BY ALI SIRMEN
CUMHURIYET- Recent developments have been crystal clear. There's no need for years of political experience or a team of seasoned foreign policy advisors to understand them.
Following Premier Recep Tayyip Erdogan's visit to Washington last November, a lot was written about a package said to be forthcoming. Everybody was expecting something to happen. A `civilian settlement' began to be mentioned more frequently.
The ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) was keeping its silence and saying nothing about what the package would contain.
People were saying, `Let's wait to see what happens.'
Plans were only known by the US administration and high-level Turkish officials.
One upon a time, plans proposing amnesty for militants in southeastern Anatolia were prepared in London, but now similar plans were being drawn up in Washington.
When airstrikes across the Iraqi border began with intelligence help from the US, we could tell the plan had been set in motion.
With the beginning of Turkish troops' ground offensive into northern Iraq, it became clear that the final stage had been reached before a `civilian settlement'
* *
There's no need to even discuss whether or not the ground offensive was carried out with the permission of the US or the withdrawal done at Washington's request.
Understanding the plan as a whole, which we heard about piecemeal, and fully understanding it are more important.
The CHP leader's recent remark, `There is a great plan,' shows that he saw what was really happening.
Baykal is asking: If the ground offensive hadn't been carried out in northern Iraq, could President Jalal Talabani have ever been invited to visit Turkey?
Rather than getting angry with him, one should answer his question
Honestly, if there hadn't been any military operation into northern Iraq, could Talabani have been invited to Turkey?
The plan will also be fully seen by the public slowly, like putting together a puzzle.
The plan doesn't just include military operations but also proposed `reforms' for southeastern Anatolia. In addition, it includes relations between Turkey and the formation in northern Iraq.
If you can't get past here, then you can't see the whole plan.
It's a part of the Greater Middle East Initiative.
* *
Turkey, in other words, the AKP, is again assuming the role of co-chairmanship of the project.
For six years the balances in our region have been upset, and relations have become very complicated.
Turkey just sitting and watching developments and objecting to everything while doing nothing is not logical.
But Ankara not seeing the whole plan and acting only with partial perceptions without considering what will happen to its borders and constitutional structure when the project is implemented is extremely wrong.
Turkey blocking the formation in northern Iraq is out of the question. But the issue of what stance this formation will take against terrorist attacks on Turkey should be fully examined.
Here we should look at deeds, not words. Turkey, burned in the past by the gulf between Talabani's deeds and words, should act more carefully.
Everybody is saying that the armed fight alone isn't enough to face down terrorism.
But the people who are urging a `civilian settlement' should make fully clear what they mean and what they want, in detail. Will the public allow any initiatives which could harm Turkey's unilateral structure established under the 1923 Treaty of Lausanne?
Again, will the public welcome any deal with terrorists?
Many people have recently gotten angry with Baykal, but we shouldn't do the same. He sees the game and is trying to make us to see it too.