Exploring the Iranian Angle of OIF
Friedman offers some interesting analysis of the Iranian dimension of current trends in Iraq:
Adm. William Fallon’s interview with the Financial Times — in which he went out of its way to downplay the American military threat to Iran — was not given by accident. Fallon does not agree to interviews without clearance. The United States was using the interview to telegraph to Iran that it should not have undue fear of an American attack.A challenge in attempting to send messages like this is that you hope you and your adversary understand each other well enough to competently operate your respective ends of the telegraph. Assuming, of course, that you both want to communicate in the first place…The United States can easily turn up the heat again psychologically, though for the moment it has chosen to lower it. By doing so, we assume Washington is sending two messages to Iran. First, it is acknowledging that creating a predominantly Sunni government is not its first choice. Also, it is rewarding Iran for the decline in violence by the Shiite militias, which undoubtedly required Tehran to shift its orders to its covert operatives in Iraq.
Friedman maintains that the possibility of a grand bargain hasn’t completely dissapeared. Given the murky nature of US-Iranian dealings, I wonder how soon we’d find out if such a deal were made.Iran in particular has little interest in giving the United States a graceful solution unless it is well compensated for it. On the other hand, for the moment, Tehran is cooperating. This could simply be another instance of Iran holding off before disappointing the United States, or it could mean it has reason to believe it will be well compensated. Revealing that compensation — if it is coming — is the next turn of the wheel.
