Teacher: You will be given a context and a verb separated with a newline character, and you have to answer if the given verb can be anchored in time or not. We say a verb can be anchored in the real timeline if and only if a verb happened in the past, is happening now, or is guaranteed to happen in the future. The output should be "Yes" if the verb can be anchored in time and "No" otherwise.
Teacher: Now, understand the problem? If you are still confused, see the following example:
It was followed by Denmark, Norway, Germany, France, Greece, Luxembourg, Spain, Britain, the United States, Iceland, Belgium, Italy, Portugal and Turkey. NATO decided at last year's Madrid summit to (invite) the three eastern European countries to start accession talks.  
 Verb: invite
Solution: No
Reason: This is a good example. The "invite" is not anchorable. Although NATO decided to invite them, they haven't invited them yet, and it's not guaranteed to happen in the future. They might change their decision later.

Now, solve this instance: We must be clear in explaining that a settlement without NATO-led enforcement is not acceptable because only NATO has the credibility and capability to make it work,  she said.  And we must be resolute in spelling out the consequences of intransigence,  she added, referring to the threat of NATO air strikes against Milosevic if he does not (agree) to the deployment.  
 Verb: agree
Student:
No