Pashinyan Adopted Denialist Language When Responding to Israeli Recognition
Pashinyan warned against weaponizing the Armenian Genocide. Scholars call that denialist language. He's joined the genocide denialist camp.
This final clip captures a moment of profound institutional failure. When Israel’s cabinet voted to recognize the Armenian Genocide, Nikol Pashinyan responded by saying the Armenian government did not need to comment and warned against weaponizing the Armenian Genocide. Amb. Aghajanian argues this language represents an adoption of Turkish denialist narratives by Armenia’s own leader.
Aghajanian emphasizes the historical irony: Israel, a nation founded in the aftermath of the Holocaust and committed to “never again,” had to be reminded by its own cabinet that genocide recognition is a moral and legal imperative. The term genocide itself originates from Raphael Lemkin’s study of the Armenian case. Yet Armenia’s government responded not with enthusiasm for international validation of its historical suffering but with warnings against speaking about it.
Genocide scholars have directly noted that Pashinyan has adopted the language and logic of the genocide denialist camp. When Turkish officials or their allies warn against weaponizing historical atrocities, they are arguing that remembrance itself constitutes political manipulation. By adopting this frame, Pashinyan inverts the moral hierarchy: he treats Armenia’s historical truth as a political liability rather than a foundation for justice and legitimacy.
For Aghajanian, this response reveals Pashinyan’s fundamental positioning. He cannot criticize Turkey because Turkey is a partner in the government’s larger geopolitical strategy. He cannot fully embrace Armenian historical claims because doing so would undermine that partnership. So instead, he adopts denialist language and advises Armenians-survivors and descendants of survivors-that speaking about their own genocide is inappropriate. In a country built on and inhabited by genocide survivors, this represents a categorical betrayal of national identity and historical truth.
Transcript
Asbed: Ambassador, so what did you think of Pashinyan's answer? Dziunik: He couldn't say anything else. Dziunik: A person who is trying to close the chapter of Armenian Genocide Dziunik: And trying to count those that have been killed in order to justify the rhetoric Dziunik: That is coming from Turkey. Dziunik: I don't expect any other answer. Dziunik: His actions are fully described by the Dziunik: Genocide scholars who rightfully mentioned Dziunik: That he has joined the Dziunik: Genocide denialist camp and just trying to implement their policies in Armenia Dziunik: In a country that is full of survivors of Armenian Genocide Dziunik: So this is this is not surprising regret Dziunik: As i said regretfully this is what he could have he can't say anything he can't say Dziunik: Something that will be Dziunik: Damaging his position in the public because he has a referendum that he has to pass. Dziunik: He cannot criticize Turkey because there are his supporters and his partners Dziunik: In bringing current Armenia to its demise. Asbed: You're absolutely right i mean this he's basically adopted the language of denialism