In every sense, the meeting between the Iranian and US
ambassadors in Baghdad on Monday was a positive turn in the tide
for two countries still locked in confrontation.
Should this be hailed as a sign of a more pragmatic approach by
both countries?
With talks confined to the subject of Iraq's security, the
meeting offered a phenomenal opportunity.
The meeting, the second between Iranian and US officials in
recent months, exhibited a subtle change in American diplomacy.
The change is a realistic approach to Iraq issues.
The US had refused to have dealings with Iran. But this policy
was no longer workable. The reality of the Middle East is that the
US cannot ignore Iran.
Iran said the two countries will meet again in less than a
month.
The two sides' positive comments on the meeting may help move
further talks forward.
Calling the meeting "businesslike", the US envoy agreed at "the
level of policy and principle" that the Iranian position as
articulated by his counterpart was very close to that of the
US.
Despite the reported bluntness of some of the exchanges, there
was broad policy agreement between the two envoys.
The meeting occurred in the midst of international tension.
Officials from the US, Japan, France and Britain raised concerns
on Friday over the comments of Mohamed ElBaradei, director-general
of the International Atomic Energy Agency, on Iran's uranium
enrichment.
ElBaradei has called for a negotiated solution to Iran's nuclear
issue, proposing that Iran be allowed to retain a limited
enrichment program.
At the same time, the US has been conducting large-scale war
games in the Gulf.
The ice-breaking session, according to both sides, did not veer
into other difficult issues that encumber the US-Iranian
relationship, with its more than a quarter century history of
diplomatic estrangement.
Iran proposed what it called a trilateral forum in which the US,
Iran and Iraq could meet regularly to discuss security matters.
The problems dividing the US and Iran remain formidable. Iran
said it has no intention of backing down over its nuclear program,
which the US claims is focused on building a nuclear weapon.
As long as the door to negotiations is left open, the two
countries are likely to at least narrow their difference.
(China Daily May 30, 2007)
