380) Were Armenians in Georgia "Genocide" Victims?

What happened to the Armenians in Georgia paralleled the fate, on a smaller scale, of the Armenians in the Ottoman Empire. Like the Ottoman Empire, Georgia came under outside attack. Like the Ottoman Empire, many Armenian-Georgians sided with the enemy. Georgia responded by "deporting" many Armenians. (Unlike the Ottoman Empire, this was a real deportation, and not a relocation; the Armenians were banished outside the borders of Georgia.)

Did these rebellious Armenian-Georgians suffer an unknown "genocide"?

Sam Weems explains, from his "Armenia: Secrets of a 'Christian' Terrorist State"; the history of Richard Hovannissian . . . is used as a basis.


Armenia Loses Unprovoked War on Georgia

Chapter Five:

Armenians Seek Free Handouts From the Christian World

On December 14, 1918, Armenia launched a surprise at tack on its neighbor, Georgia, in an attempt to take land.

On December 17, 1918, "When the ‘Armenian invasion’ was well under way...," Premier Zhordonia of Georgia spoke to his people (Holdwater note: spelling is "Zhordania"; Hovannisian's name has also been misspelled):
HOVHANNES KATCHAZNOUNI

The first man who led the Republic of Armenia

There has taken place that which should not have taken place: Regretfully, Armenia had incited rebellion and then had brought up her regular army. The present Armenian government, in instigating this shameful conflict, has pre­cipitated that which has never before occurred—war between Georgia and Armenia: Who had even heard of war over a few incidents in a village or two? The real explanation could be found in the character of Kachaznuni's government, which, like the wolf eats the calf because such is its nature. That government could not live in peace and was obsessed with battling one or another of its neighbors, for like the wolf, it had to devour everything. Should not the Armenians have realized that, in view of their hostile relations with the Muslims, they must at least cling to the friendship of Georgia? But instead they had now burned this bridge as well.

Noe Zhordania (1868-1953)

"In Armenia," continued Zhordonia, "there were two political currents, one composed of men of moderation seeking reconciliation and the other made up of militarists. Obviously the latter extremists had finally gained ascendancy, but Georgia would rise to battle this pack of mauserists. (1: Richard G. Hovannisian, The Republic of Armenia, Volume I, University of Califirnia, Los Angeles, p. 65)

The Georgians discovered important Armenian government documents and they were published. The proof, from the Armenians themselves, revealed they "had made detailed plans for seizure of the land up to the Khram River; and Armenian military activity would seem to verify the authenticity of those documents"(P 111)

The war actually lasted only two weeks because the British intervened and the two countries returned to where they were before the Armenian surprise attack. The British occupied a "neutral zone" between the two countries.

Hovannissian expresses surprise that the Georgian government, in response to the sneak military attack was so harsh on Armenians living in Georgia. He writes:

The brunt of the war fell not upon the combatants or even the villages of Lori but upon the Armenians of Tiflis and the surrounding communities. Although Zhordonia's government repeatedly underscored the distinction between the Arme­nian people and what it described as a clique of Armenian militarists, it nonetheless took stringent measures against the entire population. On December 24, 1918, the parliament passed legislation making treason punishable by death and confiscating of properties, and two days later the governor of the Tiflis gubernia declared all Armenians technically prisoners of war Those Armenians in Tiflis who were natives of the districts under enemy occupation, that is the southern half of the Borchuvezd, were required to register within twenty-four hours or face prosecution under the law of treason. This announcement was followed by numerous arrests....(P122)

Hovannissian continues:

The Armenian and Russian organizations in Tiflis protested in vain. The doors of the National Council of Armenians in Georgia were sealed and members of the council were placed under house arrest.” The Armenian newspapers in Georgia were also were shut down. In the weeks after the fighting ended, Georgia arrested hundreds of people and deported them. When the Armenian Council of Georgia was subsequently permitted to resume its activities, it denounced with acerbic indignation the unjust, cruel treatment inflicted by the Georgian government. Its protest read in part: "The explanation of the Minister of Interior that this national persecution must be ascribed to the unauthorized acts of individual officials can only leave the most onerous impression upon the Armenian public, especially since the explanation follows that which has become a most common work of late — a word about the supposed respect for the Armenian people, a word that can now only wound the sensitivity of a people living under the most debasing and oppressive of conditions." (P123)

Reaction throughout Georgia was quick and certain. Hovannissian writes: "In the country side, meanwhile, lawless bands and organized units of the People’s (Red) Guard plun­dered Armenian villages and spread terror to gain retribution and to punish the disloyal and treacherous’ inhabitants.”(P124)

Once again, ordinary Armenians suffered from their leaders’ attempt involving armed conquest of someone else's land.

The Georgians had every reason not to trust Armenians. Many innocent Armenians were hurt when they were fired from their city of Tiflis jobs. The government called for new elections (at this time Armenia had not even held one).

"The Armenians in Georgia expressed outrage that this government would require every voter to be 'registered’ as Georgian citizens. The Armenian plurality of Tiflis, from anger; fear, and humiliation, stayed away from the polls, as did thousands of Russians, who would not condescend to accept the status of Georgian subjects. Tiflis thus finally became a Georgian city ruled by Georgians. Armenians who previously could not have imagined residing anywhere but in the magnificent capital of the Caucasus now began to look toward Erevan."(P124)

All democratic republics require citizenship before an individual can vote. But the Armenians claim their people must be "Armenian" but should be an equal partner and vote in another republic’s elections without declaring citizenship. Is there a single example of this type of attitude in any other nation's history?

After Armenia willingly joined the Soviet Union in 1920, Russian and (probably) Armenian forces went on the warpath against Georgia in 1921. The two aggressors would team up again in 1992, in Karabakh.


Georgia came out of the two-week war with positive results.

Their army had been tested and had stood firm at the crucial moment. Georgia had succeeded in retaining Akhalkalak, whereas Armenia had been forced to relinquish all territory seized during the war. Moreover, as Tiflis had become the headquarters of the British command in western Transcaucasia and was more closely linked to Europe than any other capital in the Caucus, Georgia had been able both to present her case and to negotiate directly with allied representatives, thus gaining a decided advantage over Armenia. Zhordonia's government hoped that the Armenian monopoly on European sympathy had begun to crumble and that the rights of the Georgian republic would be given proper consideration by the world peace conference, which was beginning to assemble in Paris. (P125)

Armenia began to lick its wounds and look toward Azerbaijan as its next victim in attempting the conquest of someone else’s lands.

The first winter was especially hard. The Armenian people suffered greatly. Hovannissian notes: "The chaotic situation in Armenia was intensified by the presence of approximately 500,000 refugees."(P126) This number is confirmed by reports of American and British officials as well as by relief workers.

Hovannissian continues: "These figures do not include the additional thousands who had found temporary sanctuary in Zangezura and Karabagh, Georgia, the North Caucasus and the steppe lands of Russia.”(P127) In addition, this number did not include the many thousands of Armenian refugees in the Arab world.

Again, the Armenian numbers do not add up. If 1 million Armenians were removed from the Ottoman combat zones — if 500,000 went to Armenia, if there were additional many thousands of Armenian refugees in other places, if thousands of Armenian women were taken into Muslim households — just how can Armenians claim genocide of 1.5 million of their people? Based on Armenian history Professor Richard G. Hovannissian’s numbers, the alleged 1.5 million Armenian genocide just could not have happened.

The actual facts do prove the Armenian people suffered unimaginable horror; thanks to the selfish decisions made by their leaders in starting: a civil war in the Ottoman Empire; an attempt to start a civil war in Georgia; and an attempt to begin a civil war in Azerbaijan.

(More from this chapter has been recorded on the "Real Genocide" page.)



More on Georgia-Armenia Relations



(From Chapter Seven: What Kind of Christians Are the Armenians Who Claim to Be the First Christian State?)

Hovannissian writes, "During the first year of Georgian independence the collective power of the 400,000 Armenians of the Tiflis gubernia was sharply diminished." (1: Richard G. Hovannisian, The Republic of Armenia, Volume I, University of California, Los Angeles, p. 342) What he doesn’t say is why this happened. The rest of the story is the fact Armenia made a sneak, surprise and unprovoked attack on Georgia and this is why "the collective power of the 400,000 Armenians...was sharply diminished." Frankly speaking, the Georgian government had good cause not to trust the Armenians.

Hovannissian adds: "Moreover; the complicated question of citizenship threatened to relegate all Armenians of Georgia to the status of second-class subjects. Were these people the citizens of Georgia, of Armenia, of Russia, or might they hold dual or even triple citizenship? Bilateral Armeno-Georgian discussions failed to resolve the issue, for understandable reasons. Georgia could not tolerate divided loyalties and steadfastly insisted that only those who registered as Georgian citizens would be entitled to the rights and privileges incumbent therein." (P342)

What makes this an outrageous situation is because when the Armenians finally got around to holding an election later; they required the same legal requirements as Georgia. Armenia has an excellent record of wanting to talk when they try to get something for nothing, such as wanting Armenian residents of Georgia, to hold joint voting rights with both Armenia and Georgia. That was not going to happen, but the Armenians tried anyway to insert their own people into the Georgian voting process. Of course, the Armenians did not allow Georgian residents of Armenia to vote in Armenian elections, either. In other words, they did to Georgians exactly what they complained Georgia was doing to Armenians.

By the beginning of 1919 most Armenian officials, militia­men, and municipal employees in Tiflis had been erased from the payrolls, and the Georgians gained control of the local administration by monopolizing an election held in January, shortly after the Armeno-Georgian war in February the Georgians tightened their grip over the entire country through elections to a constituent assembly. As had been the case in the Tiflis municipal elections, the sizable Russian and Armenian elements either excluded themselves or were disqualified by intimidation or revised franchise requirements. (P342)

This is just another of the ongoing examples of the double standard Hovannissian attempts to explain away for his beloved Armenians. Note how he explains away Armenian aggression and blames others when Armenians start and lose wars.

Hovannissian objects to the Georgians removing Armenian officials, military men, and government employees from their positions of influence to ensure loyalty of all citizens at a time of war. What would he have Georgians do — welcome with open arms those Armenians who deliberately attempted to betray, back-stab, and undermine Georgia? Armenians, once again, bit the hand that fed them and then cried "foul" when the master reacted.

Hovannissian objects to Georgia’s requiring that only its citizens could vote. Why should Armenians, Russians, or anyone else vote in the Georgian elections, especially if they choose to refuse to register as Georgian citizens? Armenia, at this point in time, remained a true dictatorship, pure and simple, even though Hovannissian calls the government de facto.






Hamazasp Ohandjanian

Hamazasp Ohandjanian, 1919

The case of Hamozusp Ohandjanian is typical. Both Georgia and Armenia were a part of the Socialist International Organization. The land question between the two countries was put on the agenda of the Second Conference of the organization. Hovannissian records the following: "In his report to the International, Ohandjanian described the Armenian crucifixion of 1915 and resurrection of 1918. Like Avetis Abaronian he too had come to espouse the maximum Armenian goal, calling upon the labor movement to aid in the creation of a united republic encompassing Caucasian Armenia, Turkish Armenia, and Cilicia. The Second International, he insisted, must add its voice to the chorus of indignation that had arisen because Armenia, despite tremendous sufferings and the massacre of a million innocent victims, had not been given a place at the Paris Peace Conference." (P350)

The number of alleged victims is placed at 1 million here. Many years later; this number was jacked up to 1.5 million Armenian victims. Some Armenians claim as many as 2 million victims. Do the dead multiply? The fact is, this number is placed anywhere from 300,000 to 2 million, settling at about 1.5 million, as if it is an auction. Moreover; the number of Muslim victims, which is about 2.5 million (roughly four Muslim casualties for every Armenian casualty) is never given, as if they do not count. Why doesn’t he provide this documented evidence in his so-called history?

More importantly and more troubling for Christians is Armenians comparing themselves to the "crucifixion" and "resurrection" of Jesus Christ; this is blasphemy. Webster’s New World Dictionary defines blasphemy as "any remark or action held to be irreverent or disrespectful." This is especially true "to the calling down of evil upon someone or something." The Armenians consider Muslims as not being human. However; by Webster’s definition, no such exclusion is permitted. Blasphemy is blasphemy and another’s religion or race has nothing to do with it.

After Armenia was driven out of Georgia, the Armenians turned their attention to try to take land from Azerbaijan. Armenia, as always, first tried to talk their way into obtaining the land they coveted. Hovannissian records:

Although few planning sessions took place, a constant dialogue was maintained through several special commissions and through informal meetings involving two or more of the delegations. The political combinations, however arranged, and the prolonged interviews produced meager results, if in­deed results were anticipated or desired. Rivalry flared on nearly every topic. Azerbaijan demanded additional summer pasturage in the mountains of Armenia and the repatriation of all Muslim refugees who had fled in the face of Armenian bands lead by such guerrilla fighters as Andranik. Armenia called for unhindered transit privileges throughout Transcaucasia and the withdrawal of Azerbaijan military forces from Karabagh. (P357)



Georgia and Azerbaijan Strike Back


pg. 190 of Weems' book: "In October 1919 the Georgian and Azerbaijani delegations retained the services of former New York Congressman Walter M. Chandler to rally American opinion to their cause and to counteract the bad impressions made by Armenian propaganda. Chandler offered to do whatever possible ‘to neutralize and paralyze the unfriendly work of the Armenians’ and concurred in the need for an organization along the lines of the American Committee for the Independence ofArmenia." (Richard G. Hovannisian, The Republic of Armenia, Volume III, University of California, Los Angeles, P174)

Perhaps no country in the history of the world has done more to say and do whatever it took to obtain foreign help than has Armenia. How much money have the Armenian leaders spent to influence public opinion in Christian nations of the world just to obtain something for nothing?


© Holdwater
tallarmeniantale.com/georgia.htm