August 9 (LPAC)--Remarks by U.S. spokesman Sean McCormack, to the effect that the first two rounds of tripartite talks among the United States, Iraq, and Iran had not "yielded positive results," seem to run counter to statements attributed to U.S. Ambassador Ryan Crocker, who represented the United States at the meetings. Crocker, who is said to enjoy some flexibility in scheduling these talks, did in fact organize a third round which took place in Baghdad on August 6, close on the heels of the second round on July 24. Both Crocker and his Iranian counterparts said the discussions had been frank and constructive. Significantly, Crocker met with the Iranian Ambassador Mottaki, after the tripartite session, for two hours. This is significant, because the two sides have not had one-on-one talks since the Iranian revolution. The tripartite session focussed on the composition of the joint security committees, which had been decided upon at the second round.
Also, it appears contacts between the United States and Iran are not limited to this format. As reported by Middle East Online, a meeting took place on August 8 in Damascus, on Iraqi security, with the participation of both Iran and the United States, within a large group including Bahrain, Britain, China, Egypt, France, Iraq, Kuweit, Russia, Turkey, the Arab League and the UN. The meeting, details of which have not been made available yet, is interesting, because again the U.S. and Iran attended, and because it took place in the capital of Syria--—officially a rogue state, according to Washington. The United States was represented by "observers" from the military in Iraq, and the U.S. Embassy in Damascus, Sean McCormack said.
As the usually well-informed French newsletter Resau Voltaire reported August 8, "Meetings on Iraq's security among British, U.S. and Syrian representatives took place in Damascus, on the demand of the U.S." The newsletter says that Washington asked the Iraqis to set the meeting up, so as to "have a pretext to open a small window allowing for reviving the dialogue with Syria." This, it goes on to note, comes even as the Bush Administration continues to launch accusations against Syria.
Citing an expert in Mideast affairs, the newsletter also writes that this sudden opening to Syria represents a setback for the Saudis, who had tried to keep Syria out; however, the United States finally realized that Javier Solana was right in saying Syria had to be part of the soklution to the Iraq mess. Finally, the paper notes a comment by an Arab diplomat, to the effect that these moves contradict the public statements of U.S. officials.
