|
|
 |
Great Satan Talks to Axis of Evil
// America and Iran Meet to Discuss Iraq
Yesterday Baghdad hosted talks between the Iranian and American ambassadors on the subject of Iraq. The event marks the first contact on such a high level between Washington and Tehran since diplomatic relations were severed between the two countries 27 years ago. The outcome of the talks is likely to determine the future of Iran's relationship with the West, although even if the US succeeds in wrangling a promise from Tehran to cease its support for the Iraqi insurgency, Washington does not intend to let up the pressure on Iran over its nuclear program. For its part, Tehran has a powerful bargaining chip in the issue of security in Iraq, which it may use to force the US to refrain from military action or attempts to undermine the Iranian regime.
Three Decades Later
The talks that took place yesterday in the Iraqi capital between the top American envoy to Iraq, Ryan Crocker, and his Iranian counterpart Hassan Kazemi-Qomi were a worldwide sensation even before they began. Dialogue between Washington and Tehran was cut off in 1980, after the Islamic Revolution of 1979 was followed by the seizure of the US embassy in Tehran, and since then the two sides have not managed to repair their ruptured official relationship. For America, Iran is part of the global "axis of evil," while for Iran America remains the "Great Satan." Ironically, the revival of dialogue between the two countries had recently appeared all the more unlikely in light of the continuing escalation of the crisis surrounding Iran's nuclear program, a standoff in which Washington has found itself facing Iran with daggers drawn.
Nevertheless, two weeks ago US National Security Council spokesman Gordon Johndroe announced a "historical" initiative from the White House: the beginning of direct talks with Tehran. According to Mr. Johndroe, the talks are aimed mainly at trying "to make sure that the Iranians play a productive role in Iraq." As US losses mount in Iraq, Washington has been pressured into taking steps towards Iran, which the US claims is exercising an enormous influence on the situation in Iraq by arming Shiite militia groups. Washington is hoping that success in reaching an agreement with Tehran may calm the wave of violence and opposition to US troops that is convulsing Iraq.
Washington's offer of negotiations, which was sent to the Iranian authorities via the Swiss embassy in Tehran, was immediately accepted, though not without numerous conditions set by the Iranian side. First, Tehran insisted that the discussion concern only the situation in Iraq, take place in the presence of Iraqi representatives, and not under any circumstances touch upon the "holy of holies" – Iran's nuclear program. Representatives of the Iranian government also see no reason to dampen their anti-American rhetoric, saying that the relationship between Tehran and Washington remains fundamentally the same as it has been for the past three decades.
Secondly, on the eve of the talks in Baghdad, Tehran attempted to spin the upcoming negotiations for propagandistic ends, demanding that the US admit the failure of its Iraq policy and introduce changes into its course. "If the US approaches these talks realistically, admits its mistaken policy in Iraq, changes it, and in the future fulfills its obligations, then a continuation of the negotiation process can be hoped for," said Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki on Saturday. He also did not pass up the opportunity to mention who, according to Tehran, is Iraq's real friend: "Iran is counting on a successful dialogue with the goal of helping the people and government of Iraq," said Mr. Mottaki.
One Iraq, for Two
Despite the harsh statements made by the Iranian representatives, their Iraqi hosts have made it clear that the meeting in Baghdad is supposed to be the beginning of a normalization of relations between the US and Iran, a relationship upon which security and stability in Iraq depend enormously. After shaking hands with Ambassador Crocker and Ambassador Kazemi-Qomi at the entrance to his residence in Baghdad's carefully-secured Green Zone, which had been selected as the venue for the meeting, Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki led the two diplomats into a conference hall and seated them facing each other across a table.
Before leaving Ryan Crocker and Hassan Kazemi-Qomi to discuss the situation in Iraq in the presence of his national security advisor, Mowaffak al-Rubai, the Iraqi leader treated them to a short but emotionally-charged speech. According to Mr. al-Maliki, the Iraqis want to live in a stable country that is free both from a foreign military presence and from the meddling of regional powers, and he shared his opinion that American troops are in Iraq only to maintain security and that the territory of Iraq cannot be used by the US to launch strikes on Iraq's neighbors. The hint about Iran was apparent to all. "We are sure that the progress achieved during this meeting on issues of security will reinforce the bridges of trust between the two countries by creating a positive atmosphere in their relationship that will help them to resolve other problems as well," said Mr. al-Maliki.
The meeting in the Iraqi prime minister's residence took place behind closed doors and lasted for more than four hours. On the whole, Ambassador Crocker, who spoke to journalists after the meeting's conclusion, appeared satisfied. "The talks went positively," he said, emphasizing that the talks were "a professional discussion" during which the two sides "laid out the principles of their policies in Iraq." Moreover, as became apparent from the American ambassador's remarks, the sides reached a broad consensus on the issue of the necessity of supporting a "secure, stable, democratic, federal Iraq in control of its own security, at peace with its neighbors."
In his short commentary, the head of the American mission in Baghdad refrained from criticizing Tehran and navigated with diplomatic caution around several sharp corners. Though he mentioned that Iran supports several insurgent groups in Iraq that are fighting against American and Iraqi forces, Mr. Crocker carefully lobbed only a tiny salvo in his Iranian counterpart's direction, saying merely that he had "not received a direct answer" on the issue.
The main outcome of the talks could be considered the agreement that was reached to continue negotiations. Given the enduring power of the fundamental differences of opinion between Washington and Tehran concerning how best to build a "secure, stable, democratic, federal Iraq," no one expected much more. In any case, the talks can already be considered a success in that they went off without any scandals or radical moves by either side.
The Iraqi Trump Card
A final reminder that it is still too early to expect Tehran and Washington to completely renounce confrontation on the playing field of Iraq was the arrest last Saturday in Baghdad of a member of a rebel group who is suspected of organizing large-scale deliveries to Iraq of explosive devices from Iran. News of the arrest was reported by the American military command in Iraq, which presented a display of "Iranian trophies" earlier this year in Baghdad as material proof of "the hand of Tehran" operating in Iraq.
Under these conditions, the level of readiness on each side to make compromises on the matter of Iraq will largely depend on other factors, particularly the development of the Iranian nuclear crisis and possible US efforts to destabilize the Iranian regime via political and economic sanctions, military action, or covert intelligence operations, an option that was approved last week by a directive from President Bush.
With regard to the Iranian nuclear crisis, the report issued last week by IAEA head Mohamed ElBaradei, which outlined Tehran's refusal to adhere to a UN demand that it suspend its enrichment of uranium, means that the clouds are swiftly gathering above Iran. Now, in accordance with the UN resolution from March 24 of this year, the Security Council is preparing to review a new, harsher sanctions package. Further proof that the Iranian nuclear crisis has gone too far was a statement made yesterday by Russian deputy foreign minister Sergei Kislyak, who expressed "great disappointment" with Tehran's refusal to fulfill the demands of the IAEA and the UN Security Council. Moscow has previously been more circumspect in its comments regarding the behavior of the Iranian side.
In the current atmosphere of increasing political, economic, and military pressure on Iran, Iraq may now be the last ace in the hole that Tehran can attempt to wield in geopolitical horse-trading with a determined government in Washington.
Sergei Strokan
All the Article in Russian as of May 29, 2007
|
|
|
