After the weakening of Turkish-Armenian relations and intensive American missionary activities, Armenians began to leave their homelands for educational, economic and political reasons. Emigration to the United States intensified in particular in response to the 1915 Techir (Relocation and Resettlement) Law. After achieving political rights in the United States, Armenian immigrants formed groups that began trying to influence U.S. government policy, working to win recognition of the alleged Armenian Genocide, financial assistance for Armenia, and other policies favorable to Armenia. The process that began resolution the alleged Armenia Genocide was removed from the historical dimension and moved to the political dimension and an international policy instrument was created. In the United States, the Armenian Diaspora strives to influence government policy systematically through diaspora organizations that carefully follow the international scene and advocate for United States foreign policies in favor of Armenia. In this study, the ultimate aims of the Armenia Diaspora over American politics and policy-making, and the activities of the Armenian Lobby will be examined.

Ethnicity is one of the powerful concepts in social sciences. It encourages social scientists coming from different academic disciplines to think over its roles, influences and power within communities which are shaped at various level. Particularly in the globalised world, traditional approaches such as primordalism, essentialism or instrumentalism have difficulty to provide a powerful framework to understand complexity and power of ethnicity in diasporic spaces which host different identity formations, experiences and cultural hybridisation. Accordingly, these traditional approaches miss differences among human beings who associated themselves with certain ethnicities. For this reason, social scientists tend to understand the concept of ethnicity with alternative approaches. Unlike traditional approaches, social constructionism does not seen ethnicity as fixed, stable homogeneous things. Rather, ethnicities refer to a cognitive process which is shaped by people’s attitudes, perceptions or interactions. Approaching to ethnicity as a cognitive process allows us to go beyond universality and sharp definitions of ethnicity. Also, it emerges out various interpretations in diasporic spaces where ethnicity can be reproduced in various ways. By relying on this theoretical framework, this research seeks to understand the reproduction of Armenianness in diasporic spaces. Through focusing on Turkish, Lebanese and British Armenians, it searches answers for following questions a) What are the components of Armenianness in Turkey, Lebanon and Britain? b) How are the components of Armenianness interpreted in diasporic communities in Turkey, Lebanon and Britain? c) How is Armenianness reproduced among Armenian youngsters in Turkey, Lebanon and Britain? It is hypothesised that Armenianness is not a holistic form, it can be observed as “a patchwork” consisting of various patterns and colours. In order to materialise research aims and goals, the research was supported by field works in Istanbul, Beirut and London between 2011 and 2013. Throughout the data collection period, in-depth interviews, ethnography and participant observation were preferred to not only identify components of Armenianness, but also to create datasets for comparing and analysing the cases. The datasets have been analysed by ANCO-HITS to demonstrate similarities and differences among various reproduction forms of Armenianness in numerical ways. As a result of the ANCO-HITS analysis, Armenianness was ranked in each case according to participants’ scores. Later on, two participants (having the most negative and positive) were introduced through referring findings and fieldwork notes which derived from ethnography. This research shows that Armenianness is observed in various forms. It is highly heterogeneous in diasporic spaces and experienced in different ways. Interpretations of youngsters are varied. It sometimes seems to be ethnic, nationalist, political, moderate or congregational. It also demonstrates that attitudes, perceptions as well as interactions of youngsters with Armenians and non-Armenians can be effective parameters differentiate Armenianness in diasporic spaces.

My first contact with the Armenians of Jerusalem was during a four day Minor Field Study in February 2015.1 Before that I hardly knew anything about the community that has such a long history in the region. Despite their lengthy presence in what is commonly known as the Holy Land, the fact that they are joint custodians of the Christian Holy places and even have a whole quarter named after them in the Old City, they seem to be somewhat of a mystery to most people that visit. They are a minority that hold on to many of their distinct features regarding religion and culture from their homeland, something that is the trademarks of what is commonly known as a diaspora. The importance of culture and faith for the Armenian people seemed to be stressed time after another during my research. Pride was expressed to have endured as a people through many hardships. The Armenian Genocide stands out as the most significant of the many sufferings. Alongside with the traumatic consequences of the genocide is the ongoing struggle fought on many fronts for global recognition of the atrocities committed against their people.The largest group of Armenians in Jerusalem are situated in the Armenian Quarter. At the center of both the territorial and the structural composition of this community lies the convent of Saint James. Not only does the brotherhood of Saint James, consisting of about 30 brothers, and other clergy reside inside the convents premises. The majority consists of lay people. The lay community though has been decreasing for a number of years.2 If the current trend continues it may, according to some predictions, even vanish in the future.3 A gloomy outcome that would radically change the makeup of the Old City of Jerusalem.Therefore, after my first Minor Field Study, I went back four times during the coming year to learn more. I was also granted a scholarship through Stockholm School of Theology to conduct a Minor Field Study among Armenian youth. When first voicing my interest to interview youth and learn more about their identity I was told by a local contact that it would be futile. Because of the pressures of everyday life in Jerusalem few youth would have something relevant to share. They are forced to live day by day due to the ongoing conflicts. A strong statement that cannot be taken as true without evidence. This confirms the importance of conducting a more in depth study concerning how Armenian youth reflect on identity and belonging. The very existence of a future Armenian community in Jerusalem depends on their youths desire and ability to remain in the City.

Este trabalho trata dos descendentes da diáspora armênia, cujas comunidades se fixaram na Argentina e no Brasil após o genocídio armênio perpetrado pelo Império Otomano durante a Primeira Grande Guerra. O objetivo principal é apresentar relatos de indivíduos descendentes e integrantes das comunidades formadas a partir de 1920, especialmente as de Buenos Aires e São Paulo. Busca-se averiguar a presença de uma memória coletiva que evidencie elementos comuns a uma possível identidade cultural armênia nesses grupos de descendentes. Objetivos secundários: abordagens sobre a formação das comunidades na América do Sul, processo de imigração da diáspora armênia e condição refugiada no contexto de outros fluxos migratórios para Argentina e Brasil no início século XX. É uma pesquisa exploratória investigativa, sem postulados de memória, que busca na memória individual traços comuns a uma identidade coletiva. / This research deals with Armenian diaspora which migrated to Argentina and Brazil after Armenian Genocide perpetrated by Ottoman Empire during the Great War. The main objective is presenting reports of descendants from communities created since 1920 in Buenos Aires and Sao Paulo. The purpose is check the presence of collective memory which can shows common elements belonging to a possible Armenian cultural identity in these descendants. Approaches about community formation to South America as well as the immigration process of Armenian diaspora and the refugee status in the context of other migration flows to Argentina and Brazil in the XX Century constitutes secondary objectives. Exploratory and investigative research without memory postulates or filters aiming to find common traces belonging to a collective memory through the individual memory nature.

Este trabalho trata dos descendentes da diáspora armênia, cujas comunidades se fixaram na Argentina e no Brasil após o genocídio armênio perpetrado pelo Império Otomano durante a Primeira Grande Guerra. O objetivo principal é apresentar relatos de indivíduos descendentes e integrantes das comunidades formadas a partir de 1920, especialmente as de Buenos Aires e São Paulo. Busca-se averiguar a presença de uma memória coletiva que evidencie elementos comuns a uma possível identidade cultural armênia nesses grupos de descendentes. Objetivos secundários: abordagens sobre a formação das comunidades na América do Sul, processo de imigração da diáspora armênia e condição refugiada no contexto de outros fluxos migratórios para Argentina e Brasil no início século XX. É uma pesquisa exploratória investigativa, sem postulados de memória, que busca na memória individual traços comuns a uma identidade coletiva. / This research deals with Armenian diaspora which migrated to Argentina and Brazil after Armenian Genocide perpetrated by Ottoman Empire during the Great War. The main objective is presenting reports of descendants from communities created since 1920 in Buenos Aires and Sao Paulo. The purpose is check the presence of collective memory which can shows common elements belonging to a possible Armenian cultural identity in these descendants. Approaches about community formation to South America as well as the immigration process of Armenian diaspora and the refugee status in the context of other migration flows to Argentina and Brazil in the XX Century constitutes secondary objectives. Exploratory and investigative research without memory postulates or filters aiming to find common traces belonging to a collective memory through the individual memory nature.

This thesis aims to analyze the re-emergence of the Armenian question as an aspect of Armenian nationalism and its effects on Turkey between the years 1960 and 1990. The Armenian question is a very controversial political issue with its multi-dimensional characteristic. The Armenian question emerged with the Ottoman Armenians&rsquo / autonomy demands as an extension of Armenian nationalism in the nineteenth century. With the interest of the imperialist states, the Armenian question became an international problem especially after the Ottoman-Russian War of 1877-1878. Although the Armenian question reached its peak in World War I, it dropped from the international agenda by the Peace Treaty of Lausanne in 1923. After World War II, the Armenian question was transformed into an international issue once again by Joseph Stalin the leader of the USSR that was used as a political trump against Turkey in the Cold War period. Especially, the date April 24, 1965 became a remarkable turning point in the re-emergence of the Armenian question as an aspect of Armenian nationalism. Since 1965, the Armenian Diaspora has used the Armenian question to materialize dream of the &ldquo / Greater Armenia.&rdquo / Today, the Armenian question has affected Turkey&rsquo / s bilateral and multilateral relations with other countries especially with the Republic of Armenia and the United States of America. By this thesis, these whole facts will be analyzed to expose the historical background of the re-emergence of the Armenian question as an aspect of Armenian nationalism, and its effects on Turkey between the years 1960-1990, and to contribute to the academic literature.

Despite extensive research into the effects of framing in media, much less is still known about how and why these frames constructed. The field of media framing has also neglected reporting on violent conflict, instead focusing on different types of non-violent conflict, especially in terms of frame analysis. This study aims to expand on framing theory by studying the framing of diaspora-specific media in reporting on violent homeland conflict, in comparison with general media in the diaspora’s country of residence. Despite arguments that diasporic media negatively impact integration, further polarisation or contribute to conflict recreation in the country of residence, there has been little research into the reporting by diasporic media. In this thesis, I argue that diasporic and general media will differ in their framing of violent conflict in the diaspora’s homeland because of two factors: (1) the expected levels of interest and knowledge among the medium’s target audience and (2) the knowledge and objectives of the journalists producing the reporting. Through in-depth analysis of a collection of articles of the New York Times and the Armenian Mirror-Spectator on the 2020 Nagorno-Karabakh War, I find that there are indeed considerable differences between the framing of the two news media. Diasporic media use more thematic framing in their reporting, whereas general media use more episodic framing in their reporting on the conflict. Furthermore, the framing by diasporic media aligns with central (conflict) narratives of the diaspora’s collective memory, whereas general media present a mix of different conflict perspectives. Finally, this analysis showcases some of the issues of applying concepts derived from the framing of non-violent contexts to violent conflict settings. These findings further the understanding of both the reporting of diasporic media, relative to the reporting by general media, and the knowledge on the types of framing used in reporting on violent conflict, and what drives the construction of such frames. This study also highlights the importance of the consideration of violent conflict in the study of framing, and the need for further research into framing of violent conflict.