WASHINGTON: Twice in less than a week, the Obama administration expressed its willingness to accept a bilateral security deal with Afghanistan even if it’s signed by a senior Afghan official instead of the country’s president.

“Whatever document is agreed to … has to go to their parliament for ratification not unlike our Senate … then whether it’s the minister of defence or the president, someone who has the authority to sign on behalf of Afghanistan,” US Secretary of Defence Chuck Hagel told a briefing in Washington.US Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman General Martin E. Dempsey, when asked if a document signed by the Afghan defence minister would be acceptable, said he was more concerned about the contents of the document.

“What we need to account for is the freedom of movement for our military personnel. We’ll have to be able to move freely in order to accomplish the train, advise and assist task,” he said.

“Secondly, the legal protections for those who serve against an Afghan legal system that is at best described as nascent and will take some time to mature.”

US Secretary of State John Kerry suggested on Tuesday that Afghanistan’s defence minister or government, instead of a reluctant President Hamid Karzai, could sign a security pact enabling some US troops to stay in the country after 2014.The United States and its allies plan to withdraw most of their combat troops from Afghanistan by the end of 2014 and are seeking a bilateral security agreement with Afghanistan for future deployments.

An assembly of Afghan tribal elders last month endorsed the security deal with the United States, but President Karzai said he might not sign it until after elections next April.

The delay has irritated the United States and its allies, who want the document signed now so that they could plan for the post-2014 troop deployments.