The desire to remain in the swamp: Dismantling of the AGMI

2026-03-13 - 15:24

Recently, it became known that Education, Science, Culture and Sports Minister Zhanna Andreasyan decided to dismiss Dr. Edita Gzoyan from her position of director of the Armenian Genocide Museum-Institute (AGMI). This highly unusual decision has caused confusion and bewilderment within Armenia’s academic community. The decision appears arbitrary, ignoring the opinion of the AGMI staff members, who collectively opposed it. Moreover, the scholar members of the Board of Trustees were firmly against it. In protest, the board’s chairman, prominent French Armenian historian Raymond Kevorkian, resigned, followed by board members Harutyun Marutyan, Hranush Kharatyan and Stephan Astourian. The young and ambitious scholar Edita Gzoyan had been elected to the position only two years ago. With a doctorate in international relations from Yerevan State University, a master’s degree in law from the American University of Armenia (AUA) and numerous professional training courses at prestigious Western universities, the new director implemented noticeable reforms in the museum’s scientific and administrative management within two years. The scientific achievements were remarkable. Not only in terms of productivity per researcher but also in terms of quality, the AGMI became unmatched. For the first time in the history of the Republic of Armenia, a scientific institution began systematically producing results that met elite Western standards. Moreover, about a year ago, the ministry’s official website proudly announced that the museum’s journal, International Journal of Armenian Genocide Studies, had been included in the Scopus database — the first history or social science journal from Armenia to achieve this distinction. The achievements were numerous: research on many aspects of the genocide, studies on the Artsakh issue, professionalization of museology and more. Without exaggeration, many history departments at Western universities could only dream of such productivity. None of this would have been possible without exceptional managerial ability. Strategic planning and proactive leadership were accompanied by an atmosphere that respected academic freedom and political pluralism within the museum. From hosting official delegations to working with schoolchildren from the regions, everything was done with dedication and care. A strong spirit of teamwork was evident, with each member appreciated and valued for their abilities. After listing all this, a simple question arises: Why was the director dismissed? Common sense seeks rational answers, but in vain. The versions circulating in the media are frightening, yet even more frightening is that they do not resemble baseless rumors. According to these accounts, the dismissal is connected to the visit of U.S. Vice President J.D.Vance. While presenting the memorial complex, the director reportedly spoke about massacres and violence against Armenians committed by the Azerbaijani authorities, showed the khachkars commemorating them and presented Vance with a book describing these events. Gzoyan’s actions were allegedly not forgiven by Armenia’s leadership. Gzoyan has long maintained a scholarly interest in the Artsakh issue and has continuously published articles in leading international journals. Her article about massacres of Armenians in Azerbaijan was recently published in the International Criminal Law Review, the most influential legal analysis of the topic to date. Many believe this may have provided the minister with a convenient opportunity to remove Gzoyan, as before the elections, she had reportedly attempted to shift responsibility for the poorly renovated Tsitsernakaberd memorial complex away from the ministry and herself and onto the museum’s director. Nevertheless, this is not only the story of Edita Gzoyan as a patriotic Armenian scholar with dignity. Nor is it merely another example of failure by Armenia’s leadership and Education Minister Zhanna Andreasyan. It is also a story about the abandonment of rights and homeland, the erosion of academic independence about the killing of academic independence in Armenia and the vulnerability of scientific and cultural institutions. It demonstrates that whether one is a director or an ordinary researcher, everyone is vulnerable because there is no effective mechanism to protect them from the arbitrariness of superiors. I write this as someone whose professional biography was significantly shaped by the museum, where I worked from 2008 to 2018. In 2017-2018, when I served as acting director, the museum’s legal status changed from a state noncommercial organization to a foundation. At the time, there was hope that this change would increase academic freedom. But those hopes were illusions, and the circle of freedom only tightened further. In 2018, I left to teach and write my doctoral dissertation at the University of North Carolina. When I returned in 2024, the newly elected director, Edita Gzoyan, welcomed me warmly to the museum. At first, we trusted each other cautiously, but gradually we became a powerful team and, despite many difficulties, achieved great successes in a short time. That was no coincidence, because our visions, values and commitment to principles were almost identical. For a moment, it seemed we were unstoppable... About two months ago, I moved to UCLA. Learning about what happened and looking with a kind of envy at the academic environment here, I again reflect not only on the AGMI but also on the broader crisis of the social sciences in Armenia. I remember my conversations and discussions with Gzoyan. She had an unbreakable belief that something could change in Armenia — that it was possible to create a scientific environment of Western-quality — and her optimism inspired the entire museum. History shows that in Armenia, bright minds like Gzoyan are usually pushed aside and marginalized, and in many cases they emigrate. Our tragedy is not that we are in a swamp; our tragedy is that we feel comfortable there. If Armenia wants to have a scientific environment that meets international standards, the priority should be not only encouraging productivity but also creating institutional protections. Intellectuals with independent opinions must be protected from the encroachments of power. Without that, academic successes will remain temporary while systemic problems persist. If we don’t change, we will bring about our own destruction. This article was translated from Armenian by Dr. Bedross Der Matossian.