🇺🇸 U.S. SENATE RESOLUTION NO. 359

History

On the Recognition of Armenia and Its Territorial Boundaries Adopted May 11, 1920

Whereas the evidence presented at the hearings conducted by the Subcommittee of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations has clearly established the truth of reports concerning mass killings and other atrocities suffered by the Armenian people; and Whereas the people of the United States are deeply moved by the deplorable situation in Armenia—marked by insecurity, famine, and suffering; and Whereas the independence of the Republic of Armenia has been duly recognized by the Supreme Council of the Peace Conference and by the Government of the United States of America; therefore Be it resolved, That the Senate of the United States hereby sincerely congratulates the people of Armenia on the recognition of the independence of the Republic of Armenia, without thereby predetermining its territorial boundaries. —Congressional Record, Vol. 59, p. 7533, 66th Congress, 2nd Session, S. RES. 359 (Emphasis added – Yu.B.)

📡 TELEGRAM NO. 606

From A. Aharonian, Head of the Delegation of the Republic of Armenia at the Paris Peace Conference, to the President of the League of Nations Council On the Coordinated Ultimatum from Kemalist Turkey and Soviet Russia via Soviet Azerbaijan Demanding the Cession of Karabakh and Zangezur May 13, 1920

According to official information received by the Armenian Delegation, Azerbaijan has proclaimed Soviet rule and issued an ultimatum to the Armenian Government demanding the cession of Karabakh and Zangezur. Ordzhonikidze, representing Soviet authority in the North Caucasus and supporting Azerbaijan, informed the Government in Erivan that Armenia’s refusal would be considered a declaration of war against Russia. Turkish forces are also preparing to attack Armenia from the direction of Erzurum. All of this has been coordinated. Turkey is advancing a Pan-Turanian movement. Azerbaijani forces are commanded by Khalil Pasha and Nuri Pasha, the cousin and brother of Enver Pasha, respectively. The Pan-Turanian movement, under the guise of Bolshevism, aims to destroy the Armenian Republic. The Republic faces imminent catastrophe, lacking both weapons and ammunition. The Armenian Delegation foresaw and warned of this danger fifteen months ago and appealed in vain to the Powers. The Armenian Republic is under constant assault by Turkish enemies but has not received a single cartridge from its powerful allies. If Armenia does not receive assistance, the horrific massacre of 1915 will be repeated on an even greater scale. —Procès-Verbal of the Fifth Session of the Council of the League of Nations, Rome, May 14–19, 1920, p. 169 (Emphasis added – Yu.B.)

đź“ś LETTER NO. 607

From the Supreme Council of the Allied Powers to the Secretary-General of the League of Nations, Sir Eric Drummond On the Decisions Taken April 26, 1920, at the San Remo Conference Regarding Armenia’s Borders with Turkey and Azerbaijan (Appendix 43 to the Minutes of the Second (Closed) Meeting of the Fifth Session of the League of Nations Council, May 14, 1920)

During the Peace Conference, it was frequently suggested that the United States might assume a mandate over Armenia, though no formal proposal had been submitted or rejected. The Supreme Council now believes the time has come to take this step. At the meeting on April 25, it was resolved:

(a) To approach President Wilson with a request that the United States of America accept a mandate over Armenia, under the conditions outlined in Part III, Section 5, of the first draft of the Peace Treaty with Turkey. (b) That regardless of the U.S. Government’s response to the mandate question, President Wilson should be asked to act as arbitrator in determining the boundaries of Armenia, as set forth in the following proposed article. (c) That the article concerning Armenia be included in the Peace Treaty in the following form:

“Turkey and Armenia, along with the other High Contracting Parties, agree to submit to the arbitration of the President of the United States the determination of the boundary between Turkey and Armenia in the vilayets of Erzurum, Trebizond, Van, and Bitlis, and to accept his decision, as well as any measures he may prescribe regarding Armenia’s access to the sea.”

Until the arbitral decision is rendered, the borders between Turkey and Armenia shall remain unchanged. The northern and eastern borders of Armenia—that is, those with Georgia and Azerbaijan—shall be determined by the Supreme Council at the same time as the Turkish-Armenian border, unless a voluntary agreement is reached among the three Caucasian states.

To ensure the League Council is fully informed, a copy of the note sent to President Wilson on this matter is attached. From the resolution and the note, the League Council will understand that the Allied Powers, unable due to their overextended commitments to assist Armenia beyond the provision of arms and equipment, face serious difficulties in defining Armenia’s borders in a manner that best aligns with their immediate interests and future outlook. In truth, a definitive solution to the problem is unlikely until it is known whether the United States will accept the mandate for Armenia and, if not, to what extent it will assist—whether through personnel or at least financial support—for a cause the U.S. Government itself recently described as “the demand and hope of the civilized world.” —Papers Relating to the Foreign Relations of the United States, 1920, Washington, 1936, Vol. III, pp. 779–783 (Emphasis added – Yu.B.)

đź•Š RESPONSE OF THE LEAGUE OF NATIONS COUNCIL

To the Letter from the Supreme Council of the Allied and Associated Powers Regarding the Protection of Armenia from Imminent Aggression by Soviet Azerbaijan, the RSFSR, and Kemalist Turkey May 15, 1920

The Council of the League of Nations, convened in Rome on May 15, 1920, reviewed the reply of the Supreme Council of the Allied Powers to the memorandum dated April 11 concerning Armenia. The Council notes with great satisfaction that the Allied Powers have engaged in correspondence with the President of the United States, as the Council has always been convinced that American protection and assistance—whether through a mandate or another form—would offer an excellent solution to the Armenian question. Nevertheless, the Council may deem it necessary to continue examining this issue. The League of Nations Council will, by all means available to it, assist the Supreme Council in protecting Armenia in the future and in fulfilling the solemn commitment made to this unfortunate nation on behalf of humanity. —Procès-Verbal of the Fifth Session of the Council of the League of Nations, Rome, May 14–19, 1920, p. 159 (Emphasis added – Yu.B.)

⚠️ DISCUSSION OF THE THREATENED AGGRESSION AGAINST ARMENIA

At the Third (Closed) Meeting of the Fifth Session of the League of Nations Council May 15, 1920, 16:30

All members of the Council and the Secretary-General were present.

  1. Telegrams received from the Armenian Delegation. Mr. Tittoni reported that the Council had received telegrams from Mr. Aharonian, head of the Delegation of the Republic of Armenia, sent from Paris:

(a) A telegram dated May 13 (Appendix 46), requesting Armenia’s admission to the League of Nations. This telegram was forwarded to the Secretary-General for consideration.

(b) A telegram dated May 13 (Appendix 46a), stating that Soviet authorities from the North Caucasus and Azerbaijan, along with Turkish nationalists, had united and were threatening to invade Armenia unless Bolshevik rule was established there. Preparations for an immediate invasion were complete, and Armenia lacked the strength to resist. Armenia appealed urgently to the League of Nations for assistance.

Mr. Tittoni noted that the League had no means to provide direct aid to Armenia. It was decided to forward the telegram to the Supreme Council. —Procès-Verbal of the Fifth Session of the Council of the League of Nations, Rome, May 14–19, 1920, p. 169

🇺🇸 MESSAGE FROM U.S. PRESIDENT WOODROW WILSON TO CONGRESS

Requesting Authorization for the United States to Accept a Mandate for Armenia May 24, 1920

Honorable Members of Congress,

On May 14, the Commission under the President received an official communication from the Secretary of the United States Senate containing the following preamble and resolution:

Whereas the evidence presented at hearings conducted by the Subcommittee of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations has clearly established the truth of reports concerning beatings and other atrocities suffered by the Armenian people; and Whereas the people of the United States are deeply moved by the deplorable situation in Armenia—marked by insecurity, famine, and suffering; and Whereas the independence of the Republic of Armenia has been duly recognized by the Supreme Council of the Peace Conference and by the Government of the United States of America; therefore Be it resolved, That the Senate of the United States hereby sincerely congratulates the people of Armenia on the recognition of the independence of the Republic of Armenia, without thereby predetermining its territorial boundaries; Be it further resolved, That the Senate of the United States expresses its hope that the Armenian people will soon achieve the establishment of a stable government, the proper protection of individual rights and freedoms, and the full realization of their national aspirations.

I received and read this document with great interest and genuine satisfaction—not only because it reflects my own convictions and sentiments toward Armenia and its people, but especially because it seems to me to be the voice of the American people, expressing their true beliefs and deep Christian sympathy, and declaring their intention to fulfill a duty which they clearly recognize as theirs.

Sympathy for Armenia does not arise from any particular segment of our population, but manifests itself in this country with remarkable spontaneity and sincerity among a vast number of Christians—men and women whose voluntary contributions have virtually saved Armenia at the most critical moment of its existence. In their hearts, these generous people have embraced the cause of Armenia as their own.

It is to this people and its Government that the hopes and most earnest expectations of the struggling Armenian nation are now directed, as it emerges from a period of indescribable suffering and trial. I trust that Congress will find it reasonable to respond to these hopes and expectations with utmost generosity.

From the clear testimony of responsible representatives of many nations striving for independence and the restoration of peaceful life, I know that the Government of the United States is viewed with extraordinary trust and confidence. I believe that we would, at the very least, delay the hopeful progress of civilization if we were to refuse the request to become helpful friends and advisors to such nations, when approached with authoritative and official appeals for counsel and assistance. —66th Congress, 2nd Session, House of Representatives, Document No. 791 (Emphasis added – Yu.B.)

🇺🇸 AMERICAN SENATOR PHILIP MARSHALL BROWN

On the Threat of Total Annihilation of Armenia by Turks and Azerbaijanis Excerpt from “The Mandate Over Armenia,” The American Journal of International Law, Vol. 14, No. 3, October 1920

“Given all these circumstances, it is hardly surprising that the American people exhibit great reluctance to become deeply entangled in the Eastern Question by assuming the heavy burden of a mandate over Armenia.

And yet, the hearts of Americans have been profoundly moved by the tragic fate of this unfortunate people—whose pitiful remnants remain unprotected from complete annihilation at the hands of the Turks, Kurds, and their Tatar neighbors in Azerbaijan.

Substantial financial contributions continue to flow into Near East relief funds, and many courageous Americans, under harsh and dangerous conditions, are actively engaged in various capacities to deliver urgent aid to these desperate people.

The question of a mandate over Armenia starkly illuminates the broader issue of the obligations of the family of nations toward peoples and countries still in the late stages of development.

There are many such situations in the world, but Armenia’s suffering is undoubtedly among the most harrowing.

The fact remains that after the conclusion of a terrible war—one we hoped would enshrine the rights of all nations and lay a firm foundation for international law—the world appears indifferent to the rights of an ancient race still held in bondage.

Whatever justification may be offered for refusing the mandate over Armenia, it is doubtful that the American people can remain passive and allow this country to be utterly eradicated, while the rest of the world, cynically pursuing its selfish aims, refuses to take the necessary steps to prevent such an unimaginable catastrophe.

Surely, the conscientious citizens of the world must demand that the United States affirm its moral leadership in defense of the fundamental rights of nations.”

đź•Š TERRITORIAL DELIMITATION OF ARMENIA

In the Treaty of Sèvres Between the Principal Allied Powers—The British Empire, France, Italy, and Japan—and the Allied Powers—Armenia, Belgium, Greece, the Hedjaz, Poland, Portugal, Romania, the Serb-Croat-Slovene State, and Czechoslovakia—on One Side, and Turkey on the Other August 10, 1920

…Considering that, at the request of the Imperial Ottoman Government, the Principal Allied Powers granted Turkey an armistice on October 30, 1918, to enable the conclusion of a Peace Treaty;

Considering that the Allied Powers likewise desire that the war—into which some of them were successively drawn, directly or indirectly, against Turkey, and which originated with the declaration of war against Serbia by the former Imperial and Royal Austro-Hungarian Government on July 28, 1914, and the hostilities initiated by Turkey on October 29, 1914, against the Allied Powers and conducted in alliance with Germany—should give way to a stable and lasting peace;

For this purpose, the HIGH CONTRACTING PARTIES … HAVE AGREED UPON THE FOLLOWING PROVISIONS:

Armenia

Article 88 Turkey declares that it recognizes Armenia, as already recognized by the Allied Powers, as a free and independent State.

Article 89 Turkey and Armenia, together with the other High Contracting Parties, agree to submit to the arbitration of the President of the United States of America the determination of the boundary between Turkey and Armenia in the vilayets of Erzurum, Trebizond, Van, and Bitlis, and to accept his decision, as well as any measures he may prescribe regarding Armenia’s access to the sea and the demilitarization of any part of Ottoman territory adjacent to the said boundary.

Article 90 Should the boundary determination under Article 89 result in the transfer to Armenia of all or part of the territory of the aforementioned vilayets, Turkey hereby declares that, as of the date of the decision, it renounces all rights and claims to the transferred territory. The provisions of this Treaty applicable to territories separated from Turkey shall henceforth apply to that territory. The share and nature of Turkey’s financial obligations that Armenia shall bear, or the rights it may invoke in connection with the territory placed under its sovereignty, shall be determined in accordance with Articles 241–244 of Part VIII (Financial Clauses) of this Treaty. Subsequent conventions shall regulate, if necessary, any matters not settled by this Treaty and arising from the transfer of the said territory.

Article 91 If any part of the territory referred to in Article 89 is transferred to Armenia, a Boundary Commission—whose composition shall be determined later—shall be established within three months of the decision mentioned in that article, for the purpose of demarcating on the ground the boundary between Armenia and Turkey as determined by said decision.

Article 92 The boundaries of Armenia with Azerbaijan and Georgia shall be determined by mutual agreement among the interested States. If, after the decision under Article 89 is rendered, the interested States fail to reach a mutual agreement on their boundaries, the boundary shall be determined by the Principal Allied Powers, who shall also ensure its demarcation on the ground.

đź•Š STATEMENT BY P. MANTOU, DIRECTOR OF THE POLITICAL DEPARTMENT OF THE LEAGUE OF NATIONS

On the International Legal Status of Armenia Following the Signing of the Treaty of Sèvres

“There is no doubt that Armenia is henceforth a state recognized both de facto and de jure by the powers that permitted it to sign the Treaty of Sèvres.” —1920 Registry. Section No. 28, Document No. 8184, Dossier No. 4395

🇺🇸 STATEMENT BY U.S. SECRETARY OF STATE BAINBRIDGE COLBY

To Italian Ambassador Avezzana on the Need for Russian Cooperation in the Final Determination of Armenia’s Borders August 10, 1920

…Finally, while the U.S. Government gladly recognizes the independence of Armenia, it maintains that the final determination of its borders should not occur without the cooperation and consent of Russia.

Russia’s interests are affected not only because a significant portion of the territory of the new Armenian state, once its borders are defined, formerly belonged to the Russian Empire; equally important is the fact that Armenia requires Russia’s goodwill and friendly protection in order to remain a free and independent country.

Summarizing the position of the U.S. Government, I would say that it would welcome a declaration by the Allied and Associated Powers affirming that the territorial integrity and legitimate borders of Russia must be respected.

These borders should properly include the entire territory of the former Russian Empire, excluding Finland, ethnic Poland, and any territory that may, by agreement, form part of the Armenian state.

The aspirations of these peoples for independence are legitimate. Each was forcibly annexed, and their liberation from oppression and foreign rule does not constitute aggression against Russia’s territorial rights. Their cause enjoys the support of public opinion among all free nations. —Papers Relating to the Foreign Relations of the United States, 1920, Vol. III, pp. 463–468 (Emphasis added – Yu.B.)

🇬🇧 MEMORANDUM FROM THE BRITISH FOREIGN OFFICE

“Armenia and the Caucasus” Regarding Disputed Territories September 1920

The Republic of Armenia (Erivan), formerly part of the Russian Empire, consists of the following nine Russian administrative districts: Erivan, Novo-Bayazet, Sumalinsk, Etchmiadzin, Alexandropol, Kars, Kagyzman, Olti, and Ardahan.

There is also a district known as Barchalinsk, which was disputed between the Republics of Armenia and Georgia. However, an agreement was later reached, and the district was temporarily divided without prejudice to any future settlement.

The districts of Sharur-Daralagez, Nakhichevan, Zangezur, and the western part of Karabakh are contested between Armenia and the Tatars of the Azerbaijani Republic. In the summer of this year, following Azerbaijan’s alignment with the Bolsheviks, Armenia was attacked from both sides and signed an agreement providing for the temporary cession of these territories to Soviet Russia*. However, neither the Armenian nor the Azerbaijani governments appear strong enough to prevent the ongoing guerrilla warfare.

It is extremely difficult to determine to whom these districts should belong…

⚔️ Military Situation

At the time of writing this memorandum, the Republic of Armenia is under attack by bands of Turkish nationalists along its southern borders, while Azerbaijani Tatars and Soviet forces are diverting its military strength in Nakhichevan and Zangezur. Weapons, ammunition, and military equipment are being supplied by the Allies… As for manpower, both republics possess a sufficient number of trained fighters to defend their independence against any forces that might be deployed by Mustafa Kemal. —Armenia: Political and Ethnic Boundaries, 1878–1948, ed. A.L.P. Burdett, Archive Editions, 1998, pp. 728–732 (Emphasis added – Yu.B.) *Refers to Armenia’s consent to the temporary occupation of disputed territories by RSFSR forces. 616

Yuri Barsegov “Nagorno-Karabakh in International Law and Global Politics”

Artatsolum

Read Also:

You might also like:

LETTER FROM THE HEAD OF THE DELEGATION OF THE REPUBLIC OF ARMENIA REGARDING THE AGGRESSION OF BOLSHEVIK RUSSIA, SOVIET AZERBAIJAN, AND KEMALIST TURKEY

LETTER FROM THE HEAD OF THE DELEGATION OF THE REPUBLIC OF ARMENIA REGARDING THE AGGRESSION OF BOLSHEVIK RUSSIA, SOVIET AZERBAIJAN, AND KEMALIST TURKEY

The Question of Armenia’s Borders at the First (Preliminary) Conference of the Allied Powers in London

The Question of Armenia’s Borders at the First (Preliminary) Conference of the Allied Powers in London

THE ATTITUDE OF THE ALLIED HIGH COMMISSIONER IN ARMENIA, COLONEL GASKELL, TOWARDS THE ARBITRARILY ESTABLISHED BORDERS OF THE TRANSCAUCASIAN STATES

THE ATTITUDE OF THE ALLIED HIGH COMMISSIONER IN ARMENIA, COLONEL GASKELL, TOWARDS THE ARBITRARILY ESTABLISHED BORDERS OF THE TRANSCAUCASIAN STATES

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *