“What’s Next?” Documentary on Armenian Genocide Restitution Screened at Fresno State on April 10
On Friday, April 10, the Armenian Studies Program screened the movie “What’s Next? Armenian Genocide Restitution in the Post-Recognition Era.” Dr. Taner Akçam, director of the Armenian Genocide Research Program of The Promise Armenian Institute at UCLA, and director Carla Garapedian were discussants for the film. The Armenian Film Foundation and The Promise Armenian Institute were co-sponsors of the event.
The screening and discussion focused on a critical question that has emerged following recent political milestones: what comes after recognition of the Armenian Genocide? Dr. Akçam and Garapedian introduced the documentary, which was based on a 2023 UCLA conference that explored legal, moral, and historical pathways toward restitution for the Armenian Genocide.
A central theme of the discussion was the shift from symbolic recognition to justice. As Dr. Akçam explained, although the United States government officially recognized the Armenian Genocide in 2019 and 2021, “recognition is not enough. If recognition is not followed by justice, it risks remaining symbolic.” This idea shaped the whole event, showing that recognition alone cannot fix the material and cultural losses Armenians experienced.
The documentary revealed that recognition brought up new urgent questions – what comes next, and how can justice be achieved if Turkey still denies the Genocide? Dr. Akçam stated that “Turkey is unlikely to acknowledge the Genocide in the foreseeable future,” which forces Armenians and those sympathetic to the issue, to explore alternative options, particularly within legal systems outside of Turkey. This led to the discussion of whether justice could be pursued through U.S. courts and whether existing models, especially Holocaust restitution, could serve as a blueprint.
The comparison to Holocaust restitution became a major point of discussion. In the film, Ambassador Stuart Eizenstat stated that genocide involves not only the destruction of lives but also culture, stating that the aim of both the Holocaust and Armenian Genocide was “not only to kill individuals, but to destroy their culture, manuscripts, religious objects, and art.” He argued that the success of Holocaust restitution efforts, including the development of the “Washington Principles,” provides a framework for the Armenians. These principles encourage institutions to investigate the origins of artifacts and work toward “a fair and just solution,” showing that restitution is about truth and accountability rather than profit.
Another key topic was the importance of provenance research. This is the process of tracing the origins and ownership of cultural objects. Following the 2023 conference, students and researchers began identifying Armenian artifacts scattered across museums and collections worldwide. Dr. Akçam described this as a turning point, explaining that “restitution is not only a moral and historical question, it is also a practical and traceable process.” This research is essential because, as stated in the film, restitution can only begin once looted objects are identified and documented.
The documentary also provided concrete legal examples. One of the most notable cases involved the J. Paul Getty Museum and the Zeytun Gospels. Art historian Dr. Heghnar Watenpaugh described the case as “a great victory,” because although the physical pages remained at the museum, the Armenian Church successfully secured recognition of its ownership through corrected provenance. This case demonstrated that restitution is not always about returning objects, but also about restoring historical truth and correcting narratives.
Similarly, legal expert Karnig Kerkonian emphasized the topic of attribution, arguing that reclaiming Armenian contributions, even when physical ownership is not contested, is a powerful form of justice. He described this as “the insertion of truth,” countering the long-standing efforts to erase Armenian identity from cultural and historical records.
However, the discussion also acknowledged significant challenges. Legal obstacles, such as deadlines for filing cases and limits on state roles in foreign policy, have limited the number of successful restitution cases. In the film, Professor Michael Bazyler (Chapman University) noted that only a small number of Armenian restitution claims have succeeded compared to Holocaust cases. This highlights the need for new legislation, similar to the U.S. HEAR Act, which extended the statute of limitations for Holocaust related claims.
Speakers pointed out that future success depends on collective action. Attorney Kathryn Lee Boyd suggested the practical steps to move forward, including conducting extensive research, securing financial support for legal cases, and strengthening community unity. She stated that “this is just the beginning. We need more lawyers, more money, and more community unity.” This idea of unity came up throughout the event, with speakers noting that internal divisions have weakened Armenian efforts in the past.
The broader significance of restitution was also connected to global movements. Comparisons were made to Indigenous restitution efforts in Canada, where acknowledgment of past injustices led to legal settlements and official recognition of genocide. This demonstrated that Armenians are not alone in their struggle and that international precedents can provide both inspiration and strategy. Ultimately, the film ended with a focus on the future. Rather than offering simple solutions, the documentary aimed to “open a conversation” about moving from recognition to justice. As Amb. Eizenstat stated, the goal is to “uncover uncomfortable historical truths and bring them to light,” helping ensure accountability and prevent future atrocities.
The movie “What’s Next?” presented the Armenian Genocide not only as a historical tragedy but as an ongoing legal and moral issue. Moving from recognition to restitution marks a new phase in the Armenian struggle, one that requires research, legal innovation, and a collective effort. The film and discussion made it clear that while recognition was an important milestone, real justice comes from addressing the long term cultural, material, and historical impacts of the genocide.
