The word "compromise" is rarely invoked when the leaders of
archenemies Iran or the United States speak about each other.
But as the crisis in Iraq deepens, President Bush is being asked
by a growing chorus, from the Iraq Study Group to Mideast experts,
to appeal directly to Iran for help.
So far in public - as well as through diplomatic channels,
sources here say - Iran and the US are laying down irreconcilable,
maximalist positions that reflect very different worldviews about
what such contact should achieve.
But even if Mr. Bush were to set aside his approach to Iran as
part of an "axis of evil," the question remains of whether Iran is
willing to help the US out in Iraq - and if so, at what price.
"Now is not the best time [for Iran to help], because [American]
intent is only to solve the problems of the US in Iraq, and not
those of Iran," says Amir Mohebian, an editor of the conservative
"If the US wants to solve its problems in Iraq, it must see that
as a package" of issues with Iran, says Mr. Mohebian, who has close
links with power centers in the Islamic Republic. "The US should
consider Iran's new position in the region; not just as one country,
but as a regional power."
Earlier this year, both Washington and Tehran approved Iraq-
specific talks between their officials in Baghdad, though none are
known to have occurred. More recently, Bush has spoken disparagingly
of bringing Iran into the Iraq equation.
"Fundamentally, the Bush administration refuses to have
comprehensive talks with the Iranians," says a Western diplomat,
noting that US officials continue to say that Iran is a top state
sponsor of terrorism and that its nuclear-power program is a cover
to build atomic weapons. Iran rejects those charges. "[But] even if
you plan to get in some sort of contact, it makes sense to say
'never,' " as an initial bargaining stance, says the diplomat.
The White House has wanted to limit any dialogue with Iran to
Iraq, or, in a separate offer last June, to the nuclear file. But as
Iraq has deteriorated, and the demand for talks with Iran has
intensified, Iran feels increasingly that it can demand much in
James Baker, co-chair of the Iraq Study Group, which met with
Javad Zarif, Iran's ambassador to the UN, has downplayed the
likelihood of Iran's assistance.
"We're not naive enough to think that in this case [Iran] may
want to help. They probably don't," Mr. Baker testified to Congress
last week. "The president authorized me to approach the Iranian
government. I did so. And they in effect said ... we would not be
inclined to help you this time around."
Iran's price, analysts here say, could be a broader package that
would, at the least, include ending action by the UN Security
Council to draft a sanctions resolution over Iran's nuclear issue.
Iran may expect the US to accept its determination to continue
enriching uranium, something the White House says must be suspended
before talks. Recognition of the regime, after 27 years of
estrangement, and a guarantee that Iran will not be a military
target, are top priorities as well.
"I have no doubt, that if there is a serious attempt by the US
administration for a comprehensive resolution of the problems
between Iran and the US, Iran would be more than ready to help,"
says Nasser Hadian-Jazy, a political scientist at Tehran University.
"But it is not going to be just about Iraq. Iran would be much more
willing to do more, if it knew there is going to be a comprehensive
[deal] with the US."
This calculus in Tehran represents a dramatic turnaround from the
spring of 2003, when Iran's clerical leadership worried that they
were "next" after Iraq on the target list for regime change.
Feeling vulnerable, Iran sent an unprecedented secret letter to
the White House, offering to talk about everything from its
controversial nuclear program to support for Hizbullah and Hamas