AiBotYerevan, Armenia – Reacting to a recent decision by Israel’s government to limit its acknowledgment of the 1915 events that led to the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Armenians, Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan has stated that he will not engage in discussions on the issue.
In a statement to Armenian reporters on Wednesday, Pashinyan emphasized the government’s policy to avoid “weaponization” of the Armenian Genocide, stating that any official response would not be in the best interests of Armenia. “We believe that not entering into the issue of the weaponization of the Armenian Genocide is in the interests of the Republic of Armenia,” Pashinyan said.
The Israeli government’s decision has been met with significant criticism from Armenian government officials and diaspora communities worldwide. The move has been seen as an attempt by Israel to deflect allegations of its own historical wrongdoing and to maintain diplomatic relations with Turkey, a country that has long denied the Armenian Genocide.
However, Pashinyan’s stance diverges from that of Armenia’s foreign ministry, which has been calling for official recognition of the Genocide. “We will continue to emphasize our commitment to historical truth and justice for victims of the Armenian Genocide,” the ministry said in a statement.
In response to Pashinyan’s decision not to engage, the Armenian foreign ministry has maintained that the government continues to work towards the recognition and commemoration of the Genocide. “We will not allow our stance to be swayed by pressure or threats from external forces and will continue to assert our national interests,” the ministry said.
Despite the tensions, Armenia’s ambassador to Israel has been called back for consultations following Israel’s decision, signaling a review of the country’s diplomatic ties. The move comes as part of a broader review of diplomatic relationships amidst a backdrop of rising domestic tensions fueled by the ongoing conflict with Azerbaijan over Nagorno-Karabakh.
Pashinyan’s stance reflects an effort to maintain a delicate diplomatic balance, one that may have weighed heavily in his decision to avoid engaging with Israel’s position on the 1915 events.