Israel’s policy shift on the Armenian Genocide

Israel’s decision to formally recognize the Armenian Genocide (1915-1923) marks one of the most consequential shifts in its historical and diplomatic posture in decades. After years of deliberately avoiding official recognition in order to preserve strategic relations with Turkey, the Israeli Cabinet unanimously approved a proposal recognizing the systematic mass killings of Armenians by the Ottoman Empire during World War I as genocide.

Although the measure still requires approval by the Knesset before becoming law, the Cabinet’s decision represents a significant move. It comes at a time of unprecedented tensions between Israel and Turkey, whose bilateral relationship has deteriorated dramatically since the outbreak of the Gaza war in October 2023.

The Armenian Genocide: One of the 20th century’s defining atrocities

The Armenian Genocide refers to the systematic deportation, massacre, and destruction of the Ottoman Empire’s Armenian population between 1915 and 1923. During this period, the Committee of Union and Progress (CUP), commonly known as the Young Turks, implemented policies that resulted in the deaths of an estimated 1.5 million Armenians through executions, forced deportations, starvation, disease, and death marches across the Syrian desert.

The campaign began on 24 April 1915 with the arrest and execution of hundreds of Armenian intellectuals and community leaders in Constantinople, an event widely regarded as the formal beginning of the genocide. Many survivors were forcibly converted to Islam, enslaved, or permanently displaced, laying the foundations for the modern Armenian diaspora.

Today, the overwhelming consensus among historians considers these events to constitute the first major genocide of the 20th century. Nevertheless, Turkey continues to reject this characterization, maintaining that the deaths occurred within the broader context of civil unrest, famine, and wartime violence rather than as part of a deliberate policy of extermination.

Why Israel delayed recognition for decades

Israel’s hesitation to officially recognize the Armenian Genocide has long been driven by geopolitical calculations rather than historical uncertainty. Successive Israeli governments generally refrained from using the term “genocide,” despite widespread scholarly consensus and repeated parliamentary initiatives advocating recognition.

The principal reason was Israel’s strategic partnership with Turkey. Between 1948 and the early 2000s, Turkey represented one of Israel’s closest Muslim allies, with cooperation extending across military, intelligence, economic, and diplomatic spheres. Official recognition of the Armenian Genocide risked provoking Ankara and jeopardizing this valuable relationship.

At the same time, many Israeli politicians and Holocaust scholars acknowledged the historical parallels between the Armenian experience and other instances of mass extermination. Numerous Israeli leaders, including Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in previous remarks, had publicly referred to the Armenian tragedy as genocide without translating those statements into formal state policy.

Thus, historical recognition remained subordinate to diplomatic considerations until the gradual collapse of Israeli-Turkish relations fundamentally altered the political equation.

Deteriorating Israeli-Turkish relations

The latest recognition reflects the profound transformation in relations between Israel and Turkey over the past 2 decades, particularly under President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan.

Political disagreements intensified following the 2010 Mavi Marmara incident but worsened dramatically after Hamas’ attack on Israel on 7 October 2023 and Israel’s subsequent military campaign in Gaza. Erdoğan emerged as one of Israel’s most outspoken international critics, repeatedly accusing Israel of committing genocide against Palestinians and comparing Israeli leaders to Nazi officials.

Israel, in turn, strongly rejected these allegations, accusing Turkey of supporting Hamas politically while describing Erdoğan’s rhetoric as inflammatory and hostile. Diplomatic relations deteriorated further as Turkey suspended trade with Israel and intensified its international campaign against Israeli military operations.

In this context, Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar insisted that recognition of the Armenian Genocide was not an act of retaliation against Turkey. Nevertheless, the timing leaves little doubt that the worsening bilateral relationship removed the principal obstacle that had prevented successive Israeli governments from taking such a step.

A moral position or strategic diplomacy?

Israeli officials framed the decision primarily as a moral obligation grounded in historical truth.

Sa’ar argued that the overwhelming historical evidence documenting the Armenian Genocide imposes an ethical responsibility upon Israel to acknowledge the suffering endured by the Armenian people. He condemned what he described as an institutionalized campaign of denial and historical revisionism, asserting that “it is never too late to do the right thing.”

However, strategic considerations cannot be entirely separated from the decision. More than 30 countries, including the United States (U.S.), France, Germany, Lebanon, and Syria, have already recognized the Armenian Genocide. Israel’s move therefore places it within an expanding international consensus while simultaneously signaling that Turkish pressure no longer impacts Israeli policy.

Turkey’s response and the continuing politics of historical memory

Turkey reacted swiftly, dismissing Israel’s decision as politically motivated rather than historically principled.

The Turkish Foreign Ministry accused Israel of attempting to divert international attention from allegations concerning its military campaign in Gaza, arguing that a government facing genocide accusations before the International Court of Justice (ICJ) lacks the moral authority to make judgments regarding historical atrocities.

Turkey reiterated its long-standing position that the events of 1915 occurred amid civil conflict, rebellion, and wartime instability rather than constituting a deliberate campaign of extermination. Turkish officials also argued that casualty figures remain disputed and that Muslims likewise suffered significant losses during the collapse of the Ottoman Empire.

These competing narratives demonstrate that recognition of historical atrocities remains closely intertwined with present-day diplomacy, national identity, and international legitimacy.

Hence, the timing of Israel’s recognition of the Armenian Genocide reflects the profound deterioration in Israeli-Turkish relations and the broader strategic realignment occurring across the Middle East. More than a century after the genocide, debates surrounding the events of 1915 continue to shape diplomacy, influence regional rivalries, and remind the international community that the pursuit of historical justice often remains inseparable from the realities of contemporary international politics.