issues were not undertaken, while the problem concerning the 1915 events was treated very generally.
Sargsyan initially claimed that his visit to Turkey to see the football rematch depended on the progress of the talks concerning opening the border, but later declared that he saw no reasons for not accepting the invitation.70 Either way, a few days before the match, the protocols were signed. During the meeting, Turkish president announced that history was being made.71 Admittedly, both states have never had diplomatic relations, and at the time reciprocal visits of presidents were held and shortly before the second of them protocols concerning the development of relations and opening the common border were signed. From the context of this research, it should be reminded that the whole process was initiated owing to the opportunity provided by the sport.
Shortly after Sargsyan’s visit to Turkey, the whole situation changed dramatically. Protocols were not ratified, while Turkey demanded Armenia to withdraw its troops from Nagorno-Karabakh as a precondition for opening the border.72 It was a consequence of the Turkish prime minister’s visit to Baku and the declarations he made there.73 On the other hand, the Armenian opposition criticized the government for not referring directly to the Armenian genocide in 1915 in the protocols.74 The whole rapprochement process built with the use of sports diplomacy was squandered. It appears that both societies were not ready for the opening, although the role of the third party—Azerbaijan—should not be overlooked. Its capabilities of affecting Turkey have proved to be stronger than, for example, Taiwan’s concerning the United States in the 1970s.
Sports diplomacy between Turkey and Armenia was pursued with the use of football. It should be noted that Armenia is not particularly strong in this sport.75 The level of football is much higher in Turkey, both concerning the national team and the club teams. Both of the matches were won by Turkey 2-0,76 which did not bring any emotional reactions, probably because it was the favorite to have won. From this perspective, football was an appropriate medium for contacts between both states, although the whole process was the result of a draw in FIFA World Cup qualifiers. Even though this attempt to use sport for political rapprochement was not successful, it did allow a political breakthrough, which would not be possible under different circumstances. It appears to be the essence of sports diplomacy aimed at bringing states closer together—to create circumstances, which may or may not be transferred into actual political rapprochement.
American-Soviet Sports Exchanges
When relations between the United States and the Soviet Union are considered, the sport was not necessary as a means of facilitating diplomatic contacts. Despite the ideological conflict, both states have never broken off diplomatic relations and maintained diplomatic missions in another country. Apart from that, they could use other channels of dialogue, such as the UN Security Council.
Regardless of the availability of diplomatic channels, both sides began to express willingness to establish some form of sports exchange already in the early 1950s. First talks were held shortly after Soviet debut in the Olympic Games in Helsinki in 1952,77 while the US president Dwight Eisenhower discussed it with Soviet prime minister Nikolai Bulganin during their meeting in Geneva in 1955.78 However, several obstacles were preventing the realization of these arrangements. Most importantly, the Immigration and Nationality Act, also known as the McCarran Act, assumed that fingerprints should be taken from all citizens of the Soviet Union and other communist states upon their arrival in the United States.79 Soviet officials did not agree to such behavior in relation to athletes. The legislation was abolished by Congress in 1957, in response to Eisenhower’s administration’s claims that establishing sports exchanges with the USSR might be useful in communicating to its people about the success of American democracy and capitalism.80 American motivation was therefore not only about the rapprochement with the Cold War rival, but it was also an attempt to hit it in a typically Cold War manner.
From the Soviet perspective, the establishment of cultural contacts with the West is believed to have been a consequence of the changes the Soviet Union underwent after the 20th Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union and its leaders’ desire to intensify contacts with the West. One of the main Soviet objectives was about preparing the society for resignation from explicitly confrontational doctrine. Formal negotiations with the United States concerning bilateral cultural exchanges were initiated in October 1957 and finalized on January 27, 1958.81 The Cultural Agreement was signed for a two-year duration, but in the future, it was renewed numerous times. It assumed exchanges in areas such as science and technology, agriculture, radio, television, youth, sport, medicine, public health, culture, and tourism. Exchanges were also planned on the parliamentary level, and both sides agreed to open direct flight connections.82
From the American perspective, the agreement was to facilitate access to until now closed Soviet society and to increase its knowledge about American politics and lifestyle. It was also meant to allow to understand the Soviet lifestyle better, to intensify contacts between citizens and to secure relevant governmental control over exchanges through diplomatic channels and insisting on reciprocity within exchanges.83
Signing the US-USSR Cultural Agreement began a long period of sports exchanges between both states, although the first of them was organized already in June 1955 when American weightlifters visited Moscow and Leningrad. Sports exchanges were meant to symbolize rapprochement, but there were also more selfish motivations. They involved contacts in many sports and had a variety of forms, although from the diplomatic perspective track and field and basketball exchanges are believed to have been the most important.
Track and Field Exchanges
The Cultural Agreement from 1958 assumed the organization of two track and field meets: the first one in Moscow in 1958, the second in the United States in the following year.84 From the American side, negotiations were conducted by privately financed Amateur Athletic Union (AAU) and from the Soviet side by Physical Culture and Sports Committee of the Council of Ministers of the USSR, an agency with ministerial status. The formula included twenty-two men and ten women events, with two representatives of each country in every event. In the relay races, the competition included one team from each country. Scoring and the way the winner was determined were subject to disputes, similarly as the issue of men and women competition. Americans opted for a separate contest for each gender, bearing in mind a higher level of women’s sport in the USSR. Soviet negotiators, on the other hand, wanted to count points jointly, hoping that its advantage in women’s events would allow the USSR to succeed in the overall classification. Even though the ultimate objective of the exchanges was to foster the idea of peaceful coexistence, both sides strived to win in these events perceiving them in a prestigious way.85
The first of the series of track and field meets was held in Moscow in July 1958 and lasted for two days. During the exchange, peaceful symbolism could be observed in several ways. For example, Soviet newspaper Pravda assessed the meet as a part of the principle of peaceful coexistence, while Soviet fans cheered for athletes from both countries.86 Such hospitability and the desire to stress positive emotions appear to be typical for this type of sports diplomacy. Given the governmental control over the press in the Soviet Union, the situation reveals that the goal of fostering peaceful relations between Cold War superpowers was implemented. The exchange was meant to create a more positive image of the United States among the people of the Soviet Union, which would have been compatible with the new line of the Communist Party.
The Soviet press identified the meet in Moscow as “the match of a Century.” Track and field was popular in both countries, and this popularity was meant to ensure that both nations would receive the public diplomacy message according to its intentions.87 Exchange in such an important sport also indicated that both states would have cared about the victory. One the one hand, it could have led to adverse effects of the exchange, but on the other hand, only exchange in popular sport could
