US and Iran have chance to strike grand bargain

[webfact]

EDITORIAL
US and Iran have chance to strike grand bargain
The Nation

BANGKOK: -- United in their need to combat the rise of ISIS, the old enemies have an opportunity to reach a comprehensive deal over Syria's future, nuclear weapons and other pending issues

A de facto alliance is in the making between the United States and Iran in a bid to contain and wipe out the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS), though the two major international rivals will not admit it, of course.

If one broadens the scope slightly to see who else might benefit from such an alliance, it's not hard to see that the winner would likely be Syria's President Bashar al-Assad.

Mistrust between the West and Iran is one obstacle to the forging of an alliance, but another reason Tehran has been holding out is it wants to ensure that this military initiative will not be a setback for Syria, its main ally in the region.

The West has lined up against the Syrian regime and has been supporting the anti-Assad rebel forces, of which ISIS is a part. Also keen to see the fall of Assad are practically all the major powers in the region.

A loose coalition is being formed between Western and Arab countries with the aim of using any means necessary to eliminate ISIS and rescue Iraq from its grip. Secretary of State John Kerry said this was not the precursor to a US invasion of Iraq, as happened in 2003, but an effort to transform the situation.

In other words, Washington wants to drive ISIS out of Iraq and strengthen the capacity of its newly elected government, in the hope that it will afford more political space to Iraq's Sunni community and other minorities. The previous Baghdad administration was accused of bias towards the Shi'a majority that alienated many in the country and led to the rise of the extremist Sunni ISIS.

While Baghdad has extended an invitation to outsiders in a bid to eradicate ISIS from its soil, the same cannot be said of Damascus. Iran wants the anti-ISIS coalition to get permission from Damascus before taking any military action in Syria.

Damascus would probably say yes, calculating that it would regain some of the ground it has lost to ISIS and other rebel forces.

Meanwhile, Iran has been issuing public statements accusing the US of using the crisis as a "pretext to do in Iraq and Syria what it already does in Pakistan - bomb anywhere without authorisation".

Such accusations against its old enemy are to be expected. But the moment of truth will come if and when ISIS crosses what Iran calls the "red line" in Iraq. "Crossing the red line" means invading Baghdad, the capital, and Iraq's Shi'ite holy cities.

But just days ago the two sides "cooperated" in complementary combat missions, although they weren't coordinated. Iraqi Shi'ite fighters and Kurdish peshmerga retook the northern city of Amerli, in a push only made possible by guidance from Iranian military advisors and US air strikes.

In the final analysis, statements from Tehran - or the Gulf States - about their disapproval of forming a coalition to fight ISIS are merely empty political rhetoric for public consumption. The reality is that ISIS is knocking on everyone's door: all these rival Middle East countries are waking up to the hard reality that they are in the same boat.

But finding the right balance, it seems, is the name of the game. A US-led coalition would risk antagonising Iran if it armed the anti-Syria rebels. Tehran could retaliate by placing more obstacles in the way of ongoing talks with the West to curb its nuclear ambitions.

Perhaps it's time for the two powers - US and Iran - to strike a grand and comprehensive bargain over Syria's future, ISIS, nuclear weapons and other pending issues.

Yes, Iran wants Assad in power. But with the right incentives and assurances to safeguard their interests in Syria, the leaders in Iran might be willing to discuss Assad's departure.

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/opinion/US-and-Iran-have-chance-to-strike-grand-bargain-30243586.html

-- The Nation 2014-09-19

[coma]

The alliance would be tenfold strong and IS would be starved of oxygen and cease to exist if the US drops its face saving posture and welcome Assad and Tehran onto the coalition. The coalition needs ground troops to succeed and if we are not going to provide them then Iran and Syria would be a great source for those ground troops.

[Seastallion]

The alliance would be tenfold strong and IS would be starved of oxygen and cease to exist if the US drops its face saving posture and welcome Assad and Tehran onto the coalition. The coalition needs ground troops to succeed and if we are not going to provide them then Iran and Syria would be a great source for those ground troops.

It's not a face-saving posture, it's a balancing act. Israel will have an opinion that is heeded, then there's the US's agendas with Iranian nukes and the Iranian Bourse.

[ezzra]

The US should be very, very wary and suspicious of those sneaky carpet's merchants,

a Persian is not a person to be trusted, they will do and say anything to agree but than

go back on tier words like nothing happened...

[kamahele]

Since our "allies" in the region including Turkey (a NATO member) and Saudi Arabia (which is responsible for the spread of this type of Islamic teaching) are doing nothing, we might as well team up with Iran.

[arjunadawn]

When I read the concluding paragraphs I realize the facts were massaged to enable the starry eyed conclusion. Regional Arab players are not reluctant to fight ISIS but hesitant to embolden Iran. Regional GCC countries are still offended that the US opened separate channels to Iran without prior consultation; which would have been appropriate as they had been working together. It's clear as crystal the US has zero long term strategy... for anything in the region.

The US actions will antagonize Iran, whilst the US makes overture toward cooperation- but the sole reason for ISIS was to destabilize the influence Iran has in this region. The gradeschool musing that a grand opportunity exists to address nearly every issue between Shia Twelver Iran and the west... and the Sunni... is not grounded in reality. It's hardly likely Iran would be open to any non-Alawite in power in Syria. This is a Sunni region and the only reason minority Shia are in control is through an unlikely coup, and chance. If Assad goes the Shia slaughter escalates.

Edited September 19, 2014 by arjunadawn

[Ulysses G.]

Keeping Iran from getting nuclear weapons is just as important as stopping ISIS. Hopefully, the president will not forget that in a rush to improve his dreadful poll numbers.

[Credo]

Keeping Iran from getting nuclear weapons is just as important as stopping ISIS. Hopefully, the president will not forget that in a rush to improve his dreadful poll numbers.

It doesn't matter much because they will eventually get the bomb and who is our friend today will be our enemy tomorrow and vice versa. It's the reality in the ME.

[ABCer]

The US should be very, very wary and suspicious of those sneaky carpet's merchants,

a Persian is not a person to be trusted, they will do and say anything to agree but than

go back on tier words like nothing happened...

How can you blame them for this? They just follow their Book.