By IPS Correspondents
TEHRAN, Jun 4 2007 (IPS)

While limited to the issue of security in Iraq, the direct talks between Iran and the United States in Baghdad is being seen as a breakthrough and an opportunity for both countries to deal with pressing issues of national interest as well as security in a region extending from Afghanistan in the east to Iraq and to Palestine and Lebanon in the west.

While limited to the issue of security in Iraq, the direct talks between Iran and the United States in Baghdad is being seen as a breakthrough and an opportunity for both countries to deal with pressing issues of national interest as well as security in a region extending from Afghanistan in the east to Iraq and to Palestine and Lebanon in the west.

Optimists in Iran and the U.S. seem pleased that, although what has brought the two countries to the table for talks that start Monday is primarily the issue of stabilising Iraq, for the first time in 28 years a line of direct communication has opened between them.

Iran and the U.S. still continue to level accusations at each other, each demanding that the other should change its behaviour. The U.S. claims Iran is offering training and arms to Shiite militants and even to Sunni insurgents in Iraq and wants it to stop its nuclear programme. It has also refused to release the five Iranian diplomats it arrested in Erbil in January.

Iran, on the other hand, insists that the U.S. policies in Iraq have failed and, calling the U.S. an occupying force, demands that it leave Iraq immediately. It has repeatedly attributed ethnic and sectarian violence among its own Baluchis, Arabs and Kurds to ‘foreign powers’, the U.S. in particular.

A week ago Iran’s intelligence ministry claimed it had uncovered an espionage network that had penetrated the country from Iraqi territory and the ambassador of Switzerland, whose embassy protects U.S. interests in Iran, was summoned to the Iranian foreign ministry and an official protest letter on the ‘meddling of U.S. intelligence bodies in Iran’s internal affairs’ handed over to him. In recent weeks Iran has also jailed several American-Iranians visiting the country on charges of attempting a ‘soft overthrow’ of the regime.

Yet, unlike in other areas of the Middle East, both countries support the government of Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki and can therefore cooperate. The issue of security and stabilisation in Iraq is of great importance to both countries, though for different reasons.

The talks, still only at the level of ambassadors in Baghdad, are seen by many in Iran as an indication of the acknowledgement by the U.S. of a role Iran has long been aspiring to play in the region, namely, the role of a regional superpower that can seriously influence and affect regional security equations and arrangements.

“Engaging in talks over the future of Iraq with Iran and not Iraq’s other neighbours like Saudi Arabia and Jordan or even Syria, is a clear acknowledgement of Iran’s power to help return peace and calm to Iraq. This is what none of Iraq’s other neighbours can really help to accomplish the way the Shiite theocracy of Iran can,” a political analyst in Tehran, requesting anonymity, told IPS.

“As the world’s only Shiite theocracy Iran’s spiritual influence in Iraq is far greater in importance than its alleged help to the forces giving so much trouble to the allies. The U.S. has now come to the realisation that ignoring the role Iran is so eager to play, through using its influence in Iraq, can only contribute to the worsening of the situation there,” he added.

Iran, labelled by U.S. President George W. Bush as a country in the axis of evil, has found the acknowledgement of its role in the region tempting enough – in spite of considerable opposition to direct contact with the U.S. from diehard hardliners – to agree to hold talks with a country Iranian leaders have for many years been calling the ‘Great Satan’ and considered their arch foe.

Having fought Iraq for eight years Iranians know the country and its players very well. Under Saddam Hussein many of Iraq’s Shiite clerics and activists and Kurdish leaders were helped and offered shelter in Iran. Quite often the regime expelled its citizens, Sunni Kurds and Shiites of Iranian origin who had lived in Iraq for generations, in the thousands from the country. Refugees poured into Iran through the inhospitable mountainous western provinces and were taken in and given help.

In recent years Iran has actually emerged as the biggest beneficiary of the wars waged by the U.S. and its allies against Afghanistan and Iraq. Saddam Hussein’s regime in Iraq and the Taliban regime in Afghanistan, that went as far as to massacre nine Iranian diplomats in Kabul, were both huge security threats now eliminated without Iran having to sacrifice anything or pay any costs.

Apart from Iraq and Afghanistan, Iran has also shown its capability in influencing various social groups and militant Shiite movements in the region, including Lebanon. Its experience of war with Saddam Hussein’s Iraq, under U.S. sanctions when many of its neighbours and other countries were openly showing support for Iraq, has helped it develop its military power to a level almost unmatched in the region, and in spite of sanctions and huge international pressure it is pretty close to acquiring the technology needed to build its own nuclear bomb.

“Iran can no longer be ignored or dismissed in regional equations. It has earned itself a place in regional politics unequalled by any other country. The U.S., the biggest player in the region, and their allies will have to talk to Iran and to cooperate with it in certain areas of mutual interest but they are also going to continue to confront it in other areas, for instance Iran’s nuclear ambitions or its alleged assistance to militants. It’s going to be like another cold war but at least there may be dialogue,” the analyst said.

Coalition forces in Afghanistan have in recent months accused Iran of providing arms to it former foe, the Taliban. Some roadside bombs used by the Taliban recently are similar to those used in Iraq against U.S. forces and seem to have been made in Iran, the U.S. has alleged. The British also claim to have traced arms smuggled from Iran to the Taliban.

Iran denies all the allegations, pointing out the support it has offered to the government of Hamid Karzai. Foreign ministry spokesman Mohammad Ali Hosseini on Sunday called the accusations made by British Prime Minister Tony Blair about Iran’s collaboration with the Taliban “baseless and illusory” and accused Britain of supporting and funding the Taliban themselves.

“Iranian influence is clearly felt by the U.S. both in Iraq and Afghanistan. More than half of Iraq’s population consists of Shiites many of whom look up to Shiite Iran as a friend. They naturally have a better disposition towards Iran than to other regional countries,” the analyst told IPS.

“Nearly two million Afghans still live in Iran as refugees or illegal immigrants. Iran is building roads, schools and hospitals in Afghanistan and providing electricity. The investments Iran made in the past by offering support and assistance to the Northern Alliance in Afghanistan, the millions of dollars it has been pouring into Afghanistan after the defeat of the Taliban and the very close historical and linguistic ties with the country all make it a player there hard to ignore,” he said.

Like Iraq, Iran is itself a multi-ethnic country. The Sunni population, mainly the Kurds, Baluchis and Arabs living along Iran’s eastern and western borders, has many unresolved issues with the government. There have been reports of Wahabi propaganda and recruitment among Iran’s Sunni population and Iran’s Shiite establishment finds the growth of Wahabism very alarming and dangerous.

Mashallah Shamsolvaezin, journalist and analyst of regional politics in Tehran, believes one of the reasons Iran has consented to talking to the U.S. after so many years and despite considerable domestic opposition is that Iran intends to prevent religious and ethnic tensions in Iraq from spilling over its borders.

Talking to Americans and resolving the issue of security in Iraq is very determining. ‘’If this doesn’t happen, the U.S. may move towards intensifying the same kind of tensions inside Iran,” he told IPS.

“Realities on the ground such as the increase in American casualties are forcing the U.S. to gradually abandon the ambitious goals they initially had in mind and to adopt new policies. But this is not a change in strategy. They have just realised they must face the other players in the region, Iran foremost, to control instability in Iraq,” he told IPS.

Excerpt:

By IPS Correspondents
TEHRAN, Jun 4 2007 (IPS)

While limited to the issue of security in Iraq, the direct talks between Iran and the United States in Baghdad is being seen as a breakthrough and an opportunity for both countries to deal with pressing issues of national interest as well as security in a region extending from Afghanistan in the east to Iraq and to Palestine and Lebanon in the west.

Optimists in Iran and the U.S. seem pleased that, although what has brought the two countries to the table for talks that start Monday is primarily the issue of stabilising Iraq, for the first time in 28 years a line of direct communication has opened between them.

Iran and the U.S. still continue to level accusations at each other, each demanding that the other should change its behaviour. The U.S. claims Iran is offering training and arms to Shiite militants and even to Sunni insurgents in Iraq and wants it to stop its nuclear programme. It has also refused to release the five Iranian diplomats it arrested in Erbil in January.

Iran, on the other hand, insists that the U.S. policies in Iraq have failed and, calling the U.S. an occupying force, demands that it leave Iraq immediately. It has repeatedly attributed ethnic and sectarian violence among its own Baluchis, Arabs and Kurds to &#39foreign powers&#39, the U.S. in particular.

A week ago Iran&#39s intelligence ministry claimed it had uncovered an espionage network that had penetrated the country from Iraqi territory and the ambassador of Switzerland, whose embassy protects U.S. interests in Iran, was summoned to the Iranian foreign ministry and an official protest letter on the &#39meddling of U.S. intelligence bodies in Iran&#39s internal affairs&#39 handed over to him. In recent weeks Iran has also jailed several American-Iranians visiting the country on charges of attempting a &#39soft overthrow&#39 of the regime.

Yet, unlike in other areas of the Middle East, both countries support the government of Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki and can therefore cooperate. The issue of security and stabilisation in Iraq is of great importance to both countries, though for different reasons.

"Engaging in talks over the future of Iraq with Iran and not Iraq&#39s other neighbours like Saudi Arabia and Jordan or even Syria, is a clear acknowledgement of Iran&#39s power to help return peace and calm to Iraq. This is what none of Iraq&#39s other neighbours can really help to accomplish the way the Shiite theocracy of Iran can," a political analyst in Tehran, requesting anonymity, told IPS.

"As the world&#39s only Shiite theocracy Iran&#39s spiritual influence in Iraq is far greater in importance than its alleged help to the forces giving so much trouble to the allies. The U.S. has now come to the realisation that ignoring the role Iran is so eager to play, through using its influence in Iraq, can only contribute to the worsening of the situation there," he added.

Iran, labelled by U.S. President George W. Bush as a country in the axis of evil, has found the acknowledgement of its role in the region tempting enough – in spite of considerable opposition to direct contact with the U.S. from diehard hardliners – to agree to hold talks with a country Iranian leaders have for many years been calling the ‘Great Satan&#39 and considered their arch foe.

Having fought Iraq for eight years Iranians know the country and its players very well. Under Saddam Hussein many of Iraq&#39s Shiite clerics and activists and Kurdish leaders were helped and offered shelter in Iran. Quite often the regime expelled its citizens, Sunni Kurds and Shiites of Iranian origin who had lived in Iraq for generations, in the thousands from the country. Refugees poured into Iran through the inhospitable mountainous western provinces and were taken in and given help.

In recent years Iran has actually emerged as the biggest beneficiary of the wars waged by the U.S. and its allies against Afghanistan and Iraq. Saddam Hussein&#39s regime in Iraq and the Taliban regime in Afghanistan, that went as far as to massacre nine Iranian diplomats in Kabul, were both huge security threats now eliminated without Iran having to sacrifice anything or pay any costs.

Apart from Iraq and Afghanistan, Iran has also shown its capability in influencing various social groups and militant Shiite movements in the region, including Lebanon. Its experience of war with Saddam Hussein&#39s Iraq, under U.S. sanctions when many of its neighbours and other countries were openly showing support for Iraq, has helped it develop its military power to a level almost unmatched in the region, and in spite of sanctions and huge international pressure it is pretty close to acquiring the technology needed to build its own nuclear bomb.

"Iran can no longer be ignored or dismissed in regional equations. It has earned itself a place in regional politics unequalled by any other country. The U.S., the biggest player in the region, and their allies will have to talk to Iran and to cooperate with it in certain areas of mutual interest but they are also going to continue to confront it in other areas, for instance Iran&#39s nuclear ambitions or its alleged assistance to militants. It&#39s going to be like another cold war but at least there may be dialogue," the analyst said.

Coalition forces in Afghanistan have in recent months accused Iran of providing arms to it former foe, the Taliban. Some roadside bombs used by the Taliban recently are similar to those used in Iraq against U.S. forces and seem to have been made in Iran, the U.S. has alleged. The British also claim to have traced arms smuggled from Iran to the Taliban.

Iran denies all the allegations, pointing out the support it has offered to the government of Hamid Karzai. Foreign ministry spokesman Mohammad Ali Hosseini on Sunday called the accusations made by British Prime Minister Tony Blair about Iran&#39s collaboration with the Taliban "baseless and illusory" and accused Britain of supporting and funding the Taliban themselves.

"Iranian influence is clearly felt by the U.S. both in Iraq and Afghanistan. More than half of Iraq&#39s population consists of Shiites many of whom look up to Shiite Iran as a friend. They naturally have a better disposition towards Iran than to other regional countries," the analyst told IPS.

"Nearly two million Afghans still live in Iran as refugees or illegal immigrants. Iran is building roads, schools and hospitals in Afghanistan and providing electricity. The investments Iran made in the past by offering support and assistance to the Northern Alliance in Afghanistan, the millions of dollars it has been pouring into Afghanistan after the defeat of the Taliban and the very close historical and linguistic ties with the country all make it a player there hard to ignore," he said.

Like Iraq, Iran is itself a multi-ethnic country. The Sunni population, mainly the Kurds, Baluchis and Arabs living along Iran&#39s eastern and western borders, has many unresolved issues with the government. There have been reports of Wahabi propaganda and recruitment among Iran&#39s Sunni population and Iran&#39s Shiite establishment finds the growth of Wahabism very alarming and dangerous.

Mashallah Shamsolvaezin, journalist and analyst of regional politics in Tehran, believes one of the reasons Iran has consented to talking to the U.S. after so many years and despite considerable domestic opposition is that Iran intends to prevent religious and ethnic tensions in Iraq from spilling over its borders.

Talking to Americans and resolving the issue of security in Iraq is very determining. ‘&#39If this doesn&#39t happen, the U.S. may move towards intensifying the same kind of tensions inside Iran,&#39&#39 he told IPS.

"Realities on the ground such as the increase in American casualties are forcing the U.S. to gradually abandon the ambitious goals they initially had in mind and to adopt new policies. But this is not a change in strategy. They have just realised they must face the other players in the region, Iran foremost, to control instability in Iraq," he told IPS.

Excerpt: