Page 2 of
3 A US detour via Syria
to Iran By Sami Moubayed
administration was being humiliated
by the civil war, and Bush was unable to bring
violence to a halt.
Iran waited for the
moment when the US would become so desperate that
it would call on Tehran to intervene in Iraqi
affairs - perhaps a la Syria in Lebanon in
1976 - to stabilize the country.
Iran had
the manpower to do so, after all. It knew the
geography. It had the money. It had the
connections - both politically and
religiously. More important,
it had legitimacy with Iraqi Shi'ites. The US,
however, was willing to look in every other
direction - including rapprochement with Damascus
- rather than talk to Iran. All other directions,
without Iran, have led to continued failure in
Iraq.
It became clear to the United States
by late last year that a deal could not be reached
without Iran. The Shi'ites it had relied on since
2003 were clearly more affiliated with the mullahs
than with the US. This applied to strongmen in
Iraqi politics such as Abdul Aziz al-Hakim of the
Supreme Council of the Islamic Revolution in Iraq,
who heads the parliamentary majority and walks a
fine rope between being both pro-Iranian and
pro-American, and Maliki.
Also, according
to Central Intelligence Agency reports last year,
a bulk of the insurgency was coming from Shi'ite
militias, such as Muqtada al-Sadr's Mehdi Army,
which is close to the Iraqi premier, rather than
from Sunni tribesmen and al-Qaeda militants.
Despite the need for dialogue, the
conference on Saturday was not as smooth as it
needed to be. US and Iranian officials traded
accusations, refusing to take blame for the chaos
in Iraq. David Satterfield, the US envoy, who had
not ruled out corridor diplomacy between the two
countries, pointed to his briefcase, saying he had
documents proving that Iran was arming Shi'ite
militias. Iranian envoy Abbas Araghci snapped
back, "Your accusations are merely a cover for
your failures in Iraq."
Khalilzad, who
advocated courting the Sunnis at the expense of
Iraq's Shi'ites, also held direct talks with the
Iranians, describing them as "constructive and
businesslike". The Iranians objected to the
kidnapping of six of their diplomats by US troops
in January. Five of the missing were taken from
the Iranian Consulate in the northern city of
Irbil. One day before the consulate was raided,
after all, Bush had said the US troops in Iraq
would "seek out and destroy" Iranian networks.
Despite the coolness, the sides decided to
hold follow-up meetings to discuss security,
energy, and Iraqi refugees. These talks will
include Group of Eight nations and take place in
Turkey next month. Hours after the Baghdad
meeting, Iraqi Vice President Tarek al-Hashemi,
who had been critical of Shi'ite hegemony in Iraqi
politics, arrived in Tehran to discuss relations
with Iran.
There is a strong fear in Iraqi
circles that a confrontation will take place
between Iran and the United States, based on
numerous media reports and a general mood in the
international community. Much is being done to
defuse the rising tension between Sunnis and
Shi'ites, to appease an angry, hungry, insecure
and frustrated Iraqi street. If Iran is attacked,
it will unite Muslim opinion against the United
States, rather than divide it, as some US analysts
say. Inasmuch as radical Sunnis might be
anti-Shi'ite, they are certainly more
anti-American. Ahmadinejad recently concluded a
visit to Saudi Arabia, where he met with King
Abdullah, who is believed to control a large part
of the Sunni street in Iraq. While the delegates
were meeting in Baghdad, US officials were busy in
New York talking about tougher economic sanctions
on Iran.
Yet while the Iraqis were holding
their breath, awaiting outcomes of the conference
based on US-Iranian talks, the media were painting
a very different picture of where the world is
heading under Bush. The British Broadcasting Corp
said the US is planning a bombing campaign against
Iranian military and nuclear targets, mainly in
Natanz and Asfahan. The Israeli press paints a
similar picture, saying that Ahmadinejad is a new
Adolf Hitler who must be combated before he
threatens the entire world with annihilation.
The British Guardian wrote last month that the
US is in "advanced stages" of preparing for war on
Iran. The London Sunday Telegraph wrote on
February 25 that the US is funding ethnic
separatist groups (non-Persian, which make up
nearly 40% of Iran's 70 million) inside Iran to
create trouble for the Iranian regime. These
include Kurds, Azeris and Ahwaz Arabs.
Topping all came an article in The New
Yorker by investigative journalist Seymour Hersh,
who said a "redirection" is under way at the
Pentagon and the White House, focusing on Iran.
The new plan is to fund action against Hezbollah
in Lebanon and encourage Sunni extremists to fight
the Shi'ites, as the Americans did after the
Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in 1979 - they
encouraged Sunni extremists to fight the Russians.
Architects of this plan, according to
Hersh, are Deputy National Security Adviser
Elliott Abrams, Khalilzad, Saudi National Security
Adviser Prince Bandar Bin Sultan and US Vice
President
Head
Office: Unit B, 16/F, Li Dong Building, No. 9 Li Yuen Street East,
Central, Hong Kong Thailand Bureau:
11/13 Petchkasem Road, Hua Hin, Prachuab Kirikhan, Thailand 77110
