US hints it might talk to Iran, Syria

US News

By Tony Czuczka Nov 13, 2006, 2:21 GMT

Washington - The United States may consider direct talks with Iran and Syria to help quell violence in Iraq, a top aide to President George W Bush hinted Sunday in the latest sign of a shifting US approach to the war. 'Nothing is off the table. All of the options will be considered,' White House chief of staff Josh Bolten told the Cable News Network (CNN) when asked whether Bush was open to convening regional powers including Iran and Syria. Washington has frequently accused Iran and Syria of fomenting trouble in neighbouring Iraq. But US media speculated that a panel that is drafting ideas for a disengagement from Iraq will recommend talks with the two US foes, which wield major influence in Iraq. Bush faces growing pressure to change course on Iraq after after his Republican Party lost control of both houses of the US Congress in November 7 elections. The vote was largely seen as a referendum on the war in Iraq. He was due to meet Monday with members of the Iraq Study Group, a panel co-chaired by former US secretary of state James Baker. Its report is expected in December, and Bolten said the administration will 'see what their recommendations are and go from there.' Meanwhile, US national security agencies are reviewing strategy in Iraq, Bolten said. Few expect a quick withdrawal of US troops, but Bush on Saturday called Robert Gates, the former CIA director he named to replace Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, an 'agent of change.' US military leaders are also examining strategies. In Iraq, three bombings in Baghdad left at least 38 people dead and 71 wounded Sunday, most of them after a suicide bomber struck a police recruiting office. Speculation is surging in Washington that the bipartisan Baker panel, launched by Congress in March, will offer both Bush and the newly empowered Democrats a way out of the impasse in Iraq. Its report is expected in December, and British Prime Minister Tony Blair was due to address the panel Tuesday by video link. Bush has insisted since the election that he will accept nothing less than 'victory,' though he has scaled back his lofty rhetoric of democracy for the Middle East to creating an Iraq that can 'sustain, govern and defend itself,' and does not harbour terrorists. 'Iraq is the central front in this war on terror. I look forward to listening to ideas from the new leaders of Congress on the best way to support our troops on the front lines - and win the war on terror,' Bush said in his nationally broadcast Saturday radio message. Meanwhile, Blair and Australian Prime Minister John Howard - two key US military allies in Iraq - agreed in a phone call that they remain committed and would not set a date for withdrawing troops, Howard said. 'You can't put a date on it, but it will go on for a long time,' he said Saturday in Canberra. In the US, many Democrats campaigned on a platform calling for a timetable to extricate troops from Iraq, which Bush has refused to set. US presidents hold constitutional authority to set foreign and military policy, so the Democrats are looking to harness widespread Republican discontent with Bush's war policy to pressure the administration. But leading Democrats disagree among themselves about the tough choices required. Senator Carl Levin, in line to head the upper chamber's Armed Services Committee when the newly elected Congress convenes in January, called Sunday for 'a phased redeployment of forces from Iraq in four to six months.' Former presidential candidate Howard Dean, who heads the Democrats' national party organization, argued against 'an arbitrary deadline' but insisted 'this cannot be left to the next president.' 'I think that we need to tell the Iraqi people that we're leaving, because I think, frankly, they are playing political games over there to see who can get into power on the backs of our troops,' Dean said on Fox News television. © 2006 dpa - Deutsche Presse-Agentur

Your Talkback on this Story

Note posts made on our older Talkback system will still show below. However, new posts can only be made via the new system (above). We will export the old comments to the new shortly. You can still comment as a guest on the new system but it also allows you to login using various social network and other accounts.

Other features coming soon.

Talkback

page: 1

DavidNov 13th, 2006 - 03:23:05

About time. It's taken an election, and the prospect of a seething report from an independent commission, to accept that their 'shock, awe, then screw it up' strategy has been a dismal failure.

Report this comment

Shalom FreedmanNov 13th, 2006 - 06:35:30

The United States is about to embark on a path of self- deception. Or rather to continue on it. Iran and Syria are now working to take over Lebanon. The majority of that nation which opposes a Hezbollah- Syria- Iranian takeover of Iran will most likely not be supported to the degree necessary to prevent this development. As for Iraq, the Iranians will certainly be happy to led the United States withdraw. And however this withdrawal is presented in the Media it will be perceived as a defeat for the United States in Iraq. It seems to me withdrawal is inevitable.
Iran is not simply an enemy of the United States because of conflicting interests here and there. It is a totalitarian radical Islamic State whose goal is to see the destruction of the kind of democracy the United States and the West represent.
Talking with Iran may have limited practical value here and there. It is fundamentally wrong, and will backfire on the United States.
The Iranians are not going to stop their nuclear push for one instance. Nor are they going to relent in their effort to dominate the Gulf completely.
A lot of nations are worried about the United States going on the path of self- deception. First of all Israel which Iran has vowed to destroy. But also other American allies Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan are troubled at the prospect of a rising Iran and a retreating United States.
The United States has to find a new strategy. I believe it should be focused on Iran which is now arguably the most dangerous nation in the world. It can not simply bring us a wave of Terror the like of which the world has not seen, it can push towards the nuclear Armageddon the prospect of which we all thought had vanished with the demise of the Soviet Union.

Report this comment

FrankNov 13th, 2006 - 13:50:44

Its also worthwhile to point out that during Saddam Husseins twenty years of tyranny 250,000-350,000 people died... but in the last three years since the US Invasion,looking for non-existant WMD's, 600,000 Iraqis have died and another 1,500,000 have fled the country as it hurls towards self-destruction.
What was it Bush said 'We will bring Peace,Stabiliity ,Freedom and above all ,Democrasy to Iraq'.

Jesus.H.Christ.....WHAT A MESS!

Report this comment

FrankNov 13th, 2006 - 14:32:28

Salom Freedmen says
'The United States has to find a new strategy. I believe it should be focused on Iran which is now arguably the most dangerous nation in the world. It can not simply bring us a wave of Terror the like of which the world has not seen, it can push towards the nuclear Armageddon'
..But Iran has ZERO WMD's while Israel has 200-300 WMD,s (manufactured at DIMONA) which have NEVER been inspected,not to mention the Israeli Chemical and Biological weapon stockpiles, which also have NEVER seen the light of day.
If you were Iran ,would you be suicidal enough to attack Israel,without considering the consequences first?.
I thought not.

Report this comment

SP4Nov 13th, 2006 - 22:46:01

Absolutely! Let's discuss:

Capture and torture of American diplomats and theit assistants

across the board human rights violations

backing hizbolla and war with israel

death sentences for anti-Islamics

Golly, that'll take up the whole day!

...Jeeesus!

Report this comment

FrankNov 14th, 2006 - 11:42:53

SP4...yes absolutely correct..no dispute ..and lets also discuss 14th Nov 1986,when the White House acknowledged the CIA role in secretly shipping weapons to Iran.
Now back to DIMONA and the curious fact that Bush has never once mentioned the Israeli 200-300WMD's which HAVE NEVER BEEN INSPECTED....discuss!

Report this comment

FrankNov 14th, 2006 - 12:03:41

This is where it hits the fan....
In 1986, the White House acknowledged the CIA role in secretly shipping weapons to Iran.

Report this comment

page: 1

US

US hints it might talk to Iran, Syria

US News

Your Talkback on this Story

Talkback

Similar articles

Latest Headlines in US

From Sites We Like

Latest PopEater News

Latest Cinema Blend News

Latest Tech Herald News

In Monsters and Critics

Corporate

The Fine Print