To: jlallen who wrote (359443 ) 2/17/2003 2:04:35 AM From: Lazarus_Long Respond to of 769670 Nato breaks impasse over defence By Reuters and Judy Dempsey in Brussels Published: February 16 2003 10:13 | Last Updated: February 16 2003 19:01 Nato broke its deadlock over planning for the defence of Turkey in the event of a US-led war against Iraq on Sunday night after hours of wrangling in a committee where France, which had blocked the move, has no seat. "I can now confirm that the 18 Nato allies. . . agreed today to task military planners to begin their work," said Lord Robertson, Nato secretary-general. "Alliance solidarity has prevailed." The deadlock began when France, Belgium and Germany last month refused to agree a US request to extend defence guarantees to Turkey. All three countries had repeatedly said they opposed Nato making any decisions that might create the impression that the alliance believed war on Iraq was inevitable, rather than back the diplomatic efforts taking place at the United Nations Security Council. The US and other Nato countries, however, said they were only making "prudent and contingency" plans. Despite this, the Netherlands on Sunday confirmed it had shipped three Patriot missile batteries to Turkey, under bilateral arrangements. Agreement to start planning for the protection of Turkey came after Lord Robertson took the issue to the alliance's Defence Planning Committee (DPC), which he chairs. This is the main decision-making arm of the alliance on matters concerning its integrated military structure. Until now, discussion over Turkey had taken place in the North Atantic Council, the alliance's highest political decision-making arm in which France, like other countries, has a veto. The DPC spent Sunday forging a new compromise put forward by Belgium and backed by France, that spelt out how Nato would provide only defensive, not offensive backing for Turkey. German officials said they could accept that wording which the alliance had in fact already suggested last week. This time, however, the compromise held a greater chance of acceptance because France could not use its veto. It is not a DPC member, having quit Nato's military integrated structures in 1966. "In some ways, however late, all this is a face-saving compromise for all concerned," said a Nato diplomat. "France would not be accused of blocking the Turkish request, Germany could live with the wording and Belgium, the last to sign up, would be forced to cave in rather than be marginalised."news.ft.com