WRITE for ATol ADVERTISE MEDIA KIT GET ATol BY EMAIL ABOUT ATol CONTACT US
Asia Time Online - Daily News
             
Asia Times Chinese
AT Chinese



    Middle East
     May 30, 2007
Page 1 of 2
IRAN AND THE US TALK
Now, that wasn't so bad ...

By Kaveh L Afrasiabi

Finally some good news for US-Iran diplomacy, stranded on the rocky road of seemingly intractable hostilities and suspicions for nearly three decades. US and Iranian diplomats in Baghdad, meeting "businesslike" at the office of Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki to discuss Iraq's security on Monday, reported solid progress, even a "broad policy agreement" on Iraq, and will likely



meet again in the near future.

According to Nicholas Burns of the US State Department, the American people should prepare themselves for a normalization of relations with Iran. He said the US is on the verge of sending an ambassador to Libya, has a "high-ranking diplomat in Cuba" and is even talking with Zimbabwe's Robert Mugabe, so why not Iran?

Henceforth, in light of probable steady progress in US-Iran dialogue in the coming months, Burns' candid statements will most likely be mirrored in Iran, depending on the nature of follow-up meetings and developments. Any premature "quickening the process" may backfire, however, and there are still too many divisive issues, particularly with respect to Iran's nuclear program, that could torpedo any incremental progress such as with respect to Iraq.

"Iran is a major player in the region and cannot be ignored," Admiral William Fallon, the new US commander in the Middle East, stated on the eve of the Baghdad meeting, reminding the Iranians once again, "The US has no intention of leaving, as Iran would like to see happen." Can they, then, become each other's partners for regional security?

The answer depends on what Tehran and Washington can achieve over their major "clashing interests". Do those interests outweigh the shared, paralleled (eg, with respect to Lebanon, now plagued with al-Qaeda insurgency), or coinciding interests between them?

This is a complicated question and requires long-term policy approaches by both sides. Consistency is vitally important too. Reporting on the Baghdad meeting, the New York Times put this as a "significant shift in President [George W] Bush's approach toward the Iranian government".

A number of US pundits have interpreted it as a solid defeat for hawkish anti-Iran politicians led by Vice President Dick Cheney, and a victory for the duet of Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. The split within the US government will linger much longer, however, and it is premature to call the doves' upper hand anything other than tenuous at this stage.

The signs are that Washington's neo-conservatives are regrouping, desperately trying to salvage their sinking ship of Iran policy by holding an emergency meeting in the Bahamas under the title "Confronting the Iran Threat: The Road Ahead". Their frustration with the new US opening toward Iran will grow with each US-Iran meeting that, if followed consistently, will pave the way to eventual normalization.

Already, the White House has dissolved a special "pressure" committee on Iran (and Syria), which had been formed as an inter-agency policy-coordination mechanism exploited by the Cheney group. It is unclear whether this mean the US will also backtrack its approach toward covert activities inside Iran.

Concerning the latter, on the eve of the Baghdad meeting, President Mahmud Ahmadinejad broke the news that Iran had uncovered several US-backed espionage networks in western, southwestern and central Iran. Ahmadinejad also mentioned that the US had "sent 40 messages requesting a meeting on Iraq".

According to earlier reports, particularly by Seymour Hersh in The New Yorker, the Central Intelligence Agency is behind the Sunni terrorist group Jundallah operating out of Pakistan, which has conducted a number of bomb attacks against Iran's Revolutionary Guards. Iran has reportedly responded by attacking US forces, eg in Karbala, through its proxies. According to Assadolah Zarei, a Tehran political analyst, Iran is convinced that the US has had a role in the recent spate of bombings in Najaf and Karbala.

Such tit-for-tat proxy operations will likely continue as long as Iran and the US do not reach a broad strategic agreement on regional

Continued 1 2 


Tehran ignores the bluff and bluster (May 26, '07)

Dialogue amid rattling sabers (May 26, '07)

How Damascus can help US find its lost keys (May 26, '07)

Iraq's Sadrists follow Hezbollah's path (May 26, '07)


1. Dialogue amid rattling sabers

2. Tehran ignores the bluff and bluster

3. The baton passes to China

4. Darfur: Forget genocide, there's oil

5. Blogger rubs salt in Korea-China wounds

6. Iraq's Sadrists follow Hezbollah's path

(May 25-28)

 
 



All material on this website is copyright and may not be republished in any form without written permission.
© Copyright 1999 - 2007 Asia Times Online (Holdings), Ltd.
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