Latest / The Story of Armenia: Survival Through Empires and Genocide — Fexingo History / Armenian Diplomacy at the Paris Peace Conference
Transcript
- Lucas: If you've been stepping into history with us episode by episode, you know that for Armenians, 1920 wasn't just a date on a calendar—it was the moment they thought they had finally won. After the bloodshed of Sardarabad and the harrowing marches of Der Zor, the Armenian delegation arrived in Paris not as supplicants, but as a sovereign nation seeking its rightful place on the map. Luna: But maps drawn in Paris often ignored the people living on those lines. Lucas: Exactly. And leading that charge was Boghos Nubar Pasha, a veteran diplomat who had spent decades lobbying European courts for Armenian rights. He brought with him a small but fiercely dedicated team, including Ardashes Karamanouk, who would handle the military details, and Missak Torossian, whose job was to make sure the humanitarian aid flowing through Near East Relief didn't get lost in bureaucratic red tape. Lucas: Their strategy was built entirely on President Woodrow Wilson’s Fourteen Points, specifically the promise that national aspirations should be respected. They argued that Armenia’s claim wasn't just about suffering; it was about creating a stable buffer state that could protect the Caucasus from both Russian revolutionary chaos and Turkish nationalism. Luna: Did the Allies actually listen to them? Lucas: They listened, but they also looked at their own pockets. The British and French were already carving up the Ottoman Empire behind closed doors through the Sykes-Picot Agreement, which had nothing to do with Armenian self-determination and everything to do with oil and strategic access to India. So while Nubar was speaking in the grand halls of the Quai d'Orsay, his counterparts were negotiating in secret rooms where Armenian borders were treated as disposable bargaining chips. Lucas: The tension came to a head when the Commission on Independent Armenia, led by General James Harbord, actually recommended a massive state. Harbord’s report suggested that Armenia should include much of eastern Anatolia, giving it direct access to the Black Sea ports of Trabzon and Samsun. Luna: That sounds like a completely viable country. Lucas: It was viable on paper, but politically toxic for the Americans. Wilson was facing intense isolationist pressure back home, and supporting a large Armenia meant committing American troops to a region he had no interest in policing. So while the treaty itself—the Treaty of Sèvres—was signed in August 1920 and technically recognized an independent Armenia, the United States refused to ratify it. Luna: So they got the paper but not the protection. Lucas: Precisely. It was a hollow victory. The treaty gave Armenia legal sovereignty, but without American guarantee or British occupation forces, it left the new republic exposed to the very forces that had nearly destroyed it. Meanwhile, back in Anatolia, Mustafa Kemal was rallying Turkish nationalists who viewed the Treaty of Sèvres as a death sentence for their identity. Lucas: This is where Missak Torossian’s role becomes crucial because he wasn't just watching politics; he was trying to keep millions of refugees alive while the diplomats played chess. He coordinated with Near East Relief to feed displaced populations in areas that were technically Armenian but effectively controlled by warlords or retreating Ottoman armies. Luna: He was basically running a logistics network in the middle of a collapsing empire. Lucas: He was, and he did it with terrifying efficiency. But even his efforts couldn't stop the political momentum shifting against Armenia. As Kemal’s forces began to win battles against the Greeks and the French, the Western powers started pulling back their support. They realized that propping up a tiny Armenian state was too expensive and too risky compared to securing trade deals with a rising Turkey. Lucas: The irony is that the same diplomats who had championed Armenian rights in 1919 were now quietly encouraging Yerevan to seek a separate peace with Ankara before it was too late. Ardashes Karamanouk found himself arguing for military alliances that Britain simply wouldn't provide, leaving the Armenian army isolated and outgunned. Luna: It feels like they were fighting two wars at once. Lucas: They were. One against the Ottomans in the field, and one against the indifference of the League of Nations in Paris. Nubar tried everything—personal appeals to Lloyd George, desperate telegrams to Washington—but the window was closing fast. By the time the Treaty of Sèvres was ratified by the other powers, the military situation on the ground had already begun to reverse. Lucas: And this brings us to the heartbreaking realization that comes after every major diplomatic defeat: the survivors have to rebuild. For the Armenians in the diaspora, and especially for those who had just tasted freedom in 1918, the unraveling of Sèvres felt like a second genocide in slow motion. Luna: I never really thought about how close they were to having a real state. Lucas: It’s easy to look back and see the failure, but in that brief window between 1919 and 1920, they actually held power. They had ambassadors, they had treaties, they had international recognition. The fact that it all collapsed so quickly doesn't diminish what they achieved in Paris; it just highlights how fragile sovereignty can be when great powers decide it’s inconvenient. Luna: So the dream didn't die then, it just went underground. Lucas: In many ways, yes. The diplomatic framework they built influenced every subsequent effort to gain recognition for Armenian rights, right up to the modern day. But for those men in Paris, the immediate future was one of exile and uncertainty. Luna: What happened to Nubar and his team after the treaty failed? Lucas: Nubar continued to lobby until his health failed, dying in Paris in 1931, still hoping for a revision of the borders that had slipped away. Karamanouk stayed in the diplomatic corps, working to maintain the Armenian presence in the international arena, while Torossian remained deeply involved in refugee relief until the Great Depression cut off funding. Lucas: Their story is a reminder that history isn't just made by generals on battlefields; it's also shaped in quiet rooms by people who refuse to let their people be erased from the record. Luna: That makes their struggle feel incredibly relevant today. Lucas: It does. Because the question of how the international community responds to displacement and sovereignty is still very much alive. If today was worth a coffee to you, that's the link — buy me a coffee dot com slash fexingo. It helps us keep digging into these stories without ads interrupting the flow. Luna: Yeah, and it keeps the archive growing for everyone else. Lucas: Exactly. And while those diplomats in Paris were losing their battle, the Armenian soldiers on the front lines were preparing for one last stand that would change the shape of the Caucasus forever.