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

Military Attaché and the missionaries present at the site be regarded as bystanders? These areissues that this paper will try to give an answer to.As for the international relations and particularly in regard to the behaviour of the small statessuch as Sweden, the research is quite scarce. The bulk of the research regarding internationalrelations and foreign policy has been done from the perspective of major powers; the smallernations have not been considered in the existing theoretical models. However, Uppsala historian,John Rogers, has written an illuminative article on the subject in regard to Sweden’s role in theso-called Mosul Crisis during 1924-1925. 24 In his article, Rogers points out the relative scarcity ofworks on Swedish foreign policy during the inter-war period, even though it was, not least inregard to the “policy of neutrality”, quite similar to that of the policy during the Cold War era. 25Using present-day theoretical models for international relations, Rogers has tested these onarchive material concerning Swedish policy making during the period immediately after the FirstWorld War. In his case study about Sweden’s role in the commission appointed by the League ofNations to arbitrate a solution between Turkey and Great Britain in their dispute over the oil-richarea of Mosul in Northern Iraq, Rogers concludes that the decisions taken by Sweden were quiteunderstandable and in line with the presented theoretical premises.The research regarding the Armenian genocide and Swedish reactions is quite limited. Theonly known literature containing a review of Swedish knowledge about the Armenian massacresare the books Längtan till Ararat (“Longing for Ararat”) and Svärdets år (“The Year of theSword”). 26 The focus of the first book is, however, mainly the Armenian nation, its traditions andthe Armenian community in Sweden. The book also touches briefly upon the issue of theArmenian genocide and the publications regarding the Armenian massacres which appeared inSwedish newspapers, missionary reports and in some later reports from the Swedish Embassy inConstantinople. Even though the book refers to known documents and publications on thesubject, it lacks some fundamental aspects. First, there is no mentioning of any diplomatic reportsor letters from the period prior to 1920, which could indicate that the Swedish Government hador had not been informed about the situation in Ottoman Turkey. Secondly, the book isdescriptive rather than analytic in its review of the data at hand and does not contain any deeperstudies of the contents of the documents. Neither is there a proper source reference to thepresented data. And finally, the discussion about the Armenian genocide and the Swedishsubsequent reaction, or more correctly, lack of reaction, is not based on a scientific model ortheory. Nevertheless, the book renders a sufficient description of the problem, some of theknown information, and the bulk of the Swedish argumentation and reaction. It is worth tomention that the author, Göran Gunner, is at the time of the writing of this paper working on anew book about the Swedish knowledge about the Armenian massacres, covering the period24 Rogers, 2007.25 Rogers, 2007, p. 350.26 Gunner and Lindberg, 1985 and Bengtsson, 2004.9