By: Sami Shouresh
Al-Hayat May, 20, 2007
After decades, the Iranians and Americans are planning to meet for the first time on May 28 to discuss Iraq, one of the most important points of dispute between the two countries.
The Middle East countries that have witnessed the conflict between Washington and Tehran on issues such as Iran’s nuclear development and this country’s meddling in Lebanon and its support of Hezbollah, have welcomed the event. Hopes are high that this could be a prelude to a more comprehensive and higher level talks to resolve problems between Iran and the US.
The current quarrel between Iran and the United States is so alarming and severe that it could lead to more penalties for Iran and eventually a war against this country.
The above optimism is justified as the region is really not ready to go through another war and more violence. In addition, war or military action against a country like Iran could be costly due to its geographic size and population as well as its specific geopolitical situation being located north of the Gulf. Additionally, Tehran has a special political and religious effect on the neighboring Islamic countries.
All of the above make Iran a tough adversary. Even worse, the events in the past three decades confirm that like other ideological nations in the world, Iran’s theocratic regime has been quite successful in building its powerbase for survival throughout the region although it has weak points and stability issues. The experience from Taliban in Afghanistan and Baath Party in Iraq shows that this could pose a serious danger in a political or military confrontation.
There is no immediate danger in confronting or taking up a regime change policy on Iran but the threat begins afterwards and in the subsequent phases. Iraq and Afghanistan are obvious examples.
It is alright for some to be very optimistic about the upcoming Iraq meeting. But at the same time those who are not expecting big results also have a point. Some of their concerns could be detailed as follows:
None of the two countries are approaching this meeting with strong convictions since the advantages or disadvantages of a peaceful and diplomatic solution are uncertain but they are only acting on their domestic objectives.
In Washington there is increasing pressure from Democrats on George W. Bush to start dialogue with Iran in order to resolve Iraq crisis. This is what the Democrats are demanding off of the Baker-Hamilton report. Though Bush originally did not pay attention to this demand but with increasing pressure from Democrats and some Republican circles on his administration, especially with Democrats gaining the majority in the Congress, he caved in to pressure.
To escape direct talks, the American administration did not have a choice but to meet with the Iranians in conferences where other regional and international countries were present as well. Zalmay Khalilzad the former American Ambassador in Iraq initiated this in an international conference in Baghdad. Rice continued this trend in meeting with her Iranian counterpart in a similar conference in Egypt. In both cases Iranians following their own special interest rejected direct and face-to-face talks with the American officials and put this off until they agreed on a two way meeting in Baghdad.
There have been a number of Iraqi mediators such as Ali Sistani, the Shiite Ayatollah and Hoshyar Zebari, the Iraqi Foreign Minister in order to set the stage for these talks. The Americans accepted the offer quickly because of the domestic and international pressure on the Bush administration.
Iranians will attend the meeting because of their own internal reasons. Although Ahmadinejad, the hard-line Iranian President has a lot of influence, but the Iranian officials do not hide that he is dealing with numerous domestic problems. Ahmadinejad could resist this type of pressure for a while but he will have to give in eventually.
Although both Iran and the U.S. stress that the meeting will be focused only on Iraq but there is a feeling that this is not going to be the case.
The Americans want to open the door on resolving other issues with Iran in return for political and economic concessions. And Iran is aware of the problem Americans are facing in starting another war or seeking international support to further penalize Iran. Therefore, Iran wants to get even more concessions.
Iran’s first and foremost demand from the U.S. is to accept Tehran’s authority in Iraq, Lebanon and the region. In addition to recognize Iran’s right to a peaceful nuclear program, unblock their funds and put forth other economic compromises.
Iranian officials affirm that Ahmadinejad does not believe Americans will give in to these demands but he also believes that he is the ultimate winner of this game since the U.S. administration is not capable of punishing his country militarily or economically.
Obviously the meeting between Iran and the United States in Baghdad is a big deal but the general consensus is that this meeting will not go further than hammering on cold iron. The reason is that none of them are going to Baghdad to resolve Iraq’s problems. They are just showing up to defuse their own domestic pressures.