Now we are approaching the moment when things get more and more difficult, said Vigen Sargsyan, deputy chief of staff to the Armenian president in an interview to The Wall Street Journal.

“Pressure on the Armenian president to abandon the effort is building strongly as the next annual April 24 U.S. presidential commemoration of the 1915 genocide approaches, creating a tight Armenian schedule to see the protocols ratified,” he stated.

Turkish officials, by contrast, talk about an open-ended process that could last a year or more if necessary. Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu also recently expressed anger at a decision by Armenia's constitutional court that he said in effect puts conditions on the deal—a claim Mr. Sargsyan dismissed.

Mr. Sargsyan said that while Armenia's government is sending ratification papers for the deal to parliament, it is also preparing legislation to enable the president to withdraw his signature from treaties. "If this opportunity is lost it will push the whole region back, not to where we started when talks began but beyond that," said Mr. Sargsyan. He said trust between the two sides would be destroyed.

The Protocols aimed at normalization of bilateral ties and opening of the border between Armenia and Turkey were signed in Zurich by Armenian Foreign Minister Edward Nalbandian and his Turkish counterpart Ahmet Davutoglu on October 10, 2009, after a series of diplomatic talks held through Swiss mediation.

On January 12, 2010, the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Armenia found the protocols conformable to the country’s Organic Law.

The Turkish Foreign Ministry has issued the following official statement on Armenia-Turkey Protocols:
“The Constitutional Court of the Republic of Armenia has declared its decision of constitutional conformity on the Protocols between Turkey and Armenia signed on 10 October 2009 with a short statement on 12 January 2010. The Constitutional Court has recently published its grounds of decision. It has been observed that this decision contains preconditions and restrictive provisions which impair the letter and spirit of the Protocols.

The said decision undermines the very reason for negotiating these Protocols as well as their fundamental objective. This approach cannot be accepted on our part.”