Nobody dislikes and distrusts Iran as much as the Arab neighbors. Rhetoric from the Iraqi leadership during the 1980-1988 Iran-Iraq war was convincing proof, in case there was any doubt.
Now, however, there is a report — mentioned so far only on the Islamic Republic of Iran News Network (most of the Iranian media is either not publishing or on a very reduced output, due to the Now Roz or New Year holidays, which are being celebrated from 21 March to 3 April) — that Iran’s Foreign Minister has been invited to attend the Riyadh Arab Summit meeting that opens in Tehran tomorrow:
Mottaki to attend Riyadh summit
“Iranian ambassador to Saudi Arabia Sayed Mohammad Hosseini announced on Monday that Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki is scheduled to attend the Arab Heads of State Summit in Riyadh on Wednesday. He noted that Mottaki heading a high-ranking delegation will arrive in the Saudi capital of Riyadh before the summit.
A preliminary meeting opened in Riyadh at the ministerial level today. Latest developments in Lebanon, Iraq, Palestine, Somalia and Darfur as well as IRI’s nuclear issue will be high on the agenda of talks. The summit will be attended by the heads of 18 Arab and islamic states. Meanwhile, some Arab countries, including Qatar, Oman and Somalia will dispatch their Prime Ministers to the summit”.
http://www.iribnews.ir/Full_en.asp?news_id=233924&n=21
This is pretty astonishing news, if true.
The story suggests that the invitation was issued after the UN Security Council unanimous vote, on 24 March, to tighten sanctions against Iran. This could mean that Iran’s Arab neighbors (a) now see the situation as very volatile and dangerous and / or (b) they feel a surge of sympathy for Iran because they believe the UN Security Council action was somehow unjust.
Qatar is a member of the UN Security Council, and they voted for the resolution too.
Meanwhile, the high-profile R. Nicholas Burns has been in Brussels since the Security Council vote — from where EU “High Representative” Javier Solana has been trying to reach Iran’s present top nuclear negotiator Ali Larijani on the phone.
Immediately after the vote, the Foreign Ministers of the UN Security Council’s five Permanent Members (US, Russia, China, France, and Britain) plus Solana issued a statement saying they would try to open talks with Iran about holding eventual negotiations. It is not clear whether there can even be talks at this stage, though this is an offer Iran can hardly refuse. Today, it is reported, Solana managed to talk to Larijani for nearly an hour, but no agreement was reached — except to stay in touch.
If Iran’s Foreign Minister is received at the Arab Summit, it will be interesting to see if there is any movement on the Iran-Iraq border in the Shatt Al-Arab (where, despite Saddam’s having torn up the 1975 Algiers-brokered agreement with the Shah, the thalweg or mid-point line in the water is still recognized as the boundary, according to international law experts).
It will also be interesting to see if there is any movement on the long-standing dispute over three islands that the United Arab Emirates claims in the Persian Gulf.
And, of course, it will be interesting to see if there are any takers on Iran’s proposal for a Persian Gulf regional consortium on fuel production for peaceful nuclear energy (Iran says the facility should be located in Iran), or on regional security arrangements.
And, although the U.S. has been playing down the Iranian capture of 15 British marines and sailors, the U.S. military activities in the Persian Gulf have taken a much higher profile. And — though only in response to a (planted?) question from a journalist, a U.S. State Department spokesman said in today’s briefing that these British service personnel were operating under a UN mandate:
State Department briefing 27 March 2007
“MR. CASEY: Well, I think as we’ve said, this was — this action was a violation of international law. The British forces were operating as we understand it in Iraqi territorial waters. As such, they were doing so under mandates provided by the United Nations and so therefore the seizing of them by the Iranian forces and the Iranian Government is an illegal act.
QUESTION: (Inaudible)
MR. CASEY: I don’t have any characterization beyond it. My understanding from our legal people is that the best way to describe this is it’s a violation of
international law.
QUESTION: A follow-up — well related. U.S. News is reporting that in September, I guess a group of Iraqi soldiers being advised by U.S. soldiers engaged Iranians near the border, but within Iraqi territory. Has the State Department raised this issue before with Iran?
MR. CASEY: Well, I think in terms of any specific military actions in Iraq, you frankly have to go talk to the folks on the ground in Baghdad for that. In terms of our overall view of Iranian activities in Iraq, I think we’ve made those quite clear. Certainly, the Iranian Government is involved in — the Iranians, excuse me, are involved in providing materials for EFPs [roadside bombs] as you’ve heard from our military officials there. We certainly see Iranian support for various militia groups as well. And as the President said, we’ll
certainly do whatever is required to protect our troops by making sure we deal with any threats inside Iraq to our troops from whatever nationalities the
people involved are.”