NYT: Iranian Reveals Plan to Expand Role in Iraq

[RamboLiberal]

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/29/world/middleeast/29iranians.html?hp&ex=1170046800&en=d4deb1d521cb8706&ei=5094&partner=homepage

Iran’s ambassador to Baghdad outlined an ambitious plan on Sunday to greatly expand its economic and military ties with Iraq — including an Iranian national bank branch in the heart of the capital — that will almost certainly bring Iran into further conflict with American forces who have detained a number of Iranian operatives here in recent weeks.

The ambassador, Hassan Kazemi Qumi, said Iran was prepared to offer Iraqi forces training, equipment and advisers for what he called “the security fight.” In the economic area, Mr. Qumi said, Iran was ready to assume major responsibility for the reconstruction of Iraq, an area of notable failure on the part of the United States since American-led forces overthrew Saddam Hussein in the invasion nearly four years ago.

Mr. Qumi also acknowledged, for the first time, that two Iranians seized and later released by American forces last month were security officials, as the United States had claimed. But he said that they were engaged in legitimate discussions with the Iraqi government and should not have been detained.

Mr. Qumi’s remarks, in a 90-minute interview over tea and large Iranian pistachio nuts at the Iranian Embassy here, amounted to the most authoritative and substantive response the Iranians have made yet to increasingly belligerent accusations by the Bush administration that Iran is acting against American interests in Iraq. President Bush has said the American military is authorized to take whatever action necessary against Iranians in Iraq found to be engaged in actions deemed hostile.

[Beetwasher]

1. Well, Will You Look At That

Should we demand that Iran stop meddling in Iraq? I mean, how dare they meddle in another country's business! How dare they!

[Bucky]

2. Shit, let 'em have it.

The worst thing we could do to Iran is let them take over Iraq. The Sunni insurgency will step up double-time, the al-Qaedistas will go ballistic, and the various Shiite factions will start splitting up either because Iran is promoting fundamentalism or because it's failing to.

Within two years the Iranian college kids will start revolting against the war and start turning out into the street and demanding more secular reforms. Iraq is a total tar baby; let's let Iran spend a few years punching at it instead of us.

[kitty1]

3. This is Bushco's greatest fear. A power struggle over Iraq.....

That's why all those charges against the Iraqi security personnel who were arrested there back in December. All of them turned out to be bogus. They're desperate to find something huge to pin On Iran to justify ousting them out of that region and keeping their own control.
In actuality, the Iraqis should be able to conduct business with whatever country they want. However, we all know the the U.S. bought and paid for Iraq and now owns it for all intents and purposes.
There's no way in Hell they'd let the Iranians open an icecream stand in Baghdad, let alone a bank.
On the other hand, it would be stupid of the Iraqi government not to accept expertise and financing for reconstruction if they can get it.
They need to get along with their neighbors now for a lot of reasons.
The Iranians are basically in America's face here and saying this school yard doesn't belong to you really so what are you going to do about it.
The Iraqis of course are caught in the middle not knowing who to trust.
As the saying goes, keep your friends close,keep your enemies closer.
As to which category Iran and the U.S. fall into, is hard to say at times.
Iran is going to pit the Iraqi government against the U.S.
Iran is also saying to the world,look we are extending an olive branch here to Iraq. If the U.S. attacks us, it will be for unwarranted reasons and lies just as it was with Iraq. I guess two can play at this game.

[stillcool]

4. good interpretation...

thanks!..so hard these days for me to figure out what's what.

[BattyDem]

5. So if the Iraqi government requests/accepts help from Iran ...

what right do we have to stop them? Iraq is a sovereign nation ... right? They have their own government who makes all of the decisions about Iraq's future ... right? We are only there to provide security and train the Iraqis; it's not an occupation ... right? :eyes:

Seriously ... if the government of Iraq decides to accept help from Iran and tells us to leave, how will BushCo spin that?

[oblivious]

7. It's not really an 'if'. Iraqi authorities have said all detained Iranians had been invited by Iraq.

[Luckyduck]

6. Congress Gives Bush money through Iran Freedom Support Act

to spread propaganda and prepare for war on Iran.

How much are they paying the NYTimes?

[moondust]

8. Emboldened.

Uh George, they're not exactly running in fear of your saber rattling.

[IndianaGreen]

9. Iran and Iraq have rights as sovereign nations to reach any accord between them

Someone ought to tell the stupid Americans that they are not a colonial power, and that their belly aching about Iran's relations with Iraq undermines their argument that America is in Iraq to assist the Iraqis, not steal their oil.

[fujiyama]

10. Hmmm how dare they...

Dammit, how can they meddle in their neighbor's affairs, when a powerful nation that has threatened them occupies that country.

BTW I find it fascinating how Bush calls Iraq a sovereign country, yet believes it's our right to dictate their supposed elected government how they want to run their affairs.

[oblivious]

11. This article is pretty significant. A summary of the main points.

1. offering Iraq government forces training, equipment and advisers for...“the security fight.”

2. military assistance to Iraq...included increased border patrols and a proposed new “joint security committee.”

3. ready to assume major responsibility for Iraq reconstruction

4. If Iran is allowed to undertake reconstruction activities in Iraq, he said, all international construction companies would be welcome. “Urge the American companies to come here,” he said.

5. He ridiculed the evidence that the American military has said it collected (from kidnapped Iranians) ... Mr. Qumi said the maps were so common and easily obtainable that they proved nothing.

6. he said that the Iranians were in Iraq because “the two countries agreed to solve the security problems.” The Iranians “went to meet with the Iraqi side,” he said.

7. he said Iran would soon open a national bank in Iraq, in effect creating a new Iranian financial institution right under the Americans’ noses. A senior Iraqi banking official, Hussein al-Uzri, confirmed that Iran had received a license to open the bank, which he said would apparently be the first “wholly owned subsidiary bank” of a foreign country in Iraq.

8. Mr. Qumi said the bank was just the first of what he said would be several in Iraq — an agricultural bank and three private banks also intend to open branches. Other elements of new economic cooperation, he said, include plans for Iranian shipments of kerosene and electricity to Iraq and a new agricultural cooperative involving both countries.