Category: Armenian Question

“The great Turk is governing in peace twenty nations from different religions. Turks have taught to Christians how to be moderate in peace and gentle in victory.”Voltaire’s Philosophical Dictionary

  • Will there be a new Camp David of Turkey?

    Will there be a new Camp David of Turkey?

    Armenian problem of Turkey took an important dimension while regional balances are changing regional nations’ characteristics in this time section. Armenia that have seen double reaction by two countries since invasion on Karabakh region has an inevitable chance. Two brother countries’ opposition conducts because of dilemmas by foreign affairs gave some advantages for Armenia and their diaspora.

    Although Turkey’s demand about giving up by Armenian insistences on Karabakh, genocide lie and new territory of east Anatolia points, this country didn’t improve relations. Additionally Armenia’s desires about their unreal pronunciations had grew up in period of Sarkisyan. Turkey and other states can not understand different thoughts of an irredentist state.

    Of course absolute definitons like “Can be a country collapsed with historical confession which is combining many words?” of some liberal and global defenders in Turkey created this period. It doesn’t matter to interpret these responsible groups which formed new critical relations between Azerbaijan and Turkey. For example: “Azerbaijan didn’t recognize Turkish Cyprus, so this is unnecessary to defend their self interests, Karabakh conflict is an internal problem of them and Turkish foreign policy can not depend on it, Azerbaijan reailty finishes western support to Turkey while guarantees of the USA are enough for us…” To understand truth reality you can search all documents about these subjects.

    Today public opinion of Azerbaijan feels unwell about last news. All messages are followed and columnists debate possible circumstances. Additionally to political dimension, economical and energical subjects are different debate areas. Unfortunately some alternative energy line projects are debated today. About border opening effects and reaction of public opinion of Azerbaijan circumstances, we ask to Araz Aslanli who is an academic person in Khazar University and president of Caucasus Research Center for International Relations and Strategic Analysis :

    “ I don’t expect that borders will be opened. If actors look at the local and regional dynamics and Turkey want to stiff its position here, it shouldn’t be opened. But if they say that we have some guarantees of our position as regional power, no issues can influence this reality, and Turkey is only interested about global issues, they can open as minimum concession about this problem.

    Border problem is strategical but it has psychological among relations with Azerbaijan. It is important for two countries. Example; Turkey is a single country which had been sponsored and protected by Azerbaijan if we compare global powers. It is originally psychological that is shored up ethnic, religious and cultural connections. Commonlu this question can collapse “trustworthy brother” image of Turkey in Turkish world and Azerbaijan. I think that it is another target of groups which are desire border opening idea. Public opinion is very sensitive in Azerbaijan about this question. Reaction of government can be limited but it can put a psychological mine because of sensitivity of public.”

    Another symbol of public sensitive representation is a media organ that is Turkistan Newspaper. We ask this question to Aqil Camal who is a head director of Turkistan Newspaper. According to him, this case can end Turkish image in this geography:

    “We are unwell as Turkish nationalists. There are some pressures as “Is it your defensivity?”
    Some pro-Russian groups are working to create bad image about Turkey in public opinion. We should look at a point. If Turkey will open borders and Azerbaijani government agree this reality, all of the works about Turkish union will die. Because Azerbaijan is a bridge between Turkey and Central Asia because of Central Asian countries were near us. If Azerbaijan give up these works, Turkey can not be successful. This is a great problem all of us who are working to create Turkish union.

    Sometimes politicians talk about state interests. But states are existing to serve nation. Who wants a state that is not interested about demands of nation? If there will be a cold time with Turkey, Azerbaijan consider relations with Russia, like Central Asian bandwagoning.

    Mr. Öztarsu, you know that I said these sentences as a Turkish idealist on Turkish union way, not as an angry person on ordinary public sphere. At least Turkey shouldn’t open borders in this period. Chances shouldn’t be given to defeatists of our brotherhood. Punishment should be given when necessary, not serve them. As like as Çanakkale War…”

    There is a long time period to open borders and debate its historical and political subjects as like speeches of Armenian president. But only beaten side will be conscience and thought of Turkish nation in this psychological war. Defenses of opposition groups from the likes of economic development, brotherhood of Armenians for Turkey, independent situation of Turkish foreign policy thoughts will be main actors in this process. We know that Turkish bureaucrats don’t want a new Camp David of Turkish world and be remembered a new Anwar Sadat.

    Mehmet Fatih ÖZTARSU
    Baku Qafqaz University
    International Research Club

  • Rally “End to Armenian Lies” to be held in New York

    Rally “End to Armenian Lies” to be held in New York

    Baku – APA. A rally “End to Armenian Lies” will take place in New York on April 25, APA reports quoting Haberturk.

    The rally is intended to inform Americans that Armenian allegations on the incidents of 1915 are groundless and false.

    The rally, which will be held in Times square, is sponsored by the Young Turks Association under the umbrella of the Federation of Turkish-American Associations.

    The rally is a reply to the demonstration on “genocide” claims that will be held by Armenian Diaspora in the same square on April 26.

    The Azerbaijanis living in the US will also participate in the rally.

  • Turkey Keeps Armenia Guessing Over Border Blockade

    Turkey Keeps Armenia Guessing Over Border Blockade

    If Ankara is serious about putting relations with Yerevan onto a new footing, it will reopen the border crossings it closed in 1993.
    By Tatul Hakobian in Yerevan (CRS No. 488, 10-Apr-09)

    Despite the recent warming in relations between Armenia and its neighbour Turkey, especially following Turkish president Abdullah Gul’s visit to Yerevan last September, it is still unknown when or even whether real steps will be taken to normalise relations.

    On March 30, four United States congressmen, all of them Barack Obama’s fellow Democrats, addressed letters to Armenian president Serzh Sarksian and his Turkish counterpart, offering to promote reconciliation between the two countries.

    But a few days earlier, on March 17, four other US congressmen introduced a resolution to the House of Representatives urging American recognition of the mass killing of Armenians of 1915 as genocide.

    Meanwhile, the new American president’s keenness to promote the reconciliation process between the estranged neighbours was given further weight when he visited Turkey last week.

    On his two-day visit, April 5-6, Obama unexpectedly met both the Turkish and the Armenian foreign ministers, Ali Babajan and Edvard Nalbandian, using the opportunity to urge the ministers to complete talks aimed at restoring ties between their respective countries.

    In Ankara, at a joint press conference with Gul, Obama predicted that Turkish-Armenian talks “could bear fruit very quickly”.

    Obama said he stood by a statement he made last year that Ottoman Turks had carried out widespread killings of Armenians early in the 20th century, but finessed the sensitive issue by stopping short of using the word genocide.

    “My views are on the record and I have not changed views,” Obama said.

    Relations between Turkey, the successor state to the Ottoman Empire, and Armenia, which for decades formed part of the Soviet Union, have never been cordial.

    They remain bedeviled by the events in 1915, when Ottoman forces slaughtered huge numbers of Armenians in what is now eastern Turkey. Armenians claim at least 1.5 million perished and insist it was an act of state sponsored genocide. Turkey has always disputed the number of dead, and the intention, and its courts have prosecuted Turkish writers who have described Armenian claims as valid.

    During the Soviet era, meanwhile, the 200 kilometre-long Soviet Armenian-Turkish land border formed part of the “Iron Curtain”, and the only crossing point was a train that clanked slowly from Kars in Turkey to Gyumri.

    In 1991, Turkey, unlike Azerbaijan and Georgia, refused to establish diplomatic relations with the then newly independent Armenia.

    Ankara then closed its borders with Armenia entirely in 1993 in protest against Armenia’s military operations in Nagorno Karabakh and in sympathy with Armenia’s foe, Azerbaijan.

    But between 1991 and 1993, after Armenia became independent, two crossing points were opened at Akyaka-Akhurian and Alijan-Margara through which Turkish wheat was imported in 1992-93.

    Residents of Margara still remember the winter of 1992, when Turkish trucks full of wheat crossed the border.

    The newly independent country was suffering from poor economic conditions and there was a lack of wheat in the country.

    Local people welcomed the trucks as soon as they crossed the bridge and chatted with the drivers, some of whom were Turks.

    The local village head in Margara, Khachatur Asatrian, therefore, has been following signs of a thaw with interest.

    But there are no preparations for the border to reopen at present.

    Some Armenians expected the Kars-Gyumri rail line to start up again at least for several days last September, so that Turkish fans could come to Yerevan and watch the World Cup qualifier football match.

    The Armenian side started railway repair works but the border remained closed, while Gul and a few score fans arrived by plane.

    “Everything can be arranged in a short period, provided a political decision is taken to open the borders,” the head of Margara told IWPR.

    “I don’t feel any work is being done to open the border [now] but as soon as the time comes, it won’t take the authorities much time.”

    Margara, which is about 40 km away from Yerevan, lies right on the banks of the river Araks.

    But the villagers can’t even go down to the riverbank. A barbed wire fence, erected along Armenian-Turkish border in Soviet times, a relic of Cold War tensions, still stands.

    Both Margara village, and the bridge leading to it, have another meaning for Armenians. In 1915, people fleeing the Ottoman slaughter only felt safe once they had crossed the bridge into then Tsarist Russia.

    Kima Karapetian, who teaches history at Margara school, says there were many bridges across the Araks but this one holds special memories.

    “For Armenians who survived the genocide this place was a place of hope,” she told IWPR.

    In spite of bitter memories of Armenian suffering at the hands of the Turks, like most of Margara residents, Karapetian wants the borders to open, as this might revive the village.

    “I do have some fears, but we’d rather have the borders open and establish relations between the two countries,” she said. “There must be cooperation between us at long last.”

    But over and above all the issues of border points and barbed wire fences remain the events of 1915.

    Still robustly denied by Turkey, this remains by far the most difficult issue in the two states’ bilateral relations.

    It has become a question worrying the international community and remains a moot point in US-Turkey relations, especially on the eve of April 24, when Armenians commemorate the victims.

    The new US president has hitherto been a reliable supporter of pro-Armenian resolutions in Congress. During his presidential campaign, he also told the American-Armenian diaspora he would not shrink from using the term genocide in his speech on April 24 – though did not use it on his recent visit to Turkey.

    Turkish officials insist such steps would undermine Turkish-Armenian efforts to restore ties and recent progress in their relations as a whole.

    Many Armenians are suspicious of these assertions. They believe Turkey has no real intention of establishing relations with Yerevan, or of lifting the blockade on Armenia.

    They fear Ankara seeks only an “imitation” dialogue with Armenia in order to hamper formal US recognition of the 1915 events as genocide.

    At the official level, however, both Armenia and Turkey have continued to make optimistic statements in public.

    “Turkey and Armenia are closer then ever to peace,” Babajan, said on February 6, while adding that “US efforts toward the recognition of the Armenian genocide will harm the process”.

    Babajan added that reconciliation between Turkey and Armenia had never been so close.

    “I can’t say we’ve already found a solution, but where we stand now is the closest point ever to a settlement with Armenia,” he said.

    The next day, at the Munich Security Conference, Sargsian made similar noises. The visit of his Turkish counterpart to Yerevan had been a step forward towards, he said.

    “I think we are going the right way and if we continue doing so, we can speak about a different level of relations at the second half of the year,” Sargsian concluded.

    The current Armenian leadership, unlike that of Robert Kocharian whose presidency gave priority to international recognition of the genocide, now lays stress on the importance of normalising relations with Turkey.

    However, Nalbandian denies that recognition of the genocide has fallen off the agenda.

    “It has been said many times, that we [together with Turkey] must turn this sorrowful page of our history, not by forgetting it but by acknowledging it,” he said in January.

    “Armenia… will never tell our diaspora, or some states, to stop their efforts towards securing recognition of the genocide. This will never happen.”

    Yet Sargsian and Nalbandian, unlike former president Kocharian and former foreign minister Vardan Oskanian, rarely speak of the genocide at international forums.

    In turn, Turkey seems less inclined to draw parallels between the Karabakh issue and the normalisation of relations with Armenia than before.

    Meetings between Armenian and Turkish foreign ministers have become more frequent since Gul’s historic trip to Yerevan.

    In February, Sargsian also had a short meeting with the Turkish prime minister, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, at the Davos forum in Switzerland.

    But Oskanian tells IWPR there is only one way to measure real improvement in relations between Armenia and Turkey – the
    opening of the border.

    “That is the only way to judge whether Turkey is sincere in its declared intentions to normalise relations with Armenia,” he said.
    “If this happens in the coming months, we will welcome it, and that will vindicate the efforts of the Armenian side.

    “Recently, we have heard a lot of optimism about the border opening. I hope there are serious grounds for such optimism.”

    Giro Manoyan, senior member of the Armenian Revolutionary Federation, one of the ruling parties in Yerevan, says it is possible 2009 will see the establishment of diplomatic relations between Armenia and Turkey and the lifting of the land blockade by Turkey.

    “Turkey is also interested in achieving these, firstly because after the August 2008 Georgia-Russia war, Turkey wants to take advantage of the new situation in the region and… Turkey also wants to avoid the US recognition of the Armenian genocide,” he said.

    “Turkey cannot realise the former, when it is in fact in a state of undeclared war with Armenia because of the blockade; and regarding the latter reason, Turkey has been advised… that to avoid President Obama doing what candidate Obama promised, Turkey should establish diplomatic relations with Armenia and lift the blockade.”

    Turkey has been dragging its feet in doing either, threatening to cut off negotiations with Armenia in case Obama or the House of Representatives qualify the events of 1915 as genocide.

    “But in the end,” Manoyan concluded, “because it is also in Turkey’s interest to establish diplomatic relations with Armenia and lift the blockade, both will happen.”

    Other experts agree change may be on the way. “The normalisation of Armenia-Turkey relations is not being conducted only within a bilateral format,” said Alexandr Iskandarian, a Yerevan-based political scientist.

    “The US is taking part in the process, and Russia and Europe have their own role here too. This kind of talk may have certain results.”

    Meanwhile, Vahan Gasparian, station master at Gyumri, told IWPR that Gyumri can handle train traffic with Turkey; the problem is the railway on the Turkish side.

    “The rail line on the Armenian side is already in peak condition. Regular trains already run from Kars to Akyaka, the station right on the Turkish side of Armenia-Turkey border,” Gasparian said.

    It would be possible to restore the Kars-Gyumri connection in a short period. It all depends on whether Yerevan and Ankara have the political will to do so.

    Tatul Hakobian is a commentator with the English-language Armenian Reporter newspaper, published in the United States.

  • Turkey not to open border with Armenia unless Karabakh issue solved -PM

    Turkey not to open border with Armenia unless Karabakh issue solved -PM

    ANKARA, April 11 (Itar-Tass) –The Turkish-Armenian border will not be opened unless the Nagorno-Karabakh problem is resolved, Turkish Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan said.

    “Unless the Nagorno-Karabakh issue is resolved, we will not take any steps towards opening the border with Armenia,” the Ihlas news agency quoted Erdogan as saying.

    “Turkey will not sign the final agreement with Armenia unless Azerbaijan and Armenia reach consensus on Nagorno-Karabakh,” he said.

    “We will prepare the infrastructure and do preliminary work, but this [the opening of the border] will depend entirely on the settlement of the Armenian-Azerbaijani problem. It has to be settled first,” the prime minister said.

    The statement came as a response to local press reports saying that the border with Armenia may be opened before the end of this month.

    Some local observers believe that these reports cause tension between Turkey and Azerbaijan, which is one of Ankara’s major partners in the region.

    The newspaper Hurriyet says Ankara has promised to Baku not to open the border until the Karabakh issue was resolved.

    It is believed that Azerbaijani President Ilkham Aliyev refused to attend the Alliance of Civilisations forum in Istanbul on April 6-7 because of a possible violation of Turkey’s promise.

    Earlier on Friday, Armenian President Serzh Sargsyan said his country was ready to establish normal relations with Turkey without preconditions.

    “The ball is in the Turkish court,” Sargsyan said.

    The president expressed hope that he would be able to “cross the open Armenian-Turkish border” when he travels to Istanbul in September for a World Cup 2010 qualification football game between Armenia and Turkey.

    He is “deeply and sincerely convinced” that Armenia “must establish good relations with Turkey”, and this conviction did not develop after his election as president.

    Sargsyan believes that “such experienced diplomacy as the Turkish one will assess the degree of sincerity” of Armenian authorities in the establishment of relations with Ankara without preconditions.

    The president said talks with Turkey had “never discussed the problem of Nagorno-Karabakh and the recognition of Armenian genocide” by the Ottoman Empire in 1915. “We do not condition normalisation of relations between the two countries on Turkey’s recognition of Armenian genocide and hope that the Turks do not consider the termination of recognition of genocide [by different countries] as such precondition”, he said.

    At the same time, normalisation of relations with Turkey does not mean questioning the fact of genocide in 1915, the president said. “We regret millions of innocent victims and should do everything we can to prevent such tragedies in the future,” Sargsyan said.

    The opening of the border with Turkey will not impede the Karabakh settlement, but on ten contrary will facilitate it, he added.

    “We may have made a mistake in our relations with Turkey”, and they will take a totally different turn, Sargsayan said. But “even if it is a failure”, Armenia will “come out of this process stronger because the international community will see” that Yerevan “is ready to establish relations with Turkey without preconditions”.

    The Nagorno-Karabakh conflict began on February 22, 1988, when the first direct confrontation occurred in the enclave after a big group of Azeris had marched towards the Armenian-populated town of Askeran, “wreaking destruction en route.” A large number of refugees fled Armenia and Azerbaijan as violence erupted against the minority populations in the two countries. In the autumn of 1989, intensified inter-ethnic conflict in and around Nagorno-Karabakh prodded the Soviet government into granting Azerbaijani authorities greater leeway in controlling the region. On November 29, 1989 direct rule in Nagorno-Karabakh was ended and Azerbaijan regained control of the region. However later a joint session of the Armenian parliament and the top legislative body of Nagorno-Karabakh proclaimed the unification of Nagorno-Karabakh with Armenia.

    On December 10, 1991, Armenians in Nagorno-Karabakh held a referendum, boycotted by local Azeris, that approved the creation of an independent state. A Soviet proposal for enhanced autonomy for Nagorno-Karabakh within Azerbaijan satisfied neither side, and a full-scale war subsequently started | between Azerbaijan and Nagorno-Karabakh, the latter receiving support from Armenia.

    The struggle over Nagorno-Karabakh escalated after both Armenia and Azerbaijan obtained independence from the Soviet Union in 1991. In the post-Soviet power vacuum, hostilities between Azerbaijan and Armenia were heavily influenced by the Russian military, and both the Armenian and Azerbajani military used a large number of mercenaries from Ukraine and Russia.

    By the end of 1993, the conflict had caused thousands of casualties and created hundreds of thousands of refugees on both sides. By May 1994, the Armenians controlled 14 percent of the territory of Azerbaijan. At that point, the Azerbaijani government for the first time during the conflict recognised Nagorno-Karabakh as a third party in the war and began direct negotiations with the Karabakh authorities. As a result, an unofficial ceasefire was reached on May 12, 1994.

    Despite the ceasefire, fatalities due to armed conflicts between Armenian and Azerbaijani soldiers continued. As of August, 2008, the United States, France, and Russia (the co-chairmen of the OSCE Minsk Group) were attempting to negotiate a full settlement of the conflict, proposing a referendum on the status of the area, which culminated in Azerbaijani President Ilkham Aliyev and Armenian President Serzh Sargsyan travelling to Moscow for talks with Russian President Dmitry Medvedev on 2 November 2008. As a result, the three presidents signed an agreement that calls for talks on a political settlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict.

    Source:  www.itar-tass.com, 11.04.2009

  • New digital library to display world on a website

    New digital library to display world on a website

    Multimillion-dollar project hailed as online ‘intellectual cathedral’ to carry thousands of cultural treasures

    It is not every library that displays ancient Chinese manuscripts alongside postcards of Sarah Bernhardt, crumbling Iraqi newspapers near maps of the New World, and Rabelais originals next to the voice recording of a 101-year-old former slave named Fountain Hughes.

    But then the World Digital Library (WDL) is not every library. Hailed as an online “intellectual cathedral”, it is an unprecedented coming together of some of the world’s finest treasures.

    When it is launched at Unesco’s headquarters in Paris this month, the website will be a digital looking-glass through which internet users can view and study tens of thousands of cultural gems from countries as diverse as Sweden, Saudi Arabia and South Africa.

    Four years after Washington’s Librarian of Congress, Dr James Billington, suggested the idea, curators have accomplished the first stage in the construction of a truly global library. With all material free of charge on a website translated into seven different languages, the WDL is expected to be an unrivalled educational tool.

    “We hope that this brings cultures together, that it promotes better understanding between those cultures and that it provides educational uses for a world in which reading and scholarship have to face competition from 24/7 media,” said John Van Oudenaren, the director of the project.

    In partnership with leading institutions around the world, including the UK’s Wellcome Collection, curators at Unesco and the Library of Congress have attempted to provide as comprehensive a geographic spread as possible – a goal which has obvious limitations given the lack of digitisation in many developing countries, particularly in Africa.

    “It is very much an ongoing, long-term process,” said Van Oudenaren. “At the moment we have 32 partners. In principle, we could have hundreds. We’d like to have partner institutions in every country in the world, because only then will we become a genuine world library.”

    The Middle East is playing a significant role. The National Library and Archives of Iraq are contributing, among other things, a selection of yellowing newspapers and periodicals from the 19th and 20th centuries written in Arabic, English, Kurdish and Ottoman Turkish. Saudi Arabia’s King Abdullah University and the Qatar Foundation are also taking part, while the Bibliotheca Alexandrina, already a leader in the race to digitise cultural treasures of the Arab world, is providing volumes and plates from the Description of Egypt, a work of scientific observation carried out by French scholars during Napoleon’s military foray into the country in 1798.

    Dr Sohair Wastawy, chief librarian at the Bibliotheca Alexandrina, said the WDL could prove to be an effective and original means of cultural rapprochement. “So much of the recent problems between the west and the Islamic and Arab worlds has come from misunderstanding,” she said. “This project will allow us to show where we come from, our culture and our literature. Being able to communicate this will foster greater dialogue and allow us to introduce Arab culture to the rest of the world.”

    Van Oudenaren agrees that a key role of the project is to provide a balanced selection which is not biased towards the US or other countries. “It’s nice to be able to show the cultural achievements of non-western cultures,” he said.

    For the WDL to fulfil its potential, observers say it must not allow itself to be drowned out amid competition from other online cultural projects. Its aim is to focus on the very best of what each country has to offer. The French national library, for instance, has contributed a choice selection, including an illuminated manuscript by Jean Fouquet, early films by the Lumière brothers and an 1898 recording of the Marseillaise. For its part, London’s Wellcome Collection is to provide an array of anatomical drawings and scientific texts including Francis Crick’s first sketch of the DNA double helix.

    To achieve quality rather than quantity, however, funding must be in safe supply. Given that the multimillion-dollar project has so far relied entirely on private donations from companies such as Google and Microsoft, observers say keeping up the cashflow needed could prove problematic. But Van Oudenaren believes the decision to go private was correct. “We didn’t want to burden governments … especially at the moment.”

    Culture online

    The World Digital Library is the latest project to digitise culture. The EU launched Europeana in November last year, digitising millions of books, artworks, manuscripts, maps, films and audio and video content from national libraries and galleries in Europe. It was so popular on the day it launched that the website crashed and was taken offline, but it is running again. It has artefacts from approximately 1,000 institutions and is expected to showcase 10m items by 2010.

    In January the Prado digitised 14 popular paintings and displayed them online at resolutions 1,400 times higher than a normal digital photo. Recently the British Library digitised more than 1,000 pieces of classical music and made them available online.

    Lauren Goodchild

    guardian.co.uk © Guardian News and Media 2009

    Source: u.tv, 09 April 2009

  • Turkish-Armenian Talks ‘May Get Nowhere”

    Turkish-Armenian Talks ‘May Get Nowhere”

     

    By Emil Danielyan and Karine Kalantarian

    The almost year-long negotiations between Armenia and Turkey, which have brought the two neighbors close to normalizing their strained relations, could end in failure because of renewed Turkish preconditions, President Serzh Sarkisian said on Friday.

    “Is it possible that we were mistaken in our calculations and that the Turks will now adopt a different position and try to set preconditions?” he said. “Of course it is possible. One can not exclude such a thing by 100 percent.

    “But I think even in that case we would emerge from this process stronger. With this process, we have once again emphasized — and the international community has seen that — that we are really ready to establish relations [with Turkey] without preconditions.”

    The remarks came amid growing indications that Ankara is again linking the normalization of its relations with Yerevan with a resolution of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict acceptable to Azerbaijan. The Turkish government appeared ready to drop that linkage when it embarked on an unprecedented dialogue with the Sarkisian administration last year.

    However, Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan has said twice over the past week that his country can not establish diplomatic relations and reopen its border with Armenia as long as the Karabakh conflict remains unresolved. President Abdullah Gul likewise underscored the importance of Karabakh peace when he commented on Turkish-Armenian ties in an interview with “The Financial Times” newspaper published on Wednesday.

    “The major problem in the Caucasus is the Karabakh question between Armenia and Azerbaijan,” said Gul. “We wish that this problem is resolved so that a new climate emerges in the Caucasus.”

    The statements by the Turkish leaders followed an uproar in Azerbaijan over reports that Ankara and Yerevan are poised to sign this month an agreement envisaging an end to the 16-year Turkish blockade of Armenia. Azerbaijani leaders publicly warned their Turkish counterparts against lifting the embargo before a Karabakh settlement.

    Like his foreign minister, Eduard Nalbandian, Sarkisian insisted that the Karabakh dispute has not been on the agenda of the Turkish-Armenian talks and that Armenia continues to stand for only an unconditional deal with its historic foe. Speaking at a news conference, he said he still hopes that the Turkish-Armenian border will be reopened by the time he attends a football match in Turkey between the two countries in October. “But my optimism may not prove right,” the Armenian leader cautioned, adding that the Turks could “walk away from our agreements.”

    The Armenian and Turkish soccer teams already played against each in Yerevan last September. Gul paid a historic visit to Armenia to watch the game with Sarkisian. The so-called “football diplomacy” raised high hopes for Turkish-Armenian reconciliation.

    “In my opinion, the ball is now in Turkey’s court,” said Sarkisian. “And speaking of football diplomacy, we have to say that the ball can not remain in one court indefinitely. Every football game has a time limit.”

    Turkish leaders said until recently that possible U.S. recognition of the 1915-1918 massacres of Armenians in the Ottoman Empire as genocide is the main obstacle to the success of the Turkish-Armenian negotiations. U.S. President Barack Obama avoided publicly using the word genocide during his visit to Turkey earlier this week, arguing that those talks “could bear fruit very soon.” Obama is under strong pressure from Armenian advocacy groups in the United States to honor his campaign pledge to officially recognize the genocide.

    Sarkisian said that Armenian-American lobbying efforts are not directed from Yerevan. “It’s not we who are prodding the United States to recognize the genocide,” he said.

    “Naturally, we constantly consult and discuss issues with leaders of [Armenian-American] structures, but such a phenomenon can not exist,” added Sarkisian. “Those people are very good citizens of the United States … and it would not be right to issue instructions to them.”