BAGHDAD - Iran and the United States resumed public diplomacy Monday
for the first time in more than a quarter century. The meeting in
Baghdad between ambassadors on security in Iraq could produce a chapter
in world history for its success or a footnote for its failure.

U.S. Ambassador Ryan Crocker represented Washington. Iranian Ambassador
Hassan Kazemi Qomi spoke for Iran at the talks, which were held at Iraqi
Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki's office in the Green Zone compound in
Baghdad. Iraq was being represented at the talks by National Security
Adviser Mowaffak al-Rubaie.

Just before 10:30 a.m., al-Maliki greeted the two ambassadors, who shook
hands, and led them into a conference room, where the ambassadors sat
across the table from each other. Al-Maliki then made a brief statement
before leaving the room.

• Monitor the nuclear showdown in FOXNews.com's Iran Center.

He told both sides that Iraqis want a stable country free of foreign
forces and regional interference. The country should not be turned into
a base for terrorist groups, he said. He also said that the U.S.-led
forces in Iraq were only here to help build up the army and police and
the country would not be used as a launching ground for a U.S. attack on
a neighbor, a clear reference to Iran.


We are sure that securing progress in this meeting would, without doubt,
enhance the bridges of trust between the two countries and create a
positive atmosphere" that would help them deal with other issues, he
said.

Speaking in Tehran, Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki said
Monday the talks could lead to future meetings, but only if Washington
admits its Middle East policy has not been successful.

"We are hopeful that Washington's realistic approach to the current
issues of Iraq by confessing its failed policy in Iraq and the region
and by showing a determination to changing the policy guarantees success
of the talks and possible further talks," Mottaki said.

Monday's talks were to have a pinpoint focus: What Washington and Tehran
- separately or together - could do to contain the sectarian
conflagration in Iraq.

The positions - going in - are straightforward.

Washington wants Tehran to butt out - to stop arming, financing and
training militants, particularly Shiite militias that are fighting
American and Iraqi troops.

Tehran wants Washington out of Iraq, period.

But much more encumbers the narrow agenda - primarily Iran's nuclear
program and more than a quarter-century of diplomatic estrangement after
the 1979 Islamic revolution in Iran.

Further, the Iranian Shiite theocracy fears the Bush administration
harbors plans for regime change in Tehran and could act on those desires
as it did against Saddam Hussein in Iraq.

Washington and its Sunni Arab allies, on their side, are deeply unnerved
by growing Iranian influence in the Middle East and the spread of
increasingly radical Islam.

Compounding all that is Iran's open hostility to Israel.

Those issues, combined, are the nut of the larger problem and what make
this opening of the U.S.-Iranian minuet both so important and so
interesting.

Will this first meeting, as the Iraqis openly hope and as the Iranians
and Americans may quietly aspire, be sufficiently cordial and productive
that a second meeting becomes possible?

Should that happen, will a future dialogue involve higher-level
officials - perhaps U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Iranian
Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki.

On Saturday, Crocker was circumspect when asked about prospects for
further meetings.

"It's going to start with one meeting and see how it goes," Crocker
said. "We're coming prepared to talk about Iraq."

Mottaki set out a hard-line opening position.

"The two sides can be hopeful about the outcome of the negotiations, if
America develops a realistic view toward Monday's talks, admits its
wrong policies in Iraq, decides to change them and accepts its
responsibilities," he said in Tehran.

A political aide to Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki told The
Associated Press that Iraq hoped to play a mediator's role in easing
tensions between the Americans and Iranians, which Iraqi officials have
routinely said are being played out in Iraq.

The adviser, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not
authorized to speak on the matter, said Iraq would remain neutral as
regards its position in the disputes.

"But we want to try to close the gap, to be partners in the dialogue,"
the official said. "It is time to look forward, not backward."

Many small issues could cloud the talks. There were U.S. Navy exercises
in the Persian Gulf last week and tough talk from U.S. President George
W. Bush about new U.N. penalties against Tehran over its nuclear
program. The United States says Tehran is trying to build a bomb. Iran
says it needs nuclear technology for energy production.

Further complicating the talks, Iran said Saturday it had uncovered spy
rings organized by the United States and its Western allies.

Iran accuses the U.S. of improperly seizing five Iranians in Iraq this
spring. The U.S. military is holding the five. Iran says they are
diplomats; Washington contends they are intelligence agents.

The U.S. also has complained about the detention or arrest of several
Iranian-Americans in Iran in recent weeks. State Department spokesman
Tom Casey said that issue is not on the U.S. agenda for Monday.

Regardless, 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.

what a surprise, huh?

whats this, something positive that the Bush Administration is doing?
unilateral talks with iran? in iraq? about their involvement in iraq?
and nukes? whats really going on here, im sure there has to be some kind
of underlying deceitful plan by the bush guys to get the iranians all
soften up right? so we could go kill millions more people in the world?


hey uk thanks for posting this, good to see some positives.

i am amazed that none of the hypocrit anti war crowd have had nothing to
say about this, shows there true colors- in my mind at least. bastard
children to a dying idealogy of free fun for all. hahaha

peace, bring the love

doc

Good to hear, talking is the best way to stop confrontation. Hope it
works.