State Identity, Continuity, and Responsibility
The Ottoman Empire, the Republic of Turkey and the Armenian Genocide
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 12199723 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Vahagn Avedian (0000-0002-8593-8617, Lund University, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2012 |
| Volume | 23 |
| Issue | 3 |
| Pages | 797-820 |
| Publication date | 2012-08-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | European Journal of International Law (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0938-5428 • E-ISSN: 1464-3596 |
| Publisher | Oxford University Press (OUP) (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1093/ejil/chs056 |
| OpenAlex | W2164048753 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 17 |
| References cited | 2 |
By studying the continuity between the Ottoman Empire and its succeeding Turkish Republic, this article aims to address one crucial aspect of the denial of the Armenian genocide by the Turkish state, namely the issue of state responsibility. There are psychological barriers in Turkey which have largely suppressed the memories of possible wrongdoings during World War I and the ensuing ‘Independence War’. However, the barrier that is created by the issue of state responsibility is identified here as the fundamental obstacle for genocide recognition by the Turkish state. This article aims to apply some of the existing legal principles and theories of international law in order to test their applicability to the two Turkish states and the issue of internationally wrongful acts committed during World War I and the ensuing years. In addition to the Turkish Republic bearing the identity of the Ottoman Empire, this article suggests that the Republic not only failed to stop doing the wrongful acts of its predecessor, but it also continued the very internationally wrongful acts committed by the Young Turk government. Thus, the insurgent National Movement, which later became the Republic, made itself responsible for not only its own wrongful acts but also those of its predecessor, including the act of genocide committed in 1915–1916. The issue of possible liability has ever since the creation of the Republic formed the denialist policy which is Turkey’s to this day
Ancient history · Armenian · Denial · Empire · Genocide · Independence (probability theory · International law · Political science · Sociology · State (computer science · The Republic · Theology · Turkish · Global Peace and Security Dynamics · International Law and Human Rights · Psychology · Turkey's Politics and Society · History · Law
After Gallipoli
Explaining negative descriptions of Armenians in Turkish parliamentary speeches (1960–1980) via group position theory
The pillars of Türkiye’s constructed revisionist vision of the South Caucasus policy, 2002–2024
Bibliographie / Bibliography
Rhetorical Adaptation and Resistance to International Norms
The Paris Peoples' Tribunal and the Istanbul Trials
Mellemværender Om Fortiden
History, Sacred History and law at the Intersection of Law, Religion and History
Using Content Analysis to Study Political Texts
The Genocide of the Greeks of the Ottoman Empire, 1913–1923
From Positive to Negative Historical Statecraft
Activist memory narration on social media
Contested minorities in the ‘New Europe’
The Relationship between Perceived Security Threats and Negative Descriptions of Armenians in Turkish Politics (1946–1960)
A Macro-Micro Integrated Theoretical Model of Mass Participation in Genocide
The Quest for Regional Leadership
Perceived group threats and right-wing political party membership as driving forces of negative descriptions in Turkish Parliamentary debates (1983-2018)
| Unique citing works | 17 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 1,31 |
| Citation span | 2013 - 2026 (14) |
| Citation velocity | current |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 17 |