, 2004, 2005)
  2. Greek Cypriot Administration of Southern Cyprus[9] (1975, 1982, 1990)
  3. Argentina[10] (5 times in 1993, 1998, 2003, 2004, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007 with 2 legislations and 3 proposals)
  4. Russia[11] (adopted in 1995, 2005, 2015)
  5. Canada[12] (brought up in 1996, 2000, and 2004 and adopted in all three)
  6. Greece[13] (1996)
  7. Lebanon[14] (1997, 2000)
  8. Belgium[15] (1998, 2015)
  9. France[16] (adopted with different content in 1998, 2000, 2001, 2006)
  10. Sweden[17] (2000, 2010)
  11. Italy[18] (2000)
  12. Vatican City[19] (together with Italy in 2000)
  13. Switzerland[20] (2003)
  14. Slovakia[21] (2004)
  15. Netherlands[22] (2004, 2015, 2018, 2021)
  16. Poland[23] (2005)
  17. Germany[24] (2005, 2016)
  18. Venezuela[25] (2005)
  19. Lithuania[26] (2005)
  20. Chile[27] (2007, 2015)
  21. Bolivia[28] (2014)
  22. Denmark (2015, 2017)
  23. Bulgaria[29] (2015, 2022, the word massacre was used in both resolutions)
  24. Austria[30] (2015)
  25. Luxembourg (2015)
  26. Paraguay (2015)
  27. Brazil[31] (2016)
  28. Czech Republic[32] (2017, 2020)
  29. USA[33] (2019)
  30. Portugal[34] (2019)
  31. Syria[35] (2020)
  32. Latvia[36] (2021)
  33. Mexico (2023)

In addition, in the United States of America, resolutions recognizing the Armenian allegations were passed in all 50 states, the latest one being in the state of Mississippi on 13 March 2022. Both a part of the United Kingdom, Wales recognized the allegations on 24 January 2006[37] while the Scottish Parliament recognized the allegations on 18 June 2013[38] (the United Kingdom itself uses the term massacre, not genocide). On 20 April 2007, the Parliament of Spanish Basque issued a resolution recognizing the genocide[39] and repeated the resolution in 2015.[40] The parliament of Catalonia, an autonomous region in Spain, recognized the Armenian allegations in a resolution approved in March 2010. However, Jose Montilla, the President of the Autonomous Administration of Catalonia, sent a letter apologizing to Türkiye on behalf of the Catalonian government. New South Wales, a state of Australia, recognized the genocide allegations in 1997 and South Australia recognized them in 2009.


The Organizations That Recognize the Armenian Allegations:

  1. World Council of Churches (1983, 2015)
  2. European Parliament (1987, 2000, 2002, 2005, 2005, 2015, 2022)[41]
  3. Council of Europe (1998, 2001)[42]
  4. Mercosur (the Southern Common Market comprising Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay, and Uruguay) (2007)[43]



On every 24 April, Türkiye’s national agenda becomes preoccupied with the Armenian allegations. Without a doubt, this is part of a strategy to attain results for the Armenian allegations. Turkish public opinion is also targeted in this respect. Although there are rallies organized in many parts of the world around the same time to "Stop the Armenian Genocide Lie and Commemorate our Martyred Diplomats"[44], they are not as prominent as the demonstrations organized by the Armenian lobby, and therefore it is assumed that the peoples of the world take to the streets with the belief that a genocide has been committed. Since the allegations are on the agenda with such intensity, the perception that "the whole world has accepted the genocide" is inevitably formed. There is even a belief that Türkiye has damaged its own reputation by not accepting the allegations when the whole world has accepted them. However, these are only parliamentary resolutions. They can be changed by a new resolution of the same parliament. Resolutions are not included in government programs and are not binding even for that state. Therefore, parliamentary resolutions are neither binding like court decisions nor do they reflect the impressions of the peoples of the world. In fact, many parliaments in many countries have voted to pass recognition bills into laws by small margins. In Sweden, for example, the vote in 2010 was 130 "No" votes and 131 "Yes" votes. On the other hand, in many votes, half of the total number of parliamentarians did attend the sessions where the genocide allegation recognitions were put to vote. Therefore, even the expression "countries where the Armenian allegations are accepted" would psychologically mean the exaggeration of the actual situation. Since the parliaments of some countries have adopted the same resolution several times with different contents, and since the issue is brought to parliaments as a bill almost every year in some countries that have not adopted such resolutions, the perception is created that there is a high degree of recognition. In truth, however, this perception does not reflect reality.

The issue should be viewed from three perspectives. The first is the impact on public opinion. This point was emphasized when it was stated that a perception was created as if all states have accepted the allegations. The second is that parliamentary resolutions do not mean anything from a legal point of view. The ECtHR, in its judgment in the case of Switzerland v. (Doğu) Perinçek case, on the one hand, stated that parliaments cannot assume the role of courts and historians, and on the other, hand emphasized that the Events of 1915 were not similar to the Holocaust (the Shoah). In terms of the former, the Court itself minimizes the meaning attached to the concept of "recognition" by stating that "although it has only been recognized by the parliaments of 20 countries" and by stating that parliamentary resolutions have no effect. In terms of the latter, the Court clearly states that the Armenian events are not genocide in law as a result of the comparison with the Holocaust. With the statement "It is as possible to say that it was not genocide just as it is possible to say that it was", the Court has ruled that the discussion of the issue at the historical level cannot be prevented by "denial laws". However, it also allows space to say that it did happen. The CJEU decision similarly points to the political nature of parliamentary resolutions and states that they do not have legal consequences.

The third area to focus on when analysing the issue is Türkiye's political relations. This is probably the area that should be given the most importance. It is clear that despite the legal documents and court decisions that should put an end to this trend, attempts to make progress through parliamentary decisions continue. This situation points to only one conclusion: The law itself, including historical facts, the search for the truth, and the mandatory provisions of international law, is being overtaken by political lobbying. Armenian lobby groups aim to compensate for their weakness in the field of law and history with political lobbying and religious propaganda. It is also possible to determine that the focus on creating perceptions against Türkiye and the effort to appear in harmony with others (the West), rather than trying to form a sense of conviction about the crime are the main factors in the failure of the initiatives. These are all controversial issues. Amidst all of these, the understanding of "you are either with us or against us" has emerged out of the global competition, and this understanding has come to encompass the Armenian allegations as well. This is an issue that will greatly increase the possible impact of the lobbying activities of the Armenian Diaspora.


[1] For an evaluation of 2014, see Gözde Kılıç Yaşın’s Turkish-language report titled, “Ermeni İddialarını Kabul Eden Ülkeler”, 21. Yüzyıl Türkiye Enstitüsü, 1 Mayıs 2014,  ; and for the republication, see:

[2] In the Second Section of the Grand Chamber judgment in December 2013, the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) found that Switzerland had convicted Perinçek in violation of the European Convention on Human Rights (Perinçek v. Switzerland - 27510/08,{%22fulltext%22:[%22Perin%C3%A7ek%22],%22itemid%22:[%22002-9265%22]}), and Switzerland was convicted of violating the ECtHR. When Switzerland appealed the case, the case was sent to the Grand Chamber, composed of 17 judges, which delivered its final judgment on 15 October 2015. Case of Perinçek v. Swıtzerland, (Application no. 27510/08), Judgment, Strasbourg, 15 October 2015, Perinçek v. Switzerland - 27510/08,{%22tabview%22:[%22document%22],%22itemid%22:[%22001-158235%22]}; For further review, see: Alaeddin Yalçınkaya, Perinçek-İsviçre Davası Kararı Sonrasında Ermeni Soykırım İddiaları Konusunda Siyasi, Hukuki ve Akademik Etkileşim, Ermeni Araştırmaları Dergisi, S. 52, 2015, p. 61-84.

[3] According to the decision, it is not possible to establish a similarity between the events that took place in Türkiye in 1915 and afterwards and the Holocaust, which was tried by international courts and found to constitute a crime by competent judicial bodies. Moreover, the existence of a "general consensus" on the characterization of the Armenian people as having been subjected to "genocide" is doubtful. In paragraph 117 of its judgment, the Chamber therefore drew a distinction between this case and cases concerning the denial of crimes related to the Holocaust. Accordingly, there is no prohibition of genocide “denial” in the absence of a judgment of a competent court.{%22tabview%22:[%22document%22],%22itemid%22:[%22001-163490%22]} . On the other hand, the ECtHR states that there is no consensus on this issue, as only twenty of the 193 countries in the world officially recognize the Armenian genocide.

[4] Gregoire Krikorian and his wife Suzanne Krikorian, French citizens of Armenian descent who objected to Türkiye's EU candidate status in 1999, had filed a petition against the European Parliament requesting the suspension of Türkiye's EU candidacy process and an injunction to require Türkiye to recognize the Armenian genocide. They claimed that they had been victimized by the acceptance of Türkiye's EU membership status. For the judgment of the CJEU, see: ORDER OF 17. 12. 2003 — CASE T-346/03,;jsessionid=9ea7d2dc30d68138bb6cdeb94ce3ab739c7f4e841fbd.e34KaxiLc3qMb40Rch0SaxuOb3f0?text=&docid=48869&pageIndex=0&doclang=EN&mode=lst&dir=&occ=first&part=1&cid=138905. The CJEU did not engage with the content of the Armenian genocide accusation, but pointed to the political nature of the European Parliament's resolution of 18 June 1987, emphasizing that it was a declaration that the parliament could amend at any time. For a review of the judgment, see: Alaeddin Yalçınkaya, Perinçek-İsviçre Davası Kararı Sonrasında Ermeni Soykırım İddiaları Konusunda Siyasi, Hukuki ve Akademik Etkileşim, Ermeni Araştırmaları Dergisi, S. 52, 2015, ss. 61-84

[5] Three recognitions belong to the Netherlands in 2015, 2018, and 2021.

[6] In the motions prepared, it is generally attempted to prove that the legitimacy for recognizing the genocide allegation has been established by listing the others who have accepted them. In most of the motions, it is stated that the UN Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities also recognized the claim. However, this claim is not true. The Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities did not accept the 1985 Whitaker Report. The Commission did not even discuss the report, it instead politely rejected it by stating that it had "noted" the report. However, in most of the resolutions submitted to the parliaments of the countries, the impression is created as if the report was discussed, voted on, and adopted, and even as if the report was stating that the Events of 1915 constituted genocide. For example, on 5 October 2000, and on 9 April 2007, when the US Congress, which the Armenian American lobby tried to mislead with such attempts, appeared to believe that the UN had recognized the Armenian cause as genocide, UN Spokesperson Farhan Haq corrected them and stated that the UN does not take any position on events that occurred before the UN.

[7] For an article on Bulgaria's strategic instrumentalization of the recognition of the Armenian genocide as a way of signalling 'Europeanization', see: Daniel Fittante, Out-Europeanising the Competition: Armenian Genocide Recognition in Bulgaria, and

[8] The Uruguay Senate and House of Representatives Resolution, Dia De Recordacion De Los Martires Armenios Ley N° 13.326,  April 20, 1965,,; Día De Recordación De Los Mártıres Armenios Ley Nº 17.752, March 26, 2004, The Uruguayan Senate adopted a law on 20 April 1965, declaring April 24 as "Armenian Martyrs' Remembrance Day". On March 18, 2000, the Uruguayan Senate approved a bill declaring April 24 as "Armenian Martyrs' Remembrance Day in memory of those massacred in 1915". On November 1, 2000, the House of Representatives began debating the bill, which was adopted on March 10, 2004. The Uruguayan Chamber of Deputies also adopted a declaration on the Armenian allegations on May 3, 2005. In this declaration, it was requested that April 24 be declared by the UN as "a day of denunciation and rejection of all forms of genocide" and that the Uruguayan Ministry of Foreign Affairs should take initiatives at the UN for this purpose.

[9] Cyprus House of Representatives Resolution, No: 36, April 24, 1975; The resolution tried to establish a connection with the 1974 Cyprus Peace Operation. In fact, when we conducted research for a similar study in 2014, all the data indicated that the Greek Administration of Southern Cyprus first adopted such a resolution in 1982. While updating the study, it was seen that this date was later moved to 1975.

[10] Argentina Law, March 18, 2004,, Argentina Law, January 15, 2007; In the resolution 1554/92 adopted by the Argentine Senate on 5 May 1993, solidarity was emphasized with definitions and expressions in line with the claims of Armenian circles regarding the Events of 1915, and concerns were expressed regarding the Karabakh Armenians. The resolution stated that "The National Senate expresses its full solidarity with the Armenian community, the victims of the first genocide of the 20th century, in commemorating the anniversary of the crime against humanity that led to the murder of 1,500,000 Armenians by the Turkish government between 1915 and 1917. Likewise, it expresses its deep concern about the unremitting human rights violations against the majority Armenian population in Nagorno-Karabakh.". In the statement adopted by the Argentine Senate on 22 April 1998, it was stated that "the Senate condemns genocide in all its forms", using statements in line with the Armenian allegations and emphasizing solidarity with the Armenian people. The statement adopted by the Argentine Senate on 20 August 2003 also expressed sorrow on the 88th anniversary of the 1915 events and supported the claims of Armenian circles. The Argentine Senate's statements on 14 April 2004, April 20, 2005 and April 19, 2006 also reiterated support for the Armenian theses. On March 18, 2004, a draft law was submitted proposing the inclusion and dissemination of a theme referring to the Armenian claims in the country's school curriculum. In this bill, the date was shifted to 1894-1896 and extended to the fire of İzmir in 1922.  In the declaration of 20 April 2005, it was stated to participate in the commemorative actions of the Armenian Community of Argentina (ACA) with a moment of silence, this time the date range was set to 1915-1923. On 15 January 2007, the Argentine Parliament passed a law declaring 24 April as the "Action Day for Tolerance and Respect between People". The law permitted Argentine civil servants and students of Armenian origin to participate in commemorative events on 24 April, and they were given the day off. Argentina Senate Resolution, May 5, 1993,;  Argentina Senate Resolution, April 20, 2005,;   Argentina Senate Resolution, August 20, 2003,

[11] Russia Duma Resolution, April 14, 1995,; On 14 April 1995, the State Duma (House of Representatives) of the Federal Council of the Russian Federation adopted a resolution condemning the events that are the subject of the Armenian allegations and proclaimed 24 April as the "Day of Remembrance of the Victims of Genocide". The resolution claimed that "the physical extermination of the fraternal Armenian people in its historic homeland aimed at destroying Russia" and stated that "through the initiative of Russia, the Great European Powers already in 1915 characterized the actions of the Turkish Empire against the Armenian people as a Crime Against Humanity". Reference was also made to the Convention on the Non-Applicability of Statutory Limitations to War Crimes and Crimes Against Humanity of 26 November 1968. In the statement of the State Duma of the Federal Council of the Russian Federation dated 22 April 2005, evaluations were made in parallel with the Armenian allegations.

[12] Canada House of Commons Resolution, April 23, 1996,; Canada Senate Resolution, June 13, 2002,;  Canada House of Commons Resolution, April 21, 2004,; On 23 April 1996, the House of Commons of the Parliament of Canada, in its resolution on the Armenian allegations regarding the Events of 1915, announced that the week of 20-27 April of each year would be recognized as "the week of remembrance of the inhumanity of people toward one another". On 13 June 2002, the Senate wing of the Canadian Parliament adopted a resolution entitled "Recognition and Commemoration of the Armenian Genocide". The resolution adopted by the Canadian House of Commons on 21 April 2004 also included statements in line with the Armenian allegations regarding the Events of 1915 and described the events as "crimes against humanity".

[13] Greece (Hellenic Republic) Parliament Resolution, April 25, 1996,; On April 25, 1996, the Greek Parliament passed a law declaring April 24 as "Armenian Genocide Remembrance Day".

[14] Lebanon Chamber of Deputies Resolution, April 3, 1997,; The Lebanese House of Representatives' resolution of 3 April 1997 included the statements of Armenian circles and declared 24 April as "Remembrance Day". The resolution adopted by the Lebanese Parliament on 11 May 2000, referred to the claims of Armenian circles. The resolution condemned the Events of 1915 and emphasized solidarity with the demands of Armenians.

[15] Sénat de Belgique SESSION DE 1996-1997, 1-736/1, 8 Octobre 1997, . On 26 March 1998, the Belgian Senate adopted the "Resolution on the 1915 Genocide of Armenians Living in Türkiye". Türkiye was called upon to recognize it.

[16] France National Assembly Law, May 28, 1998,; France Senate Law, November 7, 2000,;  France Law, January 29, 2001,;  (In French) Proposition de loi complétant la loi n° 2001-70 du 29 janvier 2001 relative à la reconnaissance du génocide arménien de 1915, National Assembly of France, April 12, 2006,; On 7 November 2000, the French Senate adopted a law that reads "France publicly acknowledges that genocide was committed against the Armenians in 1915", which was brought to the agenda through "urgent debate". This law was unanimously adopted by some 50 parliamentarians attending a session of the French National Assembly on 18 January 2001. Then President Chirac signed the law on 29 January 2001.

[17] In the Human Rights Report prepared by the Swedish Parliament's Foreign Affairs Committee and adopted by 131 votes against 130 votes in the 29 March 2000 session of the Parliament, the allegations of Armenian circles were included in the section on Türkiye. In the resolution, the Events of 1915 were evaluated in parallel with the Armenian theses. With a text adopted on 11 March 2010, the Swedish Parliament expanded the Armenian claims to include Assyrian, Assyrian, Chaldean, and Pontic Greeks., March 11, 2010; The resolution stated that the Events of 1915 were the "Second Holocaust" and included the so-called genocide resolutions of other countries' parliaments and organizations as references..." However, officials such as the famous Swedish Traveller Sven Hedin, (Küçük 2014: 347-358) the Swedish Dragoman Johannes Kolmodin, the Swedish Ambassador to Istanbul Gustaf Wallenberg, etc. had explained in detail in their reports and works that the Events of 1915 were not genocide." Swedish Dragoman J. Kolmodin wrote the following statements in his letter dated October 23, 1921 about the massacres in Western Anatolia: "At the request of the Ottoman Empire, a non-Turkish Allied commission of inquiry, which visited the Greek-occupied areas south of the Sea of Marmara, and was accompanied by a delegate from the International Red Cross, Mr. Maurice Gebri, concluded that the Greek military authorities were systematically and deliberately trying to exterminate the Turks." See: Evren Küçük-Burak Kazan, İsveç ve Ermeni Meselesi (2010-2015), Karadeniz Araştırmaları, Güz 2015, Sayı 47, p. 61-86; MP Agneta Berliner said, "The crisis between Türkiye and Sweden will not last long. When other parliaments came to similar conclusions to our decision, Türkiye withdrew its diplomats. Soon after, the diplomats returned to their duties. Türkiye is dependent in its relations.", Evrim Coşar Bilgin, İsveç Ermeni Katliamı yaptı, 14 Mart 2010, According to 2014 data, the population of Sweden is 9,573,466. The Armenian population in Sweden is 5,000, (  while the immigrant population of Turkish origin is around 115,000. (T.C. Ministry of Foreign Affairs,

[18] Italy Chamber of Deputies Resolution, November 16, 2000,; The resolution adopted by the Italian Chamber of Deputies on 16 November 2000 referred to the resolution of the European Parliament of 15 November 2000 and called on the Italian Government to take steps to resolve the problem.

[19] Vatican City Communiqué, November 10, 2000,; The Vatican City Declaration, issued in 2000 under the signature of Pope John Paul II, states that "The Armenian genocide, which began the century, was a prologue to horrors that would follow.".

[20] Switzerland (Helvetic Confederation) National Council Resolution, December 16, 2003,

[21] Slovakia Resolution, November 30, 2004,; On 30 November 2004, the National Assembly of Slovakia adopted a resolution stating that "The National Assembly of Slovakia recognizes the Armenian genocide committed by the Ottomans in 1915 and considers it a crime against humanity".

[22] Netherlands Parliament Resolution, December 21, 2004,; In the session of the Dutch House of Representatives held on 21 December 2004, a motion demanding " intensive political and cultural dialogue will take place with Türkiye... its dialogue with Türkiye to continuously and expressly raise the recognition of the  Armenian genocide." was adopted. Dutch Deputy Prime Minister Lodewijk Ascher had announced that his country would not use the term "genocide" for the Events of 1915. The bill adopted by the parliament in 2004 upon the proposal of the Christian Democratic Party (CDA) included the term "genocide problem" and Ascher said that they would continue to use the term "problem". "Genocide or not, this should be decided by judges within the framework of international law," Ascher had stated. See. Hollanda, ‘Ermeni Soykırımı’nı tanımayacak, 24 Ağustos 2016,; Actuele situatie in Noord-Afrika en het Midden-Oosten, Tweede Kamer der Staten-Generaal, 2018-2019,32623 nr. 263,

[23] Poland Parliament Resolution, April 19, 2006,; On 19 April 2005, the Polish Parliament adopted a resolution in line with the claims made by Armenian circles, noting that the victims of the Events of 1915 were "commemorated with respect".

[24] In the text of the resolution adopted by the Bundestag, Germany's parliament, on 16 June 2005, the term "genocide" appeared only once, and it was noted that "numerous independent historians, parliaments and international organizations have described the deportation and extermination of Armenians as genocide". The resolution proposed the establishment of a commission of Turkish, Armenian, and foreign historians to examine the events of the past and emphasized that Germany has a special responsibility for the events. The Foreign Ministry was also asked to open its archives from the relevant period. The resolution emphasized the need for normalization of relations between Türkiye and Armenia. In 2016, the term genocide was included in the content. Deutscher Bundestag, 18/8613 18. Wahlperiode 31.05.2016,; 400 out of 630 MPs participated in the vote, with 1 abstention and 1 rejection.

[25] Venezuela National Assembly Resolution, July 14, 2005;; The text adopted by the Venezuelan National Assembly on 14 July 2005 stated that approximately 2 million Armenians were "exterminated" by the "Young Turks" regime in accordance with the ideology of "Pan-Turkism".  It also called for Türkiye's EU membership process to be suspended until these allegations are accepted.

[26] Lithuania Assembly Resolution, December 15, 2005;; The resolution of the Lithuanian Parliament dated 15 December 2005 also included views in line with the Armenian allegations and called on Türkiye to recognize them.

[27] Chile Senate Resolution, June 5, 2007, Resolution No. 531,; The resolution adopted by the Chilean parliament mentions "that such a recognition was granted in 1985 by the Subcommission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities of the UN that clarified the Armenian case as a genocide" and states that "it is Chile's moral imperative to ratify the UN resolution of 1985". However, there is no UN resolution on the Armenian allegations. Resolution No. 324 received 77 votes in favour in the 155-member Chamber of Deputies, with one deputy voting against and three deputies abstaining. Cámara Solıdarıza con Nacıón Armenıa Y Condena Genocıdıo, April 14, 2015,; for the text of the resolution see. Chilean parliament once again condemns Armenian Genocide and expresses solidarity with Armenian people, April 15, 2015,;

[28] Declaración Camaral, La Cámara de Diputados, 27 November 2014, DC No. 09/2014-2015

[29] The resolution uses the term "mass extermination". "In accordance with the humanitarian compassionate traditions of the Bulgarian people and its obligations arising from its ratification of UN instruments, Bulgaria distinguishes between the historical legacy of the Ottoman Empire and the historical legacy of the Republic of Türkiye and welcomes the dialogue between Türkiye and Armenia in the spirit of ultimate fidelity to historical reality. In accordance with Article 86 (1) of the Constitution of the Republic of Bulgaria, the National Assembly decides to recognize the mass extermination of Armenians in the Ottoman Empire and to proclaim April 24 as a day of remembrance of the victims." Bulgaria’s Parliament recognizes the Armenian Genocide, April 24, 2015, Standart News; The Bulgarian parliament has repeatedly rejected bills on the issue. In 2010-2011, 14 provincial and municipal councils accepted the Armenian allegations. According to 2011 population data, the Armenian population in Bulgaria is 6,552. In the resolution passed in 2022, the term massacre was used again. Parliament of Bulgaria declares April 24th as Armenian Genocide Remembrance Day, April 25, 2015,

[30] Autriche: le génocide arménien symboliquement reconnu, 22 April 2015, A joint declaration was made by six parliamentary groups. "We commemorate the victims of violence, murder and deportation of Christian communities, including the Arameans, Assyrians, Chaldeans and Pontic Greeks," the declaration states.

[31] Reconnaissance du génocide des Arméniens : la Turquie rappelle son ambassadeur au Brésil, 9 June 2015,; It was adopted by 55 of the 81 Brazilian senators who attended the session on Tuesday, 2 June.

[32] Centenaire du génocide arménien : des députés tchèques expriment leur compassion, 15 April 2015,;  Le Parlement tchèque a condamné le génocide arménien, April 27, 2017,; It is reported that the general reaction of the Czech Republic when the issue is raised is the same as that of Foreign Minister Lubomír Zaorálek and the Speaker of the Lower House of the Parliament Jan Hamáček, who said: "I think that history belongs to historians and that it is not the task of politicians to express themselves on such questions. Whatever their seriousness and even if in the concrete case of Armenia, it is a great tragedy, there is no point in taking positions on facts that are 100 or 150 years old. Unfortunately, there have been many more tragedies than tragedies in the history of mankind, and that is why I see no particular reason to discuss the Armenian genocide in concrete terms in n Parliament today. Leave it to historians." However, in 2017 the official position is said to have changed.

[33] The efforts of the Armenian Diaspora to have the American Congress recognize the Events of 1915 as genocide accelerated after 1977. Until 1989, Armenian resolutions were brought to the House of Representatives wing of the Congress almost every period, passed through the committees but failed to reach the plenary of the House of Representatives. It was in 1989 that Armenians brought the relevant draft resolutions to the Senate side of the Congress for the first time. Since 1989, all four elected Presidents (George H. W. Bush, Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, and Barack Obama) pledged during their election campaigns that they would recognize the Armenian "genocide" if elected President, but after their election, they opposed the passage of Armenian genocide resolutions in Congress and did not use the word "genocide" in the commemoration day statement they issued on 24 April. For a detailed analysis of the process, see. A. Oğuz Çelikkol, Ermeni “Soykırım” İddiaları, Amerikan Kongresi ve Türkiye, Bilge Strateji, Cilt 7, Sayı 13, Güz 2015, ss. 17-30. In 2014, Barack Obama used the term "Medz Yeghern", which means "Great Catastrophe" in Armenian, while Joe Biden became the first US President to directly use the term "genocide" in 2021. For the Armenian National Committee of America's (ANCA) active work in state and local politics in the US, and its methods of getting future senatorial candidates, starting from mayoral elections, to commit themselves to all their claims, including Karabakh, see: Gözde Kılıç Yaşın, Azerbaycan-Ermenistan Barış Görüşmelerinin Aktörleri, 27 October 2022,

It also sends letters to candidates in presidential, House of Representatives, and Congressional elections, seeking their views on the Armenian allegations, and tries to bind them to the allegations with leading questions.

[34] Portekiz Parlamentosu Ermeni Soykırımını Resmen Tanıdı, 27 Nisan 2019, The text of the resolution states that on 24 April  1915, "the Ottoman authorities executed 250 Armenian intellectuals and community leaders".

[35] Syria parliament recognises Armenian genocide, February 13, 2020,; The resolution states that "condemns and recognizes the genocide committed by the Ottoman state against the Armenians."

[36] Latvia recognizes the Armenian Genocide, May 6, 2021,; In the Latvian parliament with a total of 100 seats, it was adopted with 58 votes, with 7 abstentions and 11 votes against. Latvia's decision may be linked to the 2022 Holocaust Restitution Law (, or rather to the process, which was enacted with the encouragement of the United States. The Holocaust restitution law indicates "that the Latvian state is not responsible for the genocide carried out by the Nazi regime during the occupation of Latvia and for the nationalization of property carried out by the Soviet occupation regime, but that Latvia confirms the out-of-control consequences, due to the Holocaust carried out by the Nazi totalitarian regime on the territory of Latvia and ... as a result of its activities to provide support to the Jewish community in Latvia ... and restoration of property rights". Similar property restitution laws have been enacted in the states that emerged after the break-up of Yugoslavia and in Bulgaria.

[37] Wales National Assembly Resolution, EDM 1454

[38] Motion S4M-06266: Marco Biagi, Edinburgh Central, Scottish National Party, Date Lodged: 18/04/2013

[39] "Defining it as genocide"

[40] En el 90.º aniversario del genocidio armenio

[41] On 18 June 1987, three months after Türkiye applied for full membership to the EU, the European Parliament adopted a resolution titled "Political Solution to the Armenian Question". The resolution called the events of 1915-1917 "genocide" according to the UN Convention of 1948 and stated that Türkiye's failure to recognize the Events of 1915 within this framework was an obstacle on the way to full membership to the EU. For the Parliament's resolution, see: European Parliament resolution on a political solution to the Armenian question (June 18, 1987), On 15 November 2000, the European Parliament adopted the draft resolution accompanying the report on "Steps taken by Türkiye on the road towards full membership of the EU" in Strasbourg. An amendment aimed at incorporating the claims of Armenian circles into the resolution was narrowly adopted. Türkiye protested the inclusion of Armenian allegations in the report. The resolution adopted by the European Parliament on 28 February 2002, referred to the resolution of 1987 and called on "Türkiye to build a basis for reconciliation". Another resolution adopted by the European Parliament on 28 September 2005 "called on Türkiye to recognize the Armenian allegations" and stated that "such recognition is a precondition for entry into the European Union".

[42] Council of Europe Parliamentary Assembly Resolution, April 24, 1998; Council of Europe Parliamentary Assembly Resolution, April 24, 2001.

[43] Mercosur recognizes the Armenian Genocide, November 23, 2007, The bill was introduced by the representatives of Argentina and Uruguay.

[44] This is based on the example of the "Stop the Armenian Genocide Lie and Commemoration of our Martyred Diplomats" rally in Times Square of New York.

© 2009-2021 Center for Eurasian Studies (AVİM) All Rights Reserved


No comments yet.