US to Join in Iraq-Nam Talks with Syria and Iran

The Green Zone Government has called a conference a week from tomorrow of interested parties to discuss the security situation in Iraq-Nam. Syria and Iran have signaled that they will attend. Secretary of State neoCondoleeza Rice stunned the Senate Appropriations Committee by testifying that the US would show up as well. If this meeting is a success, an April conference at the ministerial level could follow. It is the smallest of steps forward.

There is, of course, no military settlement in Mesopotamia without a political settlement, and that must include the nation’s neighbors as well as its internal factions. Whether a political settlement is possible at this junction is a matter for debate. The only way to find out is to start negotiations. The internal factions seem to be deadlocked, so any break-through will have to come from a conference such as this. Some sort of discussion, even indirectly, amond Damascus, Tehran and Washington is the best hope.

For the Americans, the “surge” of troops into Baghdad is well-underway, and this means a bit of extra leverage and a demonstration that the administration is serious about protecting the Green Zone Government. Predictably, the backpedaling has already begun, with the Secretary of State saying there would be no direct talks with Iran or Syria. The model appears to be the six-party talks regarding the Korea Peninsula, where the US wouldn’t talk to North Korea without chaperones. Interestingly, America’s position was announced while ultra-chicken hawk Vice President Dick Cheney was traveling.

Iran and Syria have more immediate concerns. Either they want a stable and non-threatening Iraq as a neighbor, or they want instability so they can continue their Machiavellian moves. It could well be that Tehran and Damascus want different things. For both, the American intentions are significant, and they only way to determine what those are is to attend the chinwag.

The bar cannot be set lower. The talks will be a success if all concerned parties attend. There is a fair chance that one or more of the participants will storm out and that the hostile posturing will resume at a heightened level. However, negotiations are a process by which each party comes to understand what the others want. Even if there is no agreement, knowing is better than not knowing. Of course, this whole thing could fall apart with one well-aimed IED, or a talk between Messrs. Bush and Cheney, or Messrs. Ahmadinejad and Khameini. It’s early days so best not to get one’s hopes up; after all, the subject at hand is the MidEast.

© Copyright 2007 by The Kensington Review, Jeff Myhre, PhD, Editor. No part of this publication may be reproduced without written consent. Produced using Fedora Linux.

Home