3 Decades, 2 Adversaries, 1 Meeting

Is this the start of something new or was it merely a political charade for both sides? Today both U.S. and Iranians ambassadors to Iraq, Ryan C. Crocker and Hassan Kazemi Qumi, met in Baghdad to discuss various issues that relate to the security and future of Iraq. This event is more symbolically important than anything because it is the first time in over three decades that these two countries have had high level diplomatic talks.

However, I'm curious about the timing of the event. Why now?

The first motivation that I see on the U.S. side is that Bush may finally be realizing that if he doesn't see progress in Iraq by September when Petraeus comes and reports back to the Senate Armed Services Committee, then Republican leadership in both the House and Senate will become even more agitated and really start turning against the President and his agenda. House Minority Leader John Boehner has already signaled the importance of September and future policy in the region. If progress is non-existent at that time, Bush will need to really start thinking about a plan B centered on diplomacy in the region.

Also, Bush maybe starting to take notice of the Baker/Hamilton report. The report which is used by both parties for various talking points, really provides a broad overview of where Americans, including Democrats, Republicans, and Independents stand on the issue of Iraq. Knowing that he can only isolate the majority of the public for so much longer this may be an attempt at showing the American people that he is listening to advice from others.

The problem that I see in this situation is that while it is important the relations (even on the level of one meeting) resume between Iran and the United States, I suspect that neither country is truly serious about addressing the issue of security in Iraq. For the most part, according to Crocker, the U.S. "“laid out before the Iranians a number of our direct, specific concerns about their behavior in Iraq.” I don't believe that Bush really cares if the Iranians listen or not, it just gives him an opportunity to say "I told you so - diplomacy doesn't work" to the American people when future connections are found between Iran and the insurgencies in Iraq.

The Iranians also have things to gain from these talks. First of all, from a public relations standpoint, there is no greater legitimizing force if you're a government than to meet with representatives from the U.S. government. This meeting will display to the Iranian people that Islamic government is more powerful than ever. Through "show-boat" diplomacy the Iranians did what the Iranians do best - unleash wild allegations of U.S. hostility, and display anger over U.S. policy. According to Crocker the Iranians, “mechanisms, if you will, and principles rather than the detailed security substance that we need to see improvement on.” This translates into a scenario where the Iranian government simply lectures at the U.S. discussing its lack of principles, rather than truly addressing the issues.

So while on the surface this meeting between the U.S. and Iranian ambassadors to Iraq may seem like a pivotal moment, it is to remain to be seen whether or not this starts a trend of conversations between adversaries.

While some would say that these talks are a waste of time, I would disagree. While the purposes of the conversations to this point seem selfish on both ends, disregarding the true topic at hand, any conversation is an improvement step in the right direction. You never know, a breakthrough between the two countries could happen if talks continue to occur. This is diplomacy, and while it may be slow, hopefully the trend will continue in the region.

Read an article from the New York Times on the event:
In Rare Talks, U.S. and Iran Discuss Iraq

Haleh Esfandiari Charged by Iranian Government

According to the Washington Post, 67 year old "American Haleh Esfandiari has been charged with trying to topple the Iranian regime." A scholar at the Woodrow Wilson, Esfandiari is the director of Middle Eastern studies. The hard-line newspaper Kayhan has accused the duel citizen of Iran and America of "fermenting" a "soft-revolution," one which seeks to undercut the current government and form a revolution. Neither the newspaper or the government has been forthcoming on what exactly she has done in order to receive these charges. The only information that they are sharing is that she has received funding from George Soros's "Open Society Insitute," an institue that "aims to shape public policy to promote democratic governance, human rights, and economic, legal, and social reform."

Although the Deputy Director of the Wilson Institute Mike Van Dusen admitted that Esfandiari had received a grant from Soros, he was also to quick to point out that, "the Soros Foundation has also given money to the Iran government after the Bam earthquake in 2003." Therefore, at this point in time it is unclear what the real reasons are behind the arrest of Esfandiari.

Esfandiari was in Iran visiting her 93 year-old Mother when her passport was taken in December during a robbery en-route to the airport in Tehran. From the moment she attempted to get a replacement, she was arrested, and was interrogated for six weeks. It is unclear at this point when the trial will begin or if the United States government will seek to work back channels to get her release.