Month: October 2005

U.S. RADAR STATION IN AZERBAIJAN WILL NOT AFFECT NEGATIVELY AZERI-IRANIAN RELATIONS

Caucaz.com, Georgia
Oct 4 2005

Baku, October 4 – Azerbaijani political scientists agree in views
that the construction of the U.S radar station in the territory of the
country must not affect negatively the Azerbaijani-Iranian relations.

Commenting negative reaction of some Iranian mass media on the issue,
Vafa Guluzada, the former adviser to the Azerbaijani President,
noted that the position of Iran is natural.

“Iran must understand that Azerbaijan peruses its own goals, but the
United States carries out its own plans in the region,” he underlined.

“Iran must regard extending of the cooperation between Azerbaijan
and the United States as normal,” Uzeyir Jafarov, the military expert
noted in his turn. Issue of license on construction of radar station
is internal affair of Azerbaijan.

“If Iran strengthen it relations with Armenia, but Azerbaijan does not
regard it as serious danger for its national interests, then Iran must
accept the fact of development of the Azerbaijani-U.S. relations,”
he added.

In his turn, MP Anar Mammadkhanov stressed that the Iranian-Azerbaijani
relations would be subjected to any serious changes. “Iran must
understand that Azerbaijan takes the steps not for pleasure, but to
ensure national interests,” he said.

OPINION: EU AND TURKEY TAKE HISTORIC STEP

Deutsche Welle, Germany
Oct 4 2005

Turkey’s boat has finally come in

The EU’s wrangling over the negotiation framework with Turkey over
accession has finally reached a happy conclusion. DW’s Baha Gungor
heaves a big sigh of relief.

Monday was to have marked the official launch of landmark entry talks
with Turkey. But as the day approached, it seemed more and more
unlikely that the negotiations would go ahead as scheduled. Chief
among the trouble-makers was Austria, which insisted that talks with
Turkey could only begin if accession negotiations were also opened
with Croatia.

But then, contrary to all expectations, a last-ditch deal was reached
after two days of tense debate — salvaging, just in the nick of time,
the EU’s reputation as a sturdy super-structure able to take the heat.

Strategic decision

The long-awaited start of Turkey’s entry talks represents an historic
step for the EU, and a key reinforcement of its security interests in
a strategic region. While Turkey once guarded Europe’s south-eastern
border as a member of NATO during the Cold War era, it now occupies
a key position within the Middle East conflict belt.

The ultimate aim of the talks is, inevitably, Turkish accession,
but entry is by no means in the bag. It will be years before the
decision is taken whether or not to allow a politically, economically
and socially transformed Turkey to join the EU as a full member. For
the time being, piling on the pressure is counterproductive — all
it will do is fan the flames of anti-EU sentiment within this mainly
Muslim country.

And the Turkish population’s reservations about too hasty a move
towards the EU are just as understandable as Europe’s wariness of
Turkey. The country is well aware it still has many obstacles to
weather, and it will be years before its vast regional disparities
can start to narrow. It’s a problem Europe has experienced itself
— and nowhere more painfully than Germany, a country that has been
trying to breach the gap between east and west for the last 15 years,
and paying a heavy cost in the process.

EU compatibility

But Turkey will also have to prove it is EU-compatible when it comes
to democracy, human rights, the Armenian question and the Kurdish
conflict — which will include demonstrating belief in European values
in its approach to problem-solving.

Sorting out Cyprus is another challenge Turkey faces, and will be a
key test of its willingness to compromise.

Turkey will have to adopt 35 chapters of EU law, and that means every
single EU member state has 35 veto opportunities, since every chapter
has to be unanimously agreed.

Austria’s shenanigans over the last few days are more than likely to
be repeated by one country or another, sooner or later. The risk of
failure is acute given that every member state will have to ratify
Turkey’s entry agreement, some of which by referendum.

After its speedy intake of eight new eastern European countries last
year, which it’s still belly-aching about, the EU now has another
set of problems to deal with. At least it realized in time that it
wouldn’t have been fair to vent its frustration on Turkey.

Baha Gungor (jp)

Send Print

Turkey and EU Agree on Membership Talks The European Union clinched
an 11th-hour accord with Turkey Monday to clear the way for landmark
talks with the vast mainly Muslim state to go ahead, after marathon
talks overcame Austrian objections. (Oct. 3, 2005) Turkey Brings EU
to “Edge of Precipice” With Turkey raising new obstacles and Austria
holding out against an accord to clear the way for talks with Ankara,
the European Union teetered on the brink of crisis Monday, and Turkey’s
EU hopes hung in the balance. (Oct. 3, 2005) Turkey Challenges EU
to Be “World Player” Turkey’s prime minister challenged the European
Union on Sunday to be a “world player” rather than a “Christian club,”
as the bloc deliberated whether to open formal membership talks with
the largely Muslim country. (Oct. 2, 2005)

,1564,1729225,00.html

MIXED FEELINGS GREET LAUNCH OF TURKISH EU MEMBERSHIP TALKS

AsiaNews.it, Italy
Oct 4 2005

Austria has accepted the terms of the negotiating mandate: accession,
not “privileged participation”. Stands taken within the Muslim
country: the press recalls Europe’s debts to Turkey and protests
against membership take place in Ankara and Istanbul.

Ankara (AsiaNews) – Turkey endured long, bewildering hours of
announcements and denials yesterday before finally hearing the news
that its membership talks will go ahead with the EU. The green light
for negotiations – a process expected to last at least 10 years –
came in the late evening.

“We have agreement. I am going to Luxembourg,” Turkish Foreign Minister
Abdullah Gul, told the press as he left the headquarters of the
Justice and Development Party in Ankara to join ministers of the Union.

Austria accepted that the common goal of negotiations should be
accession and no longer insisted on the weaker option of “privileged
participation”, which had been upheld by many conservatives and
Christian Democrats across western Europe.

It would seem, then, that the considerable palpitations experienced in
recent days by the whole Turkish nation – divided into those for and
against – are over. There are those, like the national daily Posta
in its recent editions, who assert that entry of Turkey into Europe
is inevitable, given the great historical and cultural debt the west
owes to this thousand-year “Empire”.

The Turkish newspaper was quick to counter a provocative question
which the English Independent had the audacity to pose: “But what
have the Turks done for us?” On Sunday, the Turkish paper retorted:
“What would have become (of Europe) if it were not for the Turks?” It
followed up its question with a detailed, page-long list of things
the Europeans “learned” from the Turks: peaceful coexistence between
different cultures and religions (emphasizing that all enjoyed the
same social and civil privileges under the Ottoman Empire, although it
was Muslim); the art of painting and crafts, above all using fabrics;
trade (without forgetting that the silk trail developed above all
under the Ottoman Empire); the eastern lifestyle and military awareness
(Turkey prides itself in being the most valiant and strong NATO ally).

Then there are others who, as the Hurriyet daily points out, recall
the notable efforts made since 1999, when Helsinki laid down tough
conditions for Turkey to meet if it ever wanted to approach Europe’s
gates. In 2002, the death penalty was abolished in times of peace and
last year, the prohibition was extended to times of war. In 2002, the
ban on teaching in the Kurdish language was lifted and in June 2004,
ample broadcasting space was given to Kurdish programmes on the TRT
national radio and television channels.

In May 2004, the law discriminating against women in cases of adultery
was abrogated; penalties handed down for “honour crimes” increased
in favour of women; and a strong political and social campaign is
under way for literacy of children and girls in rural areas where
the level of education is very low.

A zero-tolerance programme against torture in detention has been given
a strong push forward; torture is now forbidden and punishable by 12
years in prison.

Certain positions amounting to interference in the government of the
Security Council have been reviewed and the Tribunal of State Security
was abolished last year.

Always according to the same newspaper, provisions for non-Muslim
religions have been expanded, although the Greek Orthodox Patriarch
Bartholomew I laments that not enough has been done as yet in this
regard. And some stipulations in the penal code against freedom of
expression have been changed even if, as the Posta admits, there are
still gaps in the law. This was clear, for example, in the notorious
court case filed against the well-known Turkish author, Orhan Pamuk,
who dared to publicly denounce the Armenian genocide. However, adds
the paper, there are renowned lawyers who have taken up his defence
and a positive resolution to the case is hoped for.

However, despite this progress which has unfolded under the gaze of
all, not everyone is in favour of Turkey joining Europe and on Sunday,
large demonstrations registering disapproval took place in Ankara
and Istanbul. The first, organized by the Turkish Nationalist Party
(MHP) and attended by 70,000 people, was one big protest against
Europe addressed by the party leader Devlet Bahceli. Self-appointed
spokesman, he held the crowd with a speech of more than 75 minutes
in a bid to convince his militants that the opening of negotiations
meant the start of serious trouble for Turkey. According to Bahceli,
this step will disrupt the nation’s social and economic development.

The second protest, organised by the Communist TKP party, drew around
3,000 people despite bad weather. The slogan of the demonstration in
the square – “An independent nation against Imperialism and Facism” –
accompanied the march and speeches, in a heartfelt “no” to dependence
on the European Union.

From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress

MEDIATORS TO VISIT AZERBAIJAN AND ARMENIA

A1+
| 16:00:10 | 04-10-2005 | Politics |

According to Azerbaijani Foreign Minister Elmar Mammadyarov the
recurrent meeting of the Armenian and Azerbaijani FMs will take
place in Ljubljana December 4-5 . He also informed that the OSCE
Minsk Group Co-Chairs are expected to visit Azerbaijan and Armenia,
ANS TV Company reported.

During the visit to be paid early November the mediators will meet
with the Armenian and Azerbaijani leadership. To note, OSCE Minsk
Group U.S. Co-Chair Steven Mann is expected to visit Baku late October.

ANDRANIK MARGARYAN RECEIVED UKRAINIAN AMBASSADOR TO RA

A1+
| 15:12:34 | 04-10-2005 | Official |

Today Armenian PM Andranik Margaryan met with newly appointed Ukrainian
Ambassador to Armenia Alexander Bozhko.

Having congratulated the diplomat with appointment to the office
for a second time, A. Margaryan said he hoped for the Ambassador to
promote Armenian-Ukrainian relations further. Mr. Bozhko informed
the Armenian PM on latest developments in the political and economic
life of Ukraine. The situation in the region is stable at present,
a new Government is formed, headed by an experienced PM, relations
in the international arena are also being regulated, he emphasized.

Noting the importance of further strengthening of political and
diplomatic relations between the two countries that have chosen
the way of European integration, the interlocutors discussed the
current state and prospects of development of bilateral trade and
economic relations. They specifically highlighted cooperation within
international organizations. The economic potential of Armenia and
Ukraine is underused in goods turnover between the two countries, the
interlocutors noted. The parties expressed confidence that the previous
sessions of the Armenian-Ukrainian Inter-Governmental Commission for
Trade and Economic Affairs, as well as a range of agreements signed
between the parties would encourage bilateral economic relations.

A. Margaryan and A. Bozhko agreed to speed up the holding of the
Commission fourth session upon the appointment of its new Ukrainian
co-chair to deal with accumulated matters more efficiently.

BEARING RESPONSIBILITY FOR GENOCIDE
by Carlo Romero

Oklahoma Daily, OK
Oct 4 2005

Staff column

“We have talked; we have sympathized; we have expressed our horror;
the time to act is long past due.”

These words appeared in a 1943 resolution by the U.S. Senate Foreign
Relations Committee calling for the liberation of European Jews from
the Nazi Holocaust.

They need to be spoken again about the genocide in Darfur, Sudan,
before the conscience of another generation is stained.

Already, since 2003, an estimated 300,000 African Sudanese have been
summarily slaughtered by their own Arab government in Darfur. At the
same time, more than 2 million people have been driven from their
homes in Darfur and forced to live indefinitely in refugee camps
in other regions of Sudan or neighboring Chad. Refugees have been
left to fight for sparse humanitarian aid while being harassed by
government militias.

The United States has a responsibility to take definitive action to
stop genocide in the Darfur region of Sudan.

According to a report by the United Nations International Commission of
Inquiry on Darfur released in January, “Government forces and militias
conducted indiscriminate attacks, including killing of civilians,
torture, enforced disappearances, destruction of villages, rape and
other forms of sexual violence, pillaging and forced displacement,
throughout Darfur.”

Alarmingly, the U.N. Commission found that “attacks on villages,
killing of civilians, rape, pillaging and forced displacement have
continued” despite its presence in the Sudan.

On Sept. 9, 2004, the United States declared through then Secretary
of State Colin Powell that the atrocities committed by the Sudanese
government amounted to genocide.

In a statement to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Powell
cited “a consistent and widespread pattern of atrocities committed
against non-Arab villagers” and “that the government of Sudan and
the Janjaweed bear responsibility.”

Powell was right about the scale of human devastation. He was wrong
about who bears responsibility.

In a day and age when a person can fly anywhere in the world in less
than 24 hours, when no First World closet is without textiles from at
least 10 Third-World countries, when the Internet reveals precision
satellite photos of every square mile on the globe at any time of the
day to anyone interested, we all bear responsibility for the genocide
that is taking place in Darfur.

Americans in particular, who still live in a democracy (despite the
complaints of journalists and college professors), bear responsibility
for seeking information about the genocide and provoking their
government leaders to take action.

Tragically, the glaring majority of the civilized world has managed
to ignore the atrocities of Darfur.

Print media have buried stories about Sudan in the depths of their
publications. And, in 2004, NBC and CBS spent a total of eight minutes
covering the genocide in Darfur (Harper’s Index, October 2005). The
fourth estate has failed to fulfill its watchdog role, thus forcing
those interested in Sudan to turn to less accessible sources.

More and more, the situation bears stark resemblance to the genocide
inflicted on Armenians by the Ottoman-Turkish government in the second
decade of the 20th century. Despite a mountain of evidence exposing the
horrors, including photographs of mass graves and execution squads,
the United States held an isolationist stance during the Armenian
genocide and allowed over one million Christian Armenians to fall by
knife, bullet or worse to the Ottoman government. The country that
is now Turkey still denies the genocide ever took place.

The world’s reaction to the genocide in Darfur is also reminiscent
of the reaction to the more recent genocide that took place in Rwanda
in 1994. In Rwanda, more than 800,000 Tutsis were slaughtered at the
hands of the Hutu majority while the world watched on the evening news.

The United States never involved itself in Rwandan genocide. And
the United Nations, who maintained peacekeeping troops in the region
to prevent widespread violence prior to the genocide, abandoned the
Tutsis and its purpose when the violence actually escalated.

Last Wednesday, Sept. 28, the U.N. humanitarian chief Jan Egeland
warned about Darfur, “If (violence) continues to escalate, if it
continues to be so dangerous on humanitarian work, we may not be able
to sustain our operation for 2.5 million people requiring lifesaving
assistance.”

We walk into the Holocaust Museum and out of Hotel Rwanda saying
“never again.” Yet, in the words of Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz.,
“It is happening again.”

Americans can only inspire their government to take action in Darfur
by displaying popular sentiment in favor of such action.

We must write our congressmen to voice distress about the genocide
in the Sudan.

We must organize demonstrations to show our leaders that we are
unified in our humanitarian cause.

But first, we must accept responsibility. Then we must act.

-Carlo Romero is a letters senior. His column appears every other
Tuesday, and he can be reached at [email protected].

TURKEY GOT OVER EUROPE

A1+
| 14:44:40 | 04-10-2005 | Politics |

As result of efforts exerted in the course of 40 years the EU-Turkey
negotiations on full membership have opened.

After long and intense discussion EU FMs came to accord in
Luxembourg. Thus, the stalemate situation was overcome: Austria
renounced its proposal on “privileged partnership” to Turkey. On
the night of October 4 the talks on Turkey’s accession to the EU
opened officially.

Before departing for LuxembourgTurkish PM Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s
words, the agreement fits Turkey’s interests fully. “This is
a really historical day for Europe and the whole international
community,” stated the Premier of the UK, which presides at the EU
at present. There is a long way ahead still, he added.

US POLICY TOWARDS KARABAKH SETTLEMENT HAS NOT CHANGED

Pan Armenian
04.10.2005 10:32

/PanARMENIAN.Net/ US policy towards settlement of the Nagorno Karabakh
conflict has not changed, stated US State Department official
representative Sean McCormack. He stated it when answering to a
question whether the letter sent to George Bush by 59 Congressmen on
protection of NK right to self-determination could evidence change of
the US policy. “Of course, we welcome Congressmen’s interest toward
various foreign policy issues, including this one. The US policy
towards NK and efforts aimed at its settlement have not changed,”
the State Department representative said.

LAND SALES IN REMOTE CALIFORNIA DESERT ARE QUESTIONED

Associated Press
San Luis Obispo Tribune, CA
Oct 4 2005

CALIFORNIA CITY, Calif. – Seda Shadkamyan paid $39,500 for a patch
of vacant land in the remote Kern County desert, hoping to pass on
something of value to her three children.

The county assessor determined the land was worth just $2,040.

“I feel used,” said Shadkamyan, an Armenian immigrant who lives
in Glendale. “My husband didn’t want it, but I forced him. It was
my mistake.”

Shadkamyan bought the land from Silver Saddle Ranch and Club, which
buys tax-defaulted land in California City at auctions and sells it
for up to 50 times what the Kern County Assessor’s Office considers
fair market value, according to a report in the Bakersfield Californian
that cited public records.

Another company, National Recreational Properties Inc., which uses
actor Erik Estrada as its television pitch man, has had a similar
operation since 2003 in the area about 100 miles north of Los Angeles,
records show.

Silver Saddle customers told the newspaper that the company marketed
itself in Korean newspapers, on Armenian-language television and
through Tagalog and Mandarin-speaking callers offering prizes. NRPI
markets itself in English and Spanish language television commercials
featuring Estrada.

Properties’ assessed values are publicly available, and representatives
from both companies said their sales practices are legitimate and
sales prices are fair.

“That’s the market,” said Silver Saddle sales manager Robert Kvassay.

But California City Mayor Larry Adams and other officials said
Silver Saddle’s sales tours, which show off new development in the
9,400-resident city, do not reflect conditions where the properties
are located. Adams said there’s no plan to install water lines,
electricity or paved roads into the area where Shadkamyan’s quarter
acre of desert and about 20,000 other parcels sit.

Several other people told the Californian they believe the companies
overcharged them for land purchases.

After buying a property from NRPI for $18,000 in 2004, Anaheim resident
Domingo Gomez said he was stunned to learn that he could acquire a
bigger and better located lot from Coldwell Banker for $9,500.

He said he reached a settlement with NRPI but was forbidden from
disclosing the terms.

“The company is bad to Spanish people,” said Gomez. “We got a little
money together and somebody took it.”

TURKEY, EUROPEAN UNION A PROBLEMATIC BID FOR MEMBERSHIP

Monday Morning, Lebanon
Oct 3 2005

The fifteenth-century Topkapi Palace in Istanbul during a
thunderstorm. Will Turkey’s membership bid be scuttled by deep-rooted
historical animosities?

British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw: “Anchor Turkey in the West and
we gain a beacon of democracy and modernity, a country with a Muslim
majority, which will be a shining example across the whole of its
neighboring region”

Talks on Turkey’s membership of the European Union were scheduled
to begin this week, but differences remain over whether the country
can ever actually join the bloc could yet torpedo membership. Four
decades after Ankara first knocked on the European club’s door, the
negotiations — likely to last at least a decade — are scheduled
to begin in the sidelines of a meeting of EU foreign ministers
in Luxembourg this week. While few really expect the talks to be
called off, frantic diplomacy seems set to continue down to the wire,
battling to overcome resistance notably by Austria to the proposed
“negotiating framework” for the mega-haggle.

Specifically Vienna — which openly opposes Turkey’s entry bid —
wants the EU to offer Ankara the prospect of something other than
full EU membership as the formal aim of its talks.

That demand led Turkey — no stranger to tough brinkmanship — to
warn last week that it may stay away from the talks if it deems the
negotiating terms unsatisfactory.

“It is out of the question that we accept any formula or suggestion
other than full membership,” Foreign Ministry spokesman Namik Tan
told reporters in Ankara.

British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw — whose country is a staunch
supporter of Ankara’s bid, and who currently holds the EU’s presidency
— also warned last week that not to go ahead with the talks would
be a disaster.

“It would now be a huge betrayal of the hopes and expectations of
the Turkish people… if, at this crucial time, we turned our back
on Turkey,” he said.

Turkey first signed an association agreement with the EU’s predecessor
in 1963, and has been a formal EU candidate since 1999.

Last December EU leaders gave Ankara a green light to start talks on
October 3.

But strains flared in July when Ankara, while signing an amended
customs accord with the EU, reaffirmed its refusal to recognize Cyprus,
one of 10 countries which joined the EU last year.

Last month EU states finally hammered out a formal response to that,
calling it regrettable and provocative, although in the end only asking
that Turkey recognize the Nicosia government before it actually joins
the EU.

But days before the talks were due to start, the negotiating framework
still remained unresolved. Amid the Austrian refusal to countenance
full membership, a meeting of foreign ministers was called for the
weekend preceding the opening of the formal talks.

While Austria remained tightlipped, observers suggested Vienna was
using the veiled threat of a veto on Turkey to push the EU to open
talks with Croatia, delayed since March due to lack of progress in
finding a key war crimes suspect.

Turkey meanwhile was playing hardball, saying it would only decide
whether to come to Luxembourg once it had seen what was on the table.

The EU-Turkey talks come amid clear public opposition to Turkey’s
EU hopes: a Eurobarometer poll in July indicated that 52 percent
of Europeans are against offering EU entry to Turkey, with only 35
percent in favor.

But Britain’s Straw, who would host the Luxembourg talks, reiterated
London’s geopolitical argument for Turkish EU entry.

“Anchor Turkey in the West and we gain a beacon of democracy and
modernity, a country with a Muslim majority, which will be a shining
example across the whole of its neighboring region,” he declared.

As the diplomatic activity continues, Turks appear to be losing their
enthusiasm for EU membership amid increasing doubts on whether their
mainly Muslim country will ever be welcome in the bloc and mounting
pressure on Ankara to tackle its most nationally explosive issues,
analysts say.

Ankara’s four-decade drive to join the European Union has always
enjoyed strong public support, but the latest polls suggest a
significant drop as the country gears up for the accession talks.

A survey released in early September by the US-based German Marshall
Fund of some 1,000 Turks showed that only 63 percent believed EU
membership would be a good thing, compared to 73 percent last year.

The main reason for the sour mood is a mounting debate in Europe
on whether Turkey should actually become a member of the bloc,
and this is giving Turks the feeling they are being badly treated,
according to Cengiz Aktar, director of the EU Center at Istanbul’s
Bahcesehir University.

Rejection of the EU constitution in referenda in France and the
Netherlands earlier this year, influenced in part by opposition to
Turkey’s membership, has taken its toll on the euphoria in Turkey that
followed the EU’s commitment at a December 17 summit in Brussels to
begin accession talks.

In Germany, conservative leader Angela Merkel, whose Christian Union
bloc narrowly won the September 18 general election and is aiming to
lead a ruling coalition, has long wanted to offer Turkey a “privileged
partnership” rather than full membership.

In France another political heavyweight, Nicolas Sarkozy, president
of the ruling UMP party and a possible successor to President Jacques
Chirac, argues against opening membership talks with Turkey for the
immediate future.

“These are not the expressions of new partnership but of new animosity
— Turkey is presented a a bitter enemy of Europe,” Aktar said. “This
has created a bitter and negative environment of which even the most
pro-EU circles in Turkey have had enough.”

Adding to what appears to Turkey like a U-turn on the EU’s commitment
is increasing pressure on Ankara to take steps many would consider
betraying the country’s basic policies, said Cigdem Nas, of Marmara
University’s European Community Institute.

Tensions have flared over the divided island of Cyprus since July,
when Turkey extended a customs union agreement to the bloc’s 10
newest members, including Cyprus, but insisted the move did not
amount to recognition of the island’s internationally-acknowledged
Greek Cypriot administration.

The EU hit back by insisting on proper recognition.

Another hot topic is the massacres during World War I of Armenians
under the Ottoman Empire, forerunner of the modern Turkish Republic.

Armenians claim up to 1.5 million of their people were slaughtered
in an Ottoman “genocide”, a claim Turkey strongly rejects.

“Turkey is being gradually pushed into an internal settling of accounts
and this creates a backlash in a country where nationalism runs high
and the EU has come to symbolize all the foreign pressure on Ankara,”
Nas said.

The past few months have seen the rise of several new civic
organizations that take their names from armed resistance groups
that fought against Allied occupation during Turkey’s 1919-1922
independence war, and which say their aim is to save the country from
“treasonous collaborators”.

“Even though there is an ideological anti-EU movement in Turkey,
many know that the EU will be to the country’s benefit. So support
of EU membership will once again increase,” Nas predicted.

“But cornering Turkey on national issues such as Cyprus and the
Armenian massacres would lead to a further backlash,” she warned.