Peace Partnership
Iran says talks in Tehran will help end Iraq clashes. Sure, why not? Reuters:
TEHRAN (Reuters) - Iran says it aims to help end fighting in its neighbour by talking to an Iraqi delegation visiting the Islamic Republic, the official IRNA news agency reported.
Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki, who won assurances Iran would help stabilise his country when he visited last year, has sent the delegation to tell Iranian officials to stop backing Shi’ite militias, Iraqi officials said.
“Iranian officials will be holding talks with the delegation with a view to helping resolve the differences and clashes in Iraq,” Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Mohammad Ali Hosseini was quoted late on Thursday as saying.
“Tehran has generally emphasised stability and security in Iraq and the invitation to the Iraqi delegation has been for this goal, and Iran’s past measures have been to bring stability and security in Iraq,” he said without giving further details.
I wouldn’t give details if I were him, either. The details are ugly. Large movement of arms, cash and trained personnel into Iraq. Hundreds of Americans and thousands of Iraqis killed. We’ll leave out the Syria, Lebanon, Afghan and Palestinian theaters fofr the moment to avoid complicating the picture further.
Of course Iran can turn it off. It is very much to Iran’s advantage to turn it off at this time, and demonstrate how they responsive they can be. Partners for peace. This Bush administration will end soon, and they need an administration they can deal with.
The part I don’t get is how anyone, upon seeing Iran turn it on and turn it off, apparently without much regard for their own public statements and agreements, could possibly think the mullahs can be relied on to be a partner for anything.
Reuters, meanwhile, has a quick summation of issues and events in Iran-Iraq-U.S. relations. It’s a little weak and Iran-friendly, but I like this part:
The U.S. military intended to put the weapons on display but Iraq decided to confront Tehran with the evidence first. The U.S. military official said there had been a “sea change” in Baghdad’s view of Iranian activity in Iraq since discovery of the new weapons, especially after Iran assured Maliki last year when he visited Tehran that it would help to stabilize Iraq.
“Basra changed it for the Iraqis. I’m not sure they believed it before. But they went to Basra and saw it first hand,” said the official. He said the Iraqi delegation would bring photographs of the captured weapons with markings that showed they were Iranian origin, as well as testimony from detained militants who had received training from the Qods force.
Maliki himself has also become increasingly assertive. Some Iraqi officials say what happened in Basra was an eye-opener for Maliki — he flew to Basra to direct the operation in late March and lived in the military headquarters there as it was pounded by rocket and mortar fire for days. At a news conference on Wednesday, Maliki declared: “I am not Iran’s man in Iraq.”
It’s great to see Iraq facing facts. But the problem with giving Iran another chance is, they might take it. Does that mean we’ll have to wait for a new round of Iranian supported violence before definitive action is taken? If I were a mullah, I’d counsel cooling it until after Obama or Hillary is elected, being a good partner for peace, and getting the damned infidel Crusader dogs out of Iraq.
Posted by Jules Crittenden at 11:10 am on Friday, May 2, 2008
2 Responses to “Peace Partnership”
Leave a Reply
Trackback URLYou must be logged in to post a comment.
May 2nd, 2008 at 1:47 pm
Bridges? Get your fresh hot bridges right here! I’ve got Cable-stayed spans and Arch bridges! get ‘em while they’re hot! I’ve got Truss bridges, Beam bridges and Suspension bridges that are half a dollar on the ton! Get your bridges right here!
May 2nd, 2008 at 1:49 pm
Sure, Iran wants to help stabilize Iraq. Right under the heel of an Iranian boot.