Ämnet för min C-uppsats handlar om diskussionen om vad som kan ...

The sooner calls referring to the Armenian question could be forgotten, the better it would be forthe ongoing talks with new-born Turkey. The Lausanne Treaty, signed on July 24, 1923 put anofficial end to the Armenian question. At least for the time being.3 ConclusionTaking the data at hand into consideration, two essential facts crystallize: a) the reality of theArmenian massacres and their genocidal aim; b) Sweden behaved as any other bystander insimilar events, and it certainly did behave like a small state, maintaining strict neutrality andfollowing the general flow.It is safe to assert that the Swedish Government had a clear view of what transpired inTurkish Armenia during the Great War. Even if one would disregard the information presentedby the missionaries and the press, the Swedish Government, especially through its Embassy inConstantinople, but also through its Military Attaché in Turkey, was well informed about theongoing annihilation. In his dispatches to Stockholm, Ambassador Anckarsvärd stressed the factthat what took place in Turkish Armenia was neither an act of mutual killings nor measures takenagainst Armenian insurrection, but a well-planned systematic annihilation of the Armenian nation,initiated and implemented by the Turkish Government. This view was verified additionally by theinformation and testimonies published by the Swedish, as well as Danish, Norwegian, German,and American missionaries and relief workers who had returned home during the last years of thewar. The description and analysis in the investigated sources do speak of a genocide committedin Turkish Armenia during the First World War. Yet, the Swedish Government, as well as theSwedish Church, did nothing, neither directly nor indirectly, to stop the massacres, nor did theymake any efforts to protest against the Turkish actions. The reports also indicate that the TurkishGovernment relied on this very fact and anticipated a silent and indifferent world for achievingits goal. Once the protests would come it would already be late. In any case there would be noArmenia. The study also indicates that, as the Armenian issue entered into the political arena, anincreasing amount of witness accounts and missionary reports started to be published andcontinued even when the politicians abandoned the issue.The bystander role is well-displayed by the Swedish silence during the massacres. Despite theirobvious and reliable knowledge neither the Swedish Government nor the Church issued as muchas a protest or called for an international reaction. There were some initiatives for urging theSwedish Government to protest against the massacres. A limited number of politicians, such asHjalmar Branting, Carl Lindhagen and influential public figures such as Anna Lindhagen andMarika Stjernstedt did appeal to the Swedish public trying to influence the Swedish decisionmaking,but in vain. It seems that only the missionaries can be “acquitted” from being bystanders.Where and when possible they did everything in their power to give shelter to the victims,actively worked for providing assistance and food for the deportees, saving as many as possible71