US and Iran holding 'secret' talks on nuclear programme

[laststeamtrain]

Source: The Independent

US and Iran holding 'secret' talks on nuclear programme

By Anne Penketh, Diplomatic Editor
Monday, 14 April 2008

Iran and the United States have been engaged in secret "back channel" discussions for the past five years on Iran's nuclear programme and the broader relationship between the two sworn enemies, The Independent can reveal.

One of the participants, former senior US diplomat Thomas Pickering, explained that a group of former American diplomats and experts had been meeting with Iranian academics and policy advisers "in a lot of different places, although not in the US or Iran".

"Some of the Iranians were connected to official institutions inside Iran," he said in a telephone interview from Washington. The group was organised by the UN Association of the USA, a pro-UN organisation. Its work was facilitated by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, a government-funded think-tank chaired by the former chief UN weapons inspector for Iraq, Rolf Ekeus.

While the nuclear issue was "prominent", Mr Pickering said, "we discussed what's going on domestically in both countries and wide-ranging issues" affecting the US-Iran relationship. Although none of the group members was from the US or Iranian governments, he said that "each side kept their officials informed". The Bush administration "did not discourage us," he added.

Read more: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/politics/us-and-iran-holding-secret-talks-on-nuclear-programme-808647.html

[sutz12]

1. Historical precedent....

Hitler had Ribbentrop negotiating with the Soviets right up until the invasion. Heck, IIRC, there were trainloads of grain shipped across the border mere hours before the first shots were fired.

Just saying. :shrug:

[PATRICK]

2. The US members

are not official and know how to do this carefully without getting kneecapped by the Bush administration.
They have also succeeded in completing these discussions to this extent because Bush doesn't give a damn, there are no consequences, and they want to see what comes out.

The catch of a real discussion is that the threat of Bush War is too absolute to placate(And Iran's position would never be a surrender). Bush gone means no war and less US clout thanks to having played out all the high cards stupidly- with hopefully no resulting war.

The intent of such a group would be more subtle- and slow. To undercut the march to war must itself attempt certain stages. They hardly, at this stage or even the immediately desired one of averting certain war, expect results from either nation's deadly leadership, but it lays a groundwork for other fronts which I doubt anyone can easily see or predict. It would move among the sane channels which have been putting immense pressure on the madmen. Failure to amend the suicidal ills of the present world runs
very wide and deep in the channels of all actual power and negotiation.