Azernews.Az

When you start investigating the historical roots of Armenia's aggressive and predatory war against Azerbaijan, certain aspects of Armenian history must be taken into account. This aggressive policy arose from the kernel of Armenian history. Therefore, when the favorable historical pre-conditions occurred for international and internal political change, Armenians made every effort for the implementation of their treacherous intentions. The occurrence of the so-called Armenian problem was not fortuitous. With regard to the Armenia- Azerbaijan conflict it is necessary to consider this problem in a new way. As the "Karabakh problem" must be considered a part of the Armenian problem. And the "Armenian problem" is a part of the Eastern problem. At the end of the 19th century and at the beginning of the 20th century a lot of research was devoted to this problem. The article written by the historian V. Gurko-Kryajinin for the Soviet Encyclopedia that was published in 1926 is one of such works. At the end of the article the author was hopeful by writing "... the most conscientious among the Armenian migrants change their views and say no to the past. They realize their mistakes and return home. After the Soviet coup d'etat the Dashnaktucun completely ceased to exist". But the historian was deceived.

This is why we have decided to begin writing this article. In the following documents, we will provide a comprehensive analysis, new facts and historical documents concerning the Armenian problem.

The Armenian problem is a part of the so-called Eastern problem and it is absolutely necessary to consider it from two points of view. Externally, in order to ensure an easier exploitation of Turkish resources, the great powers attempted to strengthen Turkey's centrifugal forces and by doing so, to weaken the country. Internally, Armenian bourgeoisie led Armenians to struggle for the achievement of the national independence and for ensuring a political and economical background, that would allow the bourgeoisie to develop easily.

The Armenian problem rose early in the 18th century when the financial aristocracy of Constantinople stood at the head of the Armenian nation.

The Armenians settled in the Minor Asian part of Turkey in the early periods brought up the trade bourgeoisie. That bourgeoisie played an important role in the live of Turkish economics - lending the money to the government, provinces' governors it became an owner of the properties and etc.

At the same time it with the help of clergymen controlled all spheres of the Armenian national life. The clergymen themselves had a great power. After Constantinople's conquest (1453) at the head of the Armenians community was the council of Notabl (consisted from the representatives of the financial aristocracy) organized on the edict of the Turks during the Constantinople's patriarchy, the council practically was at the head of the Armenian nation. The important role in the development of the Armenians bourgeoisie in Turkey played the relations with the Armenians merchants lived in Syria, Lebanon and also in America and the flow of the foreign capital. It is significant that the Armenians skilled workmen (handicraftsmen), divided into several classes which were really the numerous one together with the Greeks played the prevalent role in the Turkish handicraft industry.

It is quite evidence that during the attack of the Western capitalism over the Near East the Western countries wanted to use for this purpose the Armenian bourgeoisie. But because of being under the power of this bourgeoisie, being under the political submission its economical development was limited in enormous extent - that's why it supported all attempts, directed to the destruction of the natural economy and the internal insularity of Turkey. The Western capital, passing the Turkish ruling circles and related with them the Armenian financial bourgeoisie made an attempt to use for its goals achievement the clergymen (consisted from the Armenian Catholics and Armenian Protestants); when those attempts didn't give an expected result the Western capital came to a conclusion to use the middle bourgeoisie as its economical mean: this fact became a reason of this bourgeoisie strengthening and gave a stimulus for the development of the national movement.

Intellectuals joined to the intellectual's movement especially in Moscow and Tiflis. In the 70s in those cities, which turned into the centers of the "Armenian liberalism" not only among the Russians but also among the Turkish Armenians propaganda of the "National self-affirmation" and even of the military chauvinism carried on with the help of the press and orally. It is reasonable that the first steps of the middle Armenian bourgeoisie in the way, directed to their self-affirmation led to the limitation of the ecclesiastics' power: they relied on the city craftsmen began the struggle, directed to the weakening of the churches and Constantinople's patriarchy role. The struggle successfully came to the end: the middle bourgeoisie found its own place among the financial bourgeoisie and the ecclesiastics in the organizations established in the centers of patriarchate and churches named the "Armenians representation". That representation was engaged in financial, justice and enlightenment affairs.

First the village masses remained aloof from the National movement...

As the second reason for the expanded antagonism such factor could be considered that under the Turkish circumstances the Armenian urban bourgeoisie conducted themselves toward the backward Moslem masses as the representatives of the rapacious, usurious capital. Thus, exceptionally increased on the economic basis the Armenian problem because of the fatal interference of the "Great Powers" - Russia and England in the end became complicated. Russian trade-industrial capital using the slogan "the struggle, directed to the liberation of the Christians from the Moslem pressure" made attempts to capture the Black Sea, Bosporus, Dardanelles regions; in order to solve the problem of the national-political independence, believing in this slogan the most part of Armenian bourgeoisie not only took themselves the Russian direction, but also carried on propaganda to take this direction among the Turkish Armenians. That position sharply changed the Turkish government attitude to the Armenians bourgeoisie, whereas before the war in 1877 the government not only pursued, but to the contrary set up the necessary conditions in order the noble Armenians were be able to take up high posts. Sending by the Russian Armenians a letter to the governor in the Caucasus Grand Duke Michail Nikolayevich during the discussions of the peace conditions and an official appealing of the Turkish Armenians headed by patriarch Nerses - their wish to receive a help from Russia more strained those relations. Russia using this appeal put the 16th paragraph into the first San-Stephan peace agreement. According to the paragraph Turkey had to carry out immediately the necessary reforms in the Armenian regions, connecting to this the Russian forces went on with keeping in their hands the territories occupied by them in Asian part of Turkey.

The attempt of the Tsarist Russia 'to strengthen the positions in the mountainous regions of Armenian settlement under its guardianship' had been repulsed by England, its main opponent in the Near East. England succeeded to replace the 16th paragraph by new one (Berlin Treaty, article 61) at Berlin Congress. This article acknowledged that Turkish government had to carry out necessary reforms in provinces of Armenian settlement. The control over the implementation of this decision had not been entrusted only to Russia, but the 'unity' of 6 participant states of Berlin Congress.

The decisions of Berlin Congress gave hope to the Armenian bourgeoisie that they would get the required support from Russia and the great powers in the creation of the Armenian state. This dream had been incited by the English diplomacy, which assumed the plan of 'the Great Armenia from the Sea to the Sea' (from the Black Sea and the Mediterranean). The change of the direction fully isolated Armenians from the international policy. The aim of England was to prevent Russia from making use of Armenians in the Near East policy. England did not need Armenians that time, for according to secret agreement concluded between England and Turkey, England should supply Turkey with the necessary protection from Russia and take Cyprus instead...