Why Armenia Should Be Free: Armenia's Rôle in the Present War

In Short

This work is a firsthand historical account and political argument written in 1918 by a prominent Armenian leader and volunteer commander. It details the catastrophic impact of the Great War on the Armenian people, documenting their strategic decision to side with the Allies, their subsequent betrayal by the collapsing Russian Empire, and their desperate, isolated defense against Turkish and Tartar forces. By chronicling these events, the text serves as both a memoir of survival and a plea for international recognition of Armenia’s right to sovereignty in the post-war order.

The Story

The narrative begins in 1914, at the dawn of the global conflict, when both the Russian and Turkish empires court the Armenian people, sensing their vital strategic position on the Caucasus front. Despite a long history of suffering under both regimes, the Armenians choose to align themselves with the Allies, driven by the hope that a democratic victory will finally secure their national autonomy. This decision proves to be a harrowing gamble. As the war intensifies, the Armenian people face a dual betrayal: the systematic, genocidal massacres perpetrated by the Ottoman government, and the subsequent indifference and exploitation by the Russian military bureaucracy.

The author, a former deputy in the Ottoman Parliament and a veteran volunteer commander, provides an unflinching look at the military realities of the front. He details how Armenian volunteers, acting as the rear guard and reserve, repeatedly blunted Turkish offensives at Sarikamish and throughout the Alashkert valley. These actions, while essential to the Allied cause, come at a staggering cost. Behind the lines, the Armenian populace is subjected to mass deportations and slaughter. The narrative highlights the desperate, localized resistance in cities like Van, Sasoun, and Urfa, where civilians held off regular Turkish divisions to protect their survival and the retreat of refugees.

As the Russian Empire collapses in 1917, the situation for the Armenians shifts from precarious to existential. Left entirely abandoned by the retreating Russian army, the Armenian people find themselves surrounded by hostile Tartar populations and encroaching Turkish forces. The story then tracks the emergence of the Republic of Ararat, a small, isolated state forced to fight for every inch of its territory against overwhelming odds. The author depicts the harrowing defense of Baku, where Armenian forces and a small, late-arriving contingent of British soldiers struggle to hold the oil fields against the combined might of Turco-Tartar forces.

The account concludes in the autumn of 1918, on the cusp of an Allied victory. The author reflects on the heavy toll—over one million lives lost—and the bitter realization that the world’s great powers often view Armenia as a pawn rather than an ally. Despite the loss of Baku and the devastation of their ancestral lands, the spirit of the Armenian people remains unbroken. The book ends with a powerful, metaphorical address to the international community, asserting that the empires that sought to destroy Armenia—the Ottoman, the Russian, and the German—have ultimately paved the way for their own destruction through their crimes, leaving the cause of Armenian liberty as a necessary foundation for a just, post-war world.

How It Unfolds

The choice of sides The narrative opens with the geopolitical pressures of 1914, explaining why the Armenians chose to align with the Allies despite the well-founded distrust of Russian Czarism. This decision is contextualized as a calculated risk taken in the hope of securing international support for national autonomy.

Battles and betrayal The middle section shifts to the front lines, detailing how Armenian volunteer battalions provided critical, often decisive, support to the Russian army. It simultaneously documents how Russian commanders and officials actively pillaged Armenian property and sabotaged the very people aiding their cause.

The collapse of the front The focus moves to the chaos following the Russian Revolution, when the total withdrawal of Russian troops left the Armenian population isolated. This section vividly portrays the transition from being a supported ally to being an entirely abandoned entity facing total annihilation.

The final stand The closing chapters describe the heroic, doomed defense of Baku and the formation of the Republic of Ararat. The narrative culminates in an impassioned argument for why Armenian independence is the ultimate test of the Allied moral commitment to democracy.

The People

Garegin Pasdermadjian, known by his nom de guerre Armen Garo, serves as the primary witness and narrator. He is a man caught between his professional training as a scientist and his life’s work as a revolutionary and diplomat. He moves from the Ottoman Parliament to the battlefield and finally to the halls of power in America, seeking to translate the suffering of his people into political action.

The Turkish leadership, represented by figures like Enver Pasha, is depicted as driven by short-sighted imperialism and a brutal, genocidal agenda. They are presented as the primary antagonists whose goal was the total erasure of the Armenian people.

The Russian military commanders, such as General Kaledine, appear as cynical opportunists. Their interest in Armenia is purely territorial; they are willing to accept Armenian military aid while simultaneously looting Armenian churches and abandoning the population to the mercy of their enemies.

The Armenian volunteers, led by commanders like Dro and Keri, are characterized by their desperate courage. These men are not professional soldiers but citizens who take up arms out of necessity, holding the line against impossible odds to save their families and refugees. They stand as the moral contrast to the imperial bureaucrats, representing the sacrifice required to maintain a national identity under the shadow of extinction.

In Its Own Voice

"The horrors of the Armenian massacres have been so unendurable that many people have had to try to escape from thinking about Armenia in order to keep their sanity in the midst of such wholesale horror."

In the introduction, George Nasmyth identifies the sheer scale of the tragedy as a reason for the world's dangerous tendency to look away.

"Had not the Armenians fought against us, we should have reached Tiflis and Baku long ago."

The author quotes a captured Turkish officer’s diary to demonstrate that the Armenian military contribution was recognized even by the enemy as a significant obstacle to their regional goals.

What It's Really About

The book is an argument for international justice, asserting that the survival of small, persecuted nations is the true measure of a stable world order. It questions whether the "great powers" truly adhere to the democratic principles they claim to defend, or if they are merely replacing one form of imperialism with another. The central theme is the incompatibility of imperial expansion with the rights of minority populations. The text posits that a peace built on the sacrifice of a people is inherently unstable and that the "Armenian question" is not merely a regional dispute, but a mirror reflecting the moral integrity of the entire international community.

Why Read It Today

Readers interested in the history of the First World War, the origins of the Armenian Genocide, or the challenges of nation-building will find this work invaluable. It is a raw, urgent document that captures the perspective of someone living through the total collapse of his world. Because it was written in 1918, the prose is formal, dense, and deeply impassioned, reflecting the political rhetoric of the time. Modern readers should be prepared for the author’s blunt, unapologetic tone, which stems from the immense trauma of the events he records.

What lingers after reading is the author’s sharp contrast between the high-minded political language of the Allies and the gritty, blood-soaked reality of the Caucasus front. The book does not pretend to be a detached history; it is a plea for recognition from a man who watched his country burn and still held onto the hope that its survival mattered to the rest of the world. For those seeking to understand the enduring consequences of the Great War in the Middle East, the text offers an unflinching, primary-source account of a struggle for existence that is as haunting today as it was a century ago.