Posted on 03/10/2007 10:11:02 AM PST by Mr. Mojo
BAGHDAD (AP) -- U.S. and Iranian envoys exchanged direct talks Saturday on efforts to end Iraq's violence and bolster its government, opening limited but potentially significant contacts that could ease their nearly 28-year diplomatic freeze.
The discussions were confined to one session during a conference on Iraq stability, but they appeared to offer room for further interaction between the two nations _ which find themselves increasingly drawn toward common issues in Iraq as the nation's most influential allies.
The U.S. ambassador to Iraq, Zalmay Khalilzad, said he exchanged views with Iranian delegates "directly and in the presence of others" at the gathering led by Iraq's neighbors and the five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council.
He declined to give details of the contacts _ calling them only "constructive and businesslike and problem-solving" _ but noted that he raised U.S. assertions that Shiite militias receive weapons and assistance across the border from Iran.
The chief Iranian envoy, Abbas Araghchi, said he restated his country's demands for a clear timetable for the withdrawal of U.S.-led forces, which he insisted have made Iraq a magnet for extremists from across the Muslim world.
"Violence in Iraq is good for no country in the region," said Araghchi, deputy foreign minister for legal and international affairs, at a post-meeting news conference.
Araghchi said he did not meet privately with Khalilzad, but that all dialogue "was within the framework of the meeting" _ which he said had "very good interaction by all the delegations."
Khalilzad, too, called it a "first step."
"The discussions were limited and focused on Iraq and I don't want to speculate after that," he said.
For Iran, opening more direct contacts with Washington could help promote their shared interests in Iraq, including trying to stamp out Sunni-led insurgents. U.S. officials, meanwhile, need the support of Iranian-allied political groups in Iraq to help contain Shiite militias.
The United States broke off ties with Iran after militants occupied the American Embassy in Tehran in the wake of the 1979 Islamic Revolution.
Iraq's foreign minister, Hoshyar Zebari, told reporters there were "direct exchanges and meetings and discussions" between the U.S. and Iranian delegation.
He also said the participants at the meeting agreed to take part in future groups to study ways to bolster Iraq's security, assist displaced people and improve fuel distribution and sales in one of OPEC's former heavyweights.
Zebari did not say whether Iran and the United States could join in these smaller "tactical committees."
But Araghchi, the Iranian envoy, insisted that the working groups should include only Iraq's neighbors and could consult with "countries who are players in the region" _ an apparent reference to the United States.
Iraq's prime minister, Nouri al-Maliki, opened the meeting with an appeal for international help to sever networks aiding extremists and warned that Iraq's growing sectarian bloodshed could spill across the Middle East.
Khalilzad also urged nations bordering Iraq _ which include Syria and Iran _ to expand assistance to al-Maliki's government, saying "the future of Iraq and the Middle East is the defining issue of our time."
"(Iraq) needs support in this battle that not only threatens Iraq but will spill over to all countries in the region," al-Maliki said _ shortly before mortar shells landed near the conference site and a car bomb exploded in a Shiite stronghold across the city.
Al-Maliki urged for help in stopping financial support, weapon pipelines and "religious cover" for the relentless attacks of car bombings, killings and other attacks that have pitted Iraq's Sunnis against majority Shiites.
The delegates proposed an "expanded" follow-up meeting, which could include the G-8 nations and others, in Istanbul, Turkey, next month. Iraqi officials, however, say they want the next meeting to take place in Baghdad.
The meeting also gives a forum to air a wide range of views and concerns including U.S. accusations of weapons smuggling from Iran and Syria, and Arab demands for greater political power for Iraq's Sunnis.
Al-Maliki said "the terrorism that kills innocents" in Iraq comes from the same root as terrorists attacks around the world since Sept. 11, in a reference to groups inspired by al-Qaida.
He also delivered an apparent warning to Syria and Iran to stay away from using Iraq as a proxy battleground for fights against the United States.
"Iraq does not accept that its territories and cities become a field where regional and international disputes are settled," he said.
Khalilzad did not specifically mention Iran in statements to delegates, but he offered indirect messages that the United States acknowledges the country's growing influence in the region.
"The U.S. seeks an Iraq that is at peace with its neighbors; and neighbors that are at peace with Iraq," he said, according to a text distributed by the U.S. Embassy.
But he also reasserted U.S. claims that Syria allows foreign jihadists and Sunni insurgents to cross its border into Iraq, and that weapon shipments from Iran reach Shiite militias. Both nations deny the allegations.
Iran has strongly denounced the U.S. military presence even though it toppled their old foe Saddam Hussein. The complaints grew more pointed in December after American forces detained two Iranian security agents at the compound of a major Shiite political bloc in Baghdad
Six other Iranians were arrested Jan. 11 at an Iranian liaison office in northern Iraq. The U.S. military said they were members of Iran's elite Revolutionary Guard _ a charge Tehran rejects.
Khalilzad appeared to address Iran's complaints by saying U.S.-led troops do not "have anyone in detention who is a diplomat."
The Iranian envoy Araghchi complained the officials were "kidnapped" by U.S. forces and were members of the diplomatic staff.
The showdown over Iran's nuclear program also lurks behind any attempt to open a diplomatic dialogue. There have been other chances in the past for one-on-one dialogue between the United States and Iran, but rarely with such promise.
In September, the United States joined Iran and Syria in talks on Iraq _ although Washington ruled out direct talks with Iran in advance.
"All the delegates are united by one thing: the fear of a prolonged civil war in Iraq. It would hurt them each in different ways," said Abdel-Moneim Said, director of Al-Ahram Center for Political and Strategic Studies in Cairo. "Fear is the one thing bringing them all together."
Having read the entire thread...I believe that some folks are having a gut level knee jerk reaction, based upon being a part of history that demonstrates clearly that negotiation does not work.
I believe we have been at war with Iran since 1979 and that we will get revenge in all due course.
I believe that there is much more going on behind the scenes than ANY of us know.
I believe the article and statements were INTENTIONALLY inflamatory, to get a reaction.
I believe our President is far better at poker than Nutjob is at chess.....
I believe I will give this the "48 hour rule" and let a few things play out a bit more, before I "throw out the COnservative baby with the bathwater"
If this turns out to be factual and we ARE in FACT "NEGOTIATING" with IRAN on ANYTHING that involves the US or our Troops...I will be more than happy to comment further, and in FULL VOICE (and on more than an internet forum)
Keep the Faith.....Keep prayers up for our President and ALL of our men and women in harms way.
And for the love of GOD< do not start acting like a liberal ;-) LOL
Keep the Faith.....Keep prayers up for our President and ALL of our men and women in harms way.
And for the love of GOD< do not start acting like a liberal ;-) LOL
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Roger-That...;0)
We don't have enough sources at this point to double-check the nature of the talks, but I do refer you to post #34 for a quote --- from the White House diplomatic corps --- that disturbs me.
When the Baker Commission ISG report came out last Fall, many of the recommendations including "talks" with Iran were roundly ridiculed and condemned on this forum and rightly so. Now, it's acceptable. Who would have thought?
Phooey on that. Alleging that posters here sound like "liberals" because of voicing our concerns is one of those tactics used by RINOs to try and shut others up.
I was not accusing you or anyone else of anything my friend...please address your anger elsewhere.
I merely made a statement.
Now, having "laid down the law," you're going to get touchy. You're clearly putting down other FReepers for our views. We're ALL entitled to our views here.... aren't we?
I did not "lay down any law"...good grief! get a grip! ANd please feel free to not address ME further. My GOD.Enough already with the indignation.
The Iraq neighbors’ peace conference ends by deciding on a follow-up at foreign ministers’ level
******************
Debka implies we laid in on the Iranians,...since we have some new Intel from the defected Iranian General...
THanks...I read that a bit earlier. As I tried to say earlier, I believe that many MANY things are going on that we are not privy to :-)
Keep the Faith!
looky
bttt
......Now, it's acceptable. Who would have thought? .....
I don't accept the term "talks" in the present context. Bush bashers want to use the term to convey the thought that he is changing his policy to that they have been suggesting.
What I believe is actually happening is "tell". W is using the opportunity to convey a oneway message in no uncertain terms. Like the Godfather, he is making an offer they shoud not refuse.
Interesting to note the Democrats have the same talking points as the Islamofacists in Tehran.
You know Nancy P, John Murtha, Maxine Waters and the rest of the Democrat Clown Posse, you sound JUST like the people in Iraqn who stone gays and theat women like the private property of some male. You all should be REAL proud of your stupid pathetic selves. http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1798823/posts?page=1 Iran Tells US To Set Timetable For Iraq Exit
Our recent foreign policy actions make us look weak and clutching at straws, and possibly feeling overly pressured by congress. IMHO.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.