Blogs and Stories
Iran's Secret Bargain With Bush?
In shadowy diplomatic corners, some Arab intelligence operatives believe the US is quietly cooperating with Iran to quell violence in Iraq.
Arab intelligence sources believe the US and Iran have reached a tentative “Grand Bargain” that has already influenced the presidential election. Marked Iranian restraint in Iraq, they say, is one of the reasons the “surge” is working in Iraq—and the success of the surge has been central to John McCain’s rise from the ashes.
Is Iran this year’s “October Surprise”?
President Carter’s bid for reelection in 1980 was doomed when the Iranians failed to release American hostages in Tehran. They were freed the day President Reagan took the oath of office. The Reagan administration strenuously denied that the Republicans had made a secret deal with the Iranians for this to happen.
Arab countries, such as Jordan, Kuwait and Egypt, have expressed worries the US may strike a deal with Iran at their expense.
But they were unable, six years later, to deny the Iran-Contra Affair—the diversion of Israeli weapons to help Iran in its war with Iraq, in return for the release of US hostages in Beirut. The October Surprise was never proven, but the Iran-Contra affair established, at least, that secret deals did indeed take place. Several top US officials were eventually indicted and convicted in the scandal.
In the shadowy world of secret diplomacy, the evidence often remains circumstantial, but there have been dramatic changes in Iran’s conduct in Iraq since last year, all of which have helped McCain and put Barack Obama on the defensive. (Recently, having attacked the surge as destined to fail, Obama was forced to concede it had succeeded “beyond our wildest dreams”.)
My intelligence sources credit a number of factors, in addition to the rise in US troops, for the success in stabilizing Iraq—the Anbar Awakenings of Sunni tribal sheikhs against Al Qaeda; the increased size and competence of Iraqi forces; and the counter-insurgency tactics of General Petraeus. But these sources emphasize that the Iranian factor, as they call it, has been crucial.
(Forget the anti-American diatribe by President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad at the United Nations, that’s boilerplate rhetoric).
John Talks Joe
Lloyd Grove is editor at large for The Daily Beast. He is also a frequent contributor to New York magazine and was a contributing editor for Condé Nast Portfolio. He wrote a gossip column for the New York Daily News from 2003 to 2006. Prior to that, he wrote the Reliable Source column for the Washington Post, where he spent 23 years covering politics, the media, and other subjects.
Qaddafi Struts In
Salameh Nematt is an international writer for The Daily Beast. He is the former Washington bureau chief for the international Arab daily Al Hayat, where he reported on US foreign policy, the war in Iraq, and the US drive for democratization in the broader Middle East. He has also written extensively on regional and global energy issues and their political implications.
The Pharaoh Comes to Washington
Salameh Nematt is an international writer for The Daily Beast. He is the former Washington bureau chief for the international Arab daily Al Hayat, where he reported on US foreign policy, the war in Iraq, and the US drive for democratization in the broader Middle East. He has also written extensively on regional and global energy issues and their political implications.
Iran's Nervous Neighbors
Salameh Nematt is an international writer for The Daily Beast. He is the former Washington bureau chief for the international Arab daily Al Hayat, where he reported on US foreign policy, the war in Iraq, and the US drive for democratization in the broader Middle East. He has also written extensively on regional and global energy issues and their political implications.
Chinese and middle east governments and investors have lost millions in respect of their holdings in US Stocks. These powerful interests may be putting extra presure on Bush to achieve some peace dividends instead of cash returns.
Excellent. Realpolitik prevails in the end. Now it is time to let the Imam Al-Mahdi manifest himself, so that ghastly Wahabis may get their comeuppance and true justice reign.
The Priest
I don't quite understand the logic here. The fact that John McCain was in favor of the surge and that its success is helping his campaign is interesting, but does it follow that a secret Iranian-Bush Administration Bargain was set up with this intention? The "surge" was announced in Jan. 2007, at which time McCain's candidacy was anything but uncertain. And is this worth it for Bush to put up with being ranted at by Ahmadinejad on American soil? The war isn't over yet after all, and seems unlikely that the surge results are going to "save" the reputation of a government that is even getting the wash from its own party. And if the Iranians are cooling down in Iraq, they want something in return -- more than just NOT getting bombed. Is the key point in the argumentation inherent but missing -- that they want to be left alone to develop nuclear energy/weapons, which would put their neighbors at risk? Allies of the US, one and all. This feels like an important story, but it reads like a memo of accusations instead.
Excellent analysis! Although this piece bears some truth and it's a fair and logic argument but i think there is more to it. This piece contains the western elements of the deal but it doesn't say much on the price that was given to Iran by giving it and its ally Hezbollah a complete control over Lebanon. As for the NIE i don't think that we should treat it in terms of what it actual is NOT more. The NIE said "We judge with high confidence that in fall 2003, Tehran halted its nuclear weapons program; we also assess with moderate-to-high confidence that Tehran at a minimum is keeping open the option to develop nuclear weapons" and they added that "We assess with moderate confidence Tehran had not restarted its nuclear weapons program as of mid-2007, but we do not know whether it currently intends to develop nuclear weapons". Between mid-2007 and now there is more than a year and there is a lot they could have done in this year. So maybe we shouldn't rush to a conclusion and underestimate what the Iranians are capable of doing especially that they have the Russians on their side. After all we all might think that logic should prevent Russia from helping Iran having a nuclear weapon but since when we can bet on LOGIC when it comes to Russia nowadays?!!!!!
Thank you.
As a first time user, your comment has been submitted for review. It can take anywhere from a few hours to a day or two for your comment to be reviewed, depending on the time of week and the volume of comments we receive.
Please log in to leave comments.