Map Close  
Person info Close  
Information Close  
Source reference Close  
  Svenska
 
Index

Armenia

The Urartu Civilisation

Victory for Independence

Artashisian Dynasty on the Armenian Throne

Armenia caught between Rome and the Arsacids

The Acceptance of Christianity

Defending Christianity

Armenia Under the Bagratouni Dynasty

Cilicia - the New Armenia

Armenia Under Turanian Rule

The Renaissance or the Resurrection of Armenia

The Eastern Question

Russia in the Caucasus

The Armenian Question

Battle on Two Fronts

Tsarist Russia Against the Armenians

The Revolution of the Young Turks and the Armenian People on the Eve of World War I

The First World War

The Resurrection of Armenia

Armenia on the Road to Independence, 1918

- Armenia on the Road to Independence, 1918

Eastern Armenia

Western Armenia

"The Fateful Years" (1914-1917)

"Hopes and Emotions" (March-October, 1917)

The Bolshevik Revolution and Armenia

Transcaucasia Adrift (November, 1917

Dilemmas (March-April, 1918)

War and Independence (April-May, 1918)

The Republics of Georgia, Azerbaijan, and Armenia

The Suppliants (June-October, 1918)

In conclusion

Soviet Armenia

The Second Independent Republic of Armenia

Epilogue

Previous page Page 359 Next page Smaller font Larger font Print friednly version  
Renewed Eastern Armenian Activities

The year 1916 was a black one for the Eastern Armenians. The full extent of the blow that had struck from Constantinople to Bitlis was only then clearly comprehended. Russian occupation of Erzurum and Trabizond would have elicited delirious celebrations throughout Transcaucasia in 1914, but in 1916 it was greeted with silent interest, for the tsarist armies had occupied "Armenia without Armenians", the ideal not only of Enver and Talaat but also of the former Russian Foreign Minister, Lobanov-Rostovsky. With the tsarist order to disband the volunteer units, the Eastern Armenians entered a period of shock, disillusionment, and dismay. It was the plight of the refugees which jolted them back into action. By the end of 1916, nearly three hundred thousand Ottoman Armenians had sought safety in Transcaucasia, where nearly half were destined to die from famine and disease. 131 The revitalised National Bureau, philanthropic societies, and populace attempted to mitigate the suffering of the Western Armenian survivors by contributing over 5 million rubles for relief activities. Armenians from every corner of the Russian Empire participated in this newest of "all-national" efforts. 132

After several delays and obstacles, the Russian government, in May, 1916, authorised Armenian leaders to convene in Petrograd on the condition that the agenda include only relief measures. Joining the delegates from the influential Armenian communities of Moscow and Petrograd were representatives from Transcaucasia, South Russia, and the United States, as well as spokesmen for the refugees from Turkey. The spectrum was broad, for among the more than a hundred delegates were the two Armenian members of the Russian State Duma, both Constitutional Democrats; ranking Dashnakists, Social Democrats, and Social Revolutionaries; 133 several eminent scholars; and representatives of numerous philanthropic, social, cultural, and religious organisations. Officials of the Russian bureaucracy were also in attendance so that forbidden topics might not be broached. Though the tangible result of the deliberations were negligible, the Armenians were afforded a new and broader experience, the exchange of opinions by actual or potential leaders from widespread areas and with divergent ideological views. 134 During these sessions, Duma members M S. Ajemian, who had intimate contacts in the Russian Foreign Ministry, confided to a member of Dashnaktsoutiun that the Armenian political future was endangered by secret Entente plans to partition Turkey. When Dr. Zavriev, Dashnaktsoutiun's most experienced international diplomat, was informed of the rumour, he dismissed it as useless gossip. 135

Though the tsarist government proscribed discussion of certain subjects, it was compelled to recognise the inevitability of broader public participation in the defence effort, for the Russian bureaucracy had proved incapable of effectively gearing the nation to war. Among the several conferences sanctioned at the end of 1916 was the All-Russian Congress of Cities. Alexander Khatisian, as mayor of Tiflis and president of the Caucasus Union of Cities, represented Transcaucasia at the Moscow meeting. There the future premier of Armenia spoke of the progressive role played by Russia in the Caucasus and testified that, severed from the Empire, Transcaucasia would be bled white. While in Moscow and Petrograd, however, Khatisian witnessed growing public discontent and impatience with the protracted war. 136 Yet on his return to Tiflis he reported to a secret session of the Armenian National Bureau that conditions at the front and in the government were relatively stable. Though there were indications of corruption and inefficiency, the Empire was not imperilled. Nor did he consider the reigning sovereign endangered by revolutionary organisations, for, especially since the assassination of the scoundrel Rasputin, the prestige of the Romanovs had risen. Optimistically, Khatisian stressed that the successful conclusion of war would ensure realisation of the basic Armenian aspiration – autonomy for Western Armenia under Russian or Entente protection. Paradoxically, the Georgians were also informed of governmental stability by a member of the State Duma and leader of the Menshevik Social Democrats, N. S. Chkheidze. 137 These appraisals, made only a few weeks before the Russian Revolution, indicated that the Armenian politicians had not learned to analyse symptoms accurately. During the first months of 1917, they were not alone in that shortcoming.