Analysis

There is a great deal of confusion currently surrounding the fourth round of U.S.-Iranian negotiations over Iraq.

Let us review the situation:

• March 2-3: Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad made a historic visit to Iraq, which could have been made possible only with U.S. acquiescence and security assistance. Ahmadinejad visited Baghdad. But, notably, he did not follow through with plans to visit the holy Shiite cities of An Najaf and Karbala in southern Iraq, possibly due to a U.S. refusal to make the security arrangements for the visit.
• March 5: Iranian semi-official news agency ISNA reported that an Iranian delegation headed by Reza Amiri Moghaddam had arrived in Baghdad for the fourth round of security talks with the United States. The report said the meeting would be held at the level of experts March 6-7. Iraqi government spokesman Ali al-Dabbagh, however, said that thus far no date had been set. The same day, U.S. State Department deputy spokesman Tom Casey stated in his daily press briefing in Washington that “the United States Government has no plans to have a meeting tomorrow, there is no meeting scheduled … logistically it would be impossible to do so.”
• March 6: An Iraqi government official, speaking on condition of anonymity, told the press that the Iranian delegation that arrived March 5 would return to Tehran after visiting the Shiite holy sites in Baghdad and Karbala. The state-run Iranian news agency IRNA also carried a report with the headline, “U.S. refuses to attend talks on Iraq security,” in which it claimed Washington was unprepared for the talks. The report also cites “political analysts” as saying the United States became “confused” following Ahmadinejad’s visit to Iraq and was unable to make a decision on holding the talks.

The U.S.-Iranian talks unquestionably are in an extremely murky place. While Tehran and Baghdad hold regular backchannel discussions, the official security talks over Iraq are typically handled in a very public manner. In the three public U.S.-Iranian meetings held so far, the United States, Iran or Iraq has announced that a date has been set, the United States and Iran have confirmed, the delegations have shown up and the meetings have commenced. For the Iranians to turn up unexpectedly in Baghdad and announce that a meeting with the United States will take place without any U.S. confirmation is highly unusual.

From the surface, it appears that Washington snubbed the Iranian delegation. The manner in which the Iranians showed up indicates that they expected a meeting with the Americans to take place. To paraphrase, the U.S. response has been “There is no meeting, and we do not know what the Iranians are talking about.” The Iranian delegation then apparently went to the Shiite shrines to add some purpose to the visit, while the Iranian news agencies are doing their best to spin the story into portraying the United States as the weak and confused actor in the negotiations.

Meeting cancellations are all part and parcel of diplomatic negotiations. But what is unclear is the reasoning behind this apparent U.S. rejection toward Iran. Washington could be expressing its disapproval of a deal Ahmadinejad made during his visit to Iraq, or it could be sustaining pressure on Tehran by compounding Iranian fears that a plan is in motion to attack Hezbollah in Lebanon. There is no way to know for sure at this point, but underneath the diplomatic fog, something interesting is happening on the U.S-Iranian negotiating front.

This article is published at Lebanonwire by agreement with www.stratfor.com, the world's leading private intelligence provider. For any questions or comments on this article please write to analysis@stratfor.com

Copyright © 2005 Strategic Forecasting Inc. All rights reserved.

Copyright © 1999-2005 Lenanonwire^®.com. All rights reserved.