Love is Fleeting
May 27th, 2007America and Iran are talking again for the first time since Ronald Reagan offered to give them weapons and money illegally. No, wait, that was “covert” and doesn’t count as “official.” Well, anyway, we’re officially talking with Iran again, but only about Iraq.
The United States is pursuing a two-track strategy with Iran that reflects the high stakes in any engagement with a nation President Bush accuses of bankrolling terrorism and secretly building a nuclear bomb. Monday’s talks in Baghdad are one element. Discussion between the U.S. and Iranian ambassadors is only supposed to cover Iraq, where they have competing and overlapping interests. Then there are the U.S. Navy’s exercises in the Persian Gulf last week and tough talk from Bush about new U.N. penalties against Tehran.
“In the American mind, the two tracks sort of complement each other,” with the muscle-flexing and threats serving to push Iran to the bargaining table, said Ray Takeyh, an Iran specialist at the Council on Foreign Relations. “Iran only sees one track” and thinks it is a trap, Takeyh said. He does not hold out much hope the diplomats will get beyond talking points on Monday. “The coercive track is undermining and negating the diplomatic track and preventing any sort of meaningful discussions,” Takeyh said.
Still, any direct talks are rare. Even fleeting encounters at larger gatherings or diplomatic dinners are scrutinized for clues to the future of a troubled relationship. The Baghdad talks are the first of their kind and a small sign that Washington thinks rapprochement is possible after nearly three decades of animosity. Iran, angry over the blunt show of U.S. military power off its coast, almost refused to come.
The interesting thing to me about this whole situation is that neither side genuinely wishes to achieve anything with the other and that there is the problem. President Bush and Mahmoud Ahmaniac! both decided a long time ago that they would do everything they could to work against one another and that’s where we are now.
Maybe we should just offer them a ton of money and weapons and leave it at that? Worked for Reagan, right? And isn’t that all we can really ask for?
Serious thoughts on the matter: meaningless talks, and don’t tell me, “Oh, they’re significant because they’re formally talking!” No. They won’t be significant until Bush and Ahmaniac! tell us they’re significant or lose power. These two men are bumbler warmongers who couldn’t carry out a diplomatic coup d’tat or a military one if their lives or future reigns depended on it.