The Times of London reports that high level US officials negotiated with Iraqi insurgents about the situation in Iraq. Sadly, those negotations ended after two months. The reason? They felt betrayed (in the words of best conservative blogger, Ed Morrissey) when al-Maliki’s government was formed:
At the first meeting with Khalilzad on January 17, the insurgents expressed concern about the emergence of Iran as a new regional power. With America equally worried about Iranian interference, the two sides appeared to have found some common ground. The talks continued in Baghdad for about eight weeks, sometimes on consecutive days at Allawi’s home.
At one point the insurgents offered Khalilzad a 10-day “period of grace� in which attacks on coalition forces would be suspended in return for a cessation of US military operations.
They called for a “timetable for withdrawal�, saying that it should be announced immediately although in practice it would be “linked to the timescale necessary to rebuild Iraq’s armed forces and security services�, according to one commander.
Other demands said to have been received sympathetically by Khalilzad, such as an amnesty for insurgents and a reversal of the “de-Ba’athification� process that stripped so many Sunnis of their jobs, have now been urged by the Iraq Study Group.
[…]
“I told Khalilzad that we had the know-how and the manpower to regain control of Baghdad and rid it of the pro-Iranian militias,� one of the insurgent commanders added.
“If he would just provide us with the weapons, we would clean up the city and regain control of Baghdad in 30 days.�
[…]
The final blow to the negotiations came in mid-March when Khalilzad said that he would be willing to talk to Iran about resolving the conflict in Iraq. The news came as a bombshell to the Sunni insurgents, who complained to the ambassador at their final meeting.Shortly afterwards the government of Nouri al-Maliki was formed with the support of pro-Iranian elements. The Sunni insurgents responded by sending a memo to Khalilzad — now tipped to become US ambassador to the United Nations — suspending all meetings and accusing the Americans of “dishonesty�.
In other words, the idea of the Iraq Study Group – engage in direct talks with insurgents (except for Al Qaeda) – has already been tried… and failed.
The main idea behind such negotiations is quite logical and reasonable. Just fighting them will not solve this conflict, that is clear.
My main concern now is whether the U.S. will be able to get the Sunni insurgents back to the negotiation-table. Al-Maliki is moving more and more towards Iran, so that might prove problematic to say the least. However, without such direct-talks, there will never be peace in Iraq. At least not until one side has crushed the other side, and that is something nobody wants.
In other words, the Sunni insurgents need to receive something. Something big. But… what? Should the U.S. stop supporting al-Maliki?
PAST CONTRIBUTOR.