The Armenian Contribution to the Allied Victory in the Second World War, 19 April 2005 (in English)

Ararat Institute for Near Eastern Studies , 2020

The defeat of the Artsakh Defense Army during the Forty Four Day War surprised the majority of Armenians around the world. Significant territorial and human losses were shocking not only to the people residing in the Republic of Armenia but also in the diaspora. The whole media coverage of the war both in Armenia and diaspora was primarily based on the official narrative created by Armenia's MoD which claimed that the Armenian side was winning the war and that it was planning to go into a counteroffensive soon. Although the Armed Forces of Armenia have been acquiring offensive weapons for a while and were boasting about their ability to carry out preemptive strikes at any time, they choose to do so in reality the political leadership didn't have the will and the military leadership couldn't sustainably wage such an offensive war. Previous claims of military superiority created a false sense of security among people residing in Artsakh, the Republic of Armenia, and diaspora which contributed to the feelings of shock and dismay that they all experienced during the aftermath of this war. Considering that Pashinyan's government was the one that created this false narrative misleading people of the true situation on the battlefield only to falsely blame the people of Armenia and its diaspora for not doing enough to win this war it was only a matter of time before the people of Armenia turned against the Pashinyan's government and began to demand his resignation as the Prime Minister of Armenia. The fact that the President of Armenia and the Foreign Minister of Armenia were caught off-guard by the actions of the Prime Minister contributed to the public impression that Nikol Pashinyan was the only person responsible for this humiliating defeat, however, an analysis will indicate that various actions undertaken by the previous governments that preceded him have their share of the blame to bear also. The statement made by the President of Armenia-Armen Sarkisyan that Pashinyan should resign added more impetus to the public desire to recall Pashinyan from the post of the Prime Minister of Armenia. It is time to analyze the many errors that became apparent during this war and come up with solutions to correct those errors. It will be impossible to list every error that was made during this war and many errors that preceded this war considering that such an effort will require a lot of time and all the findings will not fit in just one article, however at the same time it is possible to analyze a specific number of the errors made during this war and draw several reasonable conclusions on how these errors can be corrected and what should be done differently going forward to achieve different outcomes in the next stage of this greater war that is on the horizon.

Reconstructing the Past Journal of Historical Studies, 2022

The military-political situation in Azerbaijan in April-July 1918 in the context of the struggle of the Baku Soviet of People's Commissars against the Republic of Azerbaijan is analyzed in the article. Since at the time of the establishment of the Republic of Azerbaijan, the Baku gubernia was under the authority of the Baku Soviet of People's Commissars, there was actually dual power in the country. But soon the Baku SPC started a war with the national government, due to which the Bolsheviks suffered heavy results. The article elucidates the relationship between the forces on the political scene in Baku. In the summer of 1918, the factors that determined the anti-Bolshevik activity of the forces represented in the Baku Soviet are revealed, and the reasons for the isolation and subsequent overthrow of the Bolsheviks are determined. The causes of disagreements between the Bolsheviks and the Dashnaks are analyzed in detail. Altogether, the influence of the Armenian factor on the events of the period is being studied. It also clarifies to whicht extent the military assistance of Soviet Russia played a role in the struggle of the Baku SPC against the Republic of Azerbaijan. The main source base of the paper is the press materials of the mentioned period and the memories of participants in the event of different political orientations.

Cunningham's Theory of Educide 1. Republic of Armenia 1918 Introduction The establishment of the First Republic of Armenia on May 28, 1918, was a defiant act of national survival amid the Armenian Genocide and the collapse of Russian control in the Caucasus. Following the 1915-1916 genocide, which killed over 1.5 million Armenians, the Armenian National Council in Tiflis declared independence to protect survivors and assert sovereignty over Russian-held Armenian territories, centered in Yerevan. This nascent state faced immediate threats: Ottoman military advances, territorial disputes, and a refugee crisis. The Republic's formation was bolstered by victories like the Battle of Sardarabad (May 1918), which repelled Ottoman forces, preserving Yerevan. However, the geopolitical turmoil following the Russian Revolution and the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk (March 1918) left Armenia isolated, with minimal Western support despite promises like Wilson's Fourteen Points advocating self-determination. The Republic's brief existence (1918-1920) was marked by efforts to revive Armenian cultural and intellectual identity through education and governance, led by figures like Aram Manukian. Yet, Turkish nationalist invasions and Sovietization by December 1920 crushed its sovereignty. Michael Cunningham's theory of educide applies, as Ottoman and Turkish forces sought to erase Armenian historical legitimacy through territorial conquests and narrative suppression. The Republic's collapse set a precedent for ongoing educide, as Turkish revisionism denied Armenian claims to Western Armenia and Artsakh, perpetuating cultural and intellectual erasure. This section analyzes how the Republic's formation and demise reflect educide's principles, particularly the destruction of cultural heritage and denial of legitimacy, shaping Armenia's defense struggles through 2025. Subpoint A: Formation of the Republic and National Identity The declaration of the First Republic of Armenia on May 28, 1918, responded to the collapse of Russian authority and the urgent need to protect genocide survivors. The Armenian Revolutionary Federation (ARF), under leaders like Aram Manukian, unified Armenians to reclaim cultural and political identity. The Battle of Sardarabad (May 21-29, 1918) was pivotal, as Armenian forces, numbering fewer than 10,000, repelled a larger Ottoman army, securing Yerevan as the Republic's capital. This victory symbolized resilience but highlighted vulnerabilities: a devastated economy, refugee influx, and no Allied aid. The Republic prioritized education to foster national consciousness, establishing schools despite resource scarcity. However, Ottoman advances and the Treaty of Batum (June 1918) curtailed these efforts, aligning with educide's aim to destroy Armenian heritage.

ANRO, 2023

Bust of Suvorov right, lion skin around his shoulder, initials C.H.K. below. Reverse: ITALIAE LIBERATOR; MDCCXCIX-in exergue; C. H. KUCHLER. F.-on the ground line Liberator of Italy. Ancient warrior holding a spear in his right hand, supports a woman by his left hand. On the left-French soldier fights with the Death.

Review of Armenian Studies, 2024

The object of this research is to emphasize the fact that the Russian Empire and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) leadership, which purposefully continued the imperial policy of the Russian Empire in the 20 th century, used the "Armenian card" from time to time to make groundless territorial claims against Turkey. After the victory over Hitler's Germany, USSR used the "Armenian Question" as a priority issue in its foreign policy. The article notes that, on the eve of the Potsdam Conference of 1945, the legend of "Great Armenia" coincided with the contours of the foreign policy of the USSR, and Moscow created fertile conditions for the development of the concept of "Urartu" created by the Armenian historian Kerope Patkanov at the end of the 19 th century. The Joseph Stalin government of USSR's emphasis on the concept of "Urartu" was related to the initiative to scientifically substantiate the baseless territorial claims on Eastern Anatolia. Moscow, acting in tandem with Armenia, brought up other aspects of the "Armenian Question" when it failed to achieve its goals. One of the new foreign policy directions was the issue of Karabakh. As a result of the decisive and principled position of Mirjafar Bagirov, the First Secretary of the Central Committee of Azerbaijan K(b), Armenians could not realize their claims to Karabakh. However,

SHS Web of Conferences

This article is an attempt to analyse the military and political situation during the considered period as a prerequisite for a proper understanding of the socio-political processes that took place in Chechnya-Ingushetia and Dagestan. It notes the complete interconnectedness in the work of the military commissariats and the repressive bodies, fitting logically into the context of Stalinist nationality policy. On the basis of the incriminating accusations against the peoples of the republics, it is concluded that there was a deliberate accentuation of criminality in order to justify and justify Stalin's policy towards entire peoples.

Review of Armenian Studies, 2020

formation of Armenian Relief corps in Iraq

ADDITIONS, INTEGRATIONS, CORRECTIONS AND SUPPLEMENTS TO THE BIBLIOGRAPHY OF ARNOLD JOSEPH TOYNBEE, Nos. 329-332, Additions to Part I, Works by Arnold J. Toynbee