IRAQ AND TURKISH TROOP DEPLOYMENT: GOT EXPECTS

S E C R E T ANKARA 006281 SIPDIS E.O. 12958: DECL: 10/06/2013 TAGS: PREL MOPS MARR TU IZ SUBJECT: IRAQ AND TURKISH TROOP DEPLOYMENT: GOT EXPECTS "YES" FROM PARLIAMENT 10/7, WORRIED ABOUT POSSIBLE NEAGTIVE STATEMENTS FROM IGC, REQUEST CPA ENGAGEMENT REF: A. ANKARA 6272 ¶B. ANKARA 6279 (U) Classified by DCM Robert S. Deutsch. Reasons 1.5 b and d. Action Requests at Para 2 and 3. ¶1. (S) Ambassador was called October 7 by MFA Undersecretary Ziyal who said the GOT expects Ref A motion granting the GOT authority to deploy Turkish troops to pass this evening (Oct. 7). Ziyal and the Ambassador agreed to meet on Oct. 9 to discuss next steps. Ziyal expressed concern (that he said was shared by FM Gul),based on GOT meetings with Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK) "Prime Minister" Barham Salih Oct. 6, that the Iraqi Governing Council (IGC) would make a negative statement about the possible Turkish deployment. (Note: Salih told the Turks that a Turkish deployment might hamper, rather than help, the political and security situation in Iraq, and could harm both Iraqi and Turkish interests. See Ref B. End Note.) Ziyal said that the support of Arab public opinion was important for Turkey to proceed with the deployment, and that FM Gul would be taking steps to shore it up. Ziyal asked that the US work with the IGC to ensure that it either issues a positive statement about a possible Turkish deployment or that it says nothing. ¶2. (S) ACTION REQUEST: Request that CPA engage IGC members urgently to ensure either a positive statement or no statement at all is issued by the IGC or its members about a possible Turkish deployment. ¶3. (S) ACTION REQUEST: Please provide by OOB Oct. 9 guidance on how the US prefers to conclude on military operational details including details on financial and logistics issues, and how we should react to the expected request for a "political" agreement on other Iraq-related issues. ¶4. (U) Baghdad minimize considered. EDELMAN