An agreement without signature

As Gen. James Jones, the commander of NATO forces in Europe, visited Ankara, our military officials have once again sat down to the negotiating table with Washington. It’s also being reported that Adm. Sir Michael Boyce, Britain’s former chief of Defense Staff, is set to pay a visit to our country at the end of this month. This military traffic reminds me of the pre-war period when military officials had signed an agreement for US troop deployments. However, after the ink on the agreement had dried, our Parliament refused Washington’s request to let in US troops for a northern front against Iraq. That rebuff angered Washington, which is why our government is now eager to mend strained relations. Once bitten, twice shy; so this time, our militaries will prepare an agreement, but won’t sign anything before getting Parliament’s stance on the issue. The signing of the military agreement will take place after the political decision-makers weigh in. This time, Ankara should proceed carefully and take every possible measure to prevent another disappointment with Washington, as this would very likely cause irreparable harm to bilateral relations. Ankara should act consistently and determinedly. Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan recently stated that his government had yet to make its decision on the issue, underlining that he would never send Turkish soldiers into a bad situation. Our government often stresses that the main mission of Turkish troops should be to provide the Iraqi people with civilian services, rather than acting as policemen in the region. We’re all fearful that the Iraqis will see our soldiers as collaborators of foreign occupiers. However, we have yet to see any preparations to make the arrangements for such civilian services. If doctors, engineers and technicians are to accompany our soldiers to Iraq, why hasn’t Ankara begun the necessary preparations? All we see now are the military negotiations underway.”