U.S. And Iranian Diplomats Break The Ice

At Afghan Conference, Holbrooke Has "Cordial" Talks With Iran's FM; Clinton Sends Letter To Tehran About U.S. Citizens

(CBS/AP)  In a cautious first step toward unlocking 30 years of tense relations, senior U.S. diplomat Richard Holbrooke had a brief but cordial meeting with Iran's deputy foreign minister Tuesday at an international conference on Afghanistan.

The rare diplomatic approach was the first official face-to-face interplay between the Obama administration and the Iranian regime. U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton cautioned that the talks between Holbrooke and Iranian diplomat Mehdi Akhundzadeh were promising but not "substantive."

"They agreed to stay in touch," Clinton said at the close of a one-day conference on Afghan security and development that was designed partly to allow the diplomatic turn with Iran.

The meeting between Holbrooke, President Barack Obama's hand-picked Afghanistan envoy, and Akhundzadeh came on the sidelines of a session aimed at improving Afghanistan's future prospects. Akhundzadeh pledged to help the reconstruction of its neighbor, but he criticized U.S. plans to send more troops into Afghanistan.

The gathering was being closely watched for signs that the U.S. and Iran can work together on a common problem after years of hostility. The two countries cooperated at a distance in 2001 and 2002 after U.S.-led forces ousted Afghanistan's Taliban government.

The U.S. and Iran have been estranged for 30 years, since young Iranians stormed the U.S. Embassy in Tehran and took more than 50 Americans hostage for 444 days. Representatives of the two nations are rarely even in the same room with one another, but they have had accidental-on-purpose public meetings on the sidelines of other international gatherings.

The face-to-face pleasantries, along with a diplomatic letter hand-delivered to the Iranian delegation by a U.S. official, were carefully calibrated overtures from the Obama administration aimed at testing the clerical regime's willingness to take larger steps.

Afghanistan and Iran share nearly 600 miles of border, and Clinton said the United States and Afghanistan share concern over the flow of drugs into Iran.

"We will look for ways to cooperate with them and I think the fact that they came today, that they intervened today, is a promising sign that there will be future cooperations," she said.

The diplomatic letter asked for Iran's help in releasing or lifting travel restrictions on two American women in Iran, and information on a man missing for two years since traveling to Iran on business.

"It was a letter to the government of Iran seeking both information and assistance about our three American citizens," Clinton told CBS News chief foreign affairs analyst Lara Logan.

The Iranians did promise to cooperate in Afghanistan, but, Logan reports, could not resist taking aim at the United States.

"The presence of foreign forces has not improved things in the country, and it seems that an increase in the number of foreign forces will prove ineffective, too," Akhundzadeh said.

The cases and the American position on them were known. What is different was the Obama administration's decision to approach Iran directly, instead of using a go-between.

Information or help from Tehran "would constitute a humanitarian gesture by the Iranians in keeping with the spirit of renewal and generosity that marks the Persian new year," Clinton said.

Mr. Obama recently sent an unusual video message to mark the Iranian new year in March.

The conference opens a week of diplomatic gatherings in Europe where Mr. Obama is also expected to try for a fresh start in the bumpy U.S. relationship with Russia. Numerous U.S. allies have encouraged a better relationship with oil-rich and strategic Iran.

As a candidate, Mr. Obama said he would reach out to Iran, and even hold direct talks with its leaders, if he decided it would serve U.S. interests. That was a marked change from the early days of George W. Bush's administration, when Iran recoiled angrily at being labeled part of an "axis of evil."

Organizers of Tuesday's conference called it a success merely for the range of nations and organizations attending. Clinton and other diplomats pledged support for the fragile government of Afghan President Hamid Karzai, but avoided the argument over fighting troops that had put the United States at odds with some NATO allies.

Karzai said there was still a long way to go. One key issue: Afghanistan's illegal opium trade, reports Logan. It provides ninety percent of the world supply.

"Hundreds of Afghan policeman have sacrificed their lives in eradication of crops, interdiction and bringing criminals to justice," Karzai said.

This week's NATO summit meeting is not expected to raise significant numbers of fighting forces, despite Mr. Obama's decision to add some 21,000 U.S. troops before the end of summer.

Karzai and Clinton said Afghanistan would welcome Taliban fighters who embrace peace, reject al Qaeda and pledge to abide by the Afghan constitution.

Clinton said most Taliban fighters have allied with anti-government forces "out of desperation" rather than commitment, in a country that has barely made inroads against poverty and lack of development.

"They should be offered an honorable form of reconciliation and reintegration into a peaceful society" if they abandon violence and break with al Qaeda, she said.

Akhundzadeh was critical of Mr. Obama's plan to add U.S. troops, saying the money they cost would be better spent on building Afghanistan's own forces. But he added that "Iran is fully prepared to participate in the projects aimed at combating drug trafficking and the plans in line with developing and reconstructing Afghanistan."

In a closing statement, the conference agreed to promote good governance and stronger institutions in Afghanistan while generating economic growth and strengthening security.

Karzai and U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon opened the conference Tuesday. CBS News foreign affairs analyst Pamela Falk at the U.N. said the world body is playing a more active role in Afghanistan, due to the renewal of their mandate by the Security Council and the Secretary-General's concern for the safety of personnel in the country.

Meanwhile, the top Taliban commander in Pakistan promised on Tuesday an assault on Washington "soon" - one he said would "amaze" the world.

Baitullah Mehsud (at left) also claimed responsibility for Monday's attack on a police academy outside the eastern Pakistani city of Lahore, saying it was in retaliation for U.S. missile strikes against militants along the Afghan border.

[ozus]

nokia3210c,

I have read a lot of factual information and a number of the nutty sites on 9/11. It believe the facts, not the nuts.

[nokia3210c]

TO OZUS:
YOU SEEM 2 B NAIVE OF THE FACTS BEHIND 911. JUST GO TO www.weknowthe truth.com; or www.911truth.com.
read 4yourself and make conclusions and stop making untruth excuses. go up, will u!!!

[Obama__is__Chavez]

bajajohn1,

Iran has the uranium and the equipment and they have been given the technical expertise. You don't need a missile to deliver a nuclear weapon.
Posted by ozus at 4:41 AM : Apr 1, 2009
******************************************************

But if you take down their nuclear facilities where are they gonna "cook" their nukes? In some microwave oven?

[ozus]

bajajohn1,

Iran has the uranium and the equipment and they have been given the technical expertise. You don't need a missile to deliver a nuclear weapon.

[ozus]

taebok ,

It would be nice if the world was as simple as it appears to your narrow mind. Perhaps if you studied history and politics more and didn't rely on your silly links, you might have a different point of view.

[Obama__is__Chavez]

OBAMA and HILLARY are imploring Iran to talk with them because they are too scared to fight Iran. Now Iran is the one who controls Iraq,the Persian Gulf and the entire Middle East. Obama is too weak to defy Iran.

[shawshank22]

Obama and Hillary are the biggest fools ever to hold office if they are naive enough to trust Iran....Guess we need another wakeup to remind these unqualied democrats.

[didserve]

Start on a basis of respect!

[searingtruth]

"I'm sure glad we can trust the Iranians now. Thank God for Hillary and Barack!!"
budmag06


I wouldn't trust anyone that has declared us their mortal enemy. Especially after we had helped to torture millions of them.

I would instead confess my sins, ask them to confess their sins, and request a sincere mutual pledge of peace from this day forward.

Which will work most all the time.
ST


"Those who desire peace can always claim an amicable agreement."
SearingTruth

A Future of the Brave

[budmag06]

I'm sure glad we can trust the Iranians now. Thank God for Hillary and Barack!!

[searingtruth]

"...The Palestinian and Israeli leaders talk alll of the time, year after year. So what? Does anything ever get resolved?"
rhs648


No.

Because our American government has always seen the Israelis shooting twelve year old Palestinian children in the belly while being shielded by their fathers begging for their lives as a necessity.

Only condemning acts of evil from other sides.

While most all the people of the earth condemn evil, no matter its origin, excuse, or allegiance.
ST


"We did not have to swear allegiance to their god, but only live as if we had."
SearingTruth

A Future of the Brave

[bajajohn1]

Ozus; there is no proof according to the IAEA and international intelligence community that Iran has the capability to produce a nuclear weapon. Unfortunately, the hype from politicians on this issue borders on paranoia. Most Western nations, Israel, have the capability to shoot down a missile in flight. That is a fact.

[ozus]

taebok,

I think you have to go back a little bit earlier. The Shah was placed on the throne in 1941 by the British and the Soviet Union.

What you are thinking about is the removal of the Communist-backed Prime Minister in 1953 who was attempting to sideline the Shah and make him a figurehead.

Of course we could go back further, say 2,500 years of continuous monarchy to Cyrus the Great and the Persian Empire. I think that may have preceded Mohamed, the US, UK and USSR.

[rhs648]

Well, at least the politicians are talking. Can't say I envy them, but its better than the alternative.
Posted by arthur419

The Palestinian and Israeli leaders talk alll of the time, year after year. So what? Does anything ever get resolved?

[searingtruth]

"When the Shah ser ved as a puppet for Western governments, Iran's people did not receive much of the wealth being generated by the oil fields. The revolt occurred because our influence in Iran favored the powerful interests in that country at the expense of the majority of the population. There is no excusing the takeover of the American Embassy. The hard-right extremists who commandeered the facility kept threatening to kill the hostages...."
bajajohn1


Unfortunately, it is even worse than that fellow citizen.

My most horrific memory of the Shah and the CIA are the videos of those dying from their bones uncontrollably growing out of their skin.

Unfortunately after the Shah was overthrown no doctors could figure out how to counter the drug the CIA had given him to torture them, and they died.

But as you stated, there is no excuse for brutality in revenge of brutality. The answer is just trial and punishment.

So let's hope that both Iran and America have the strength of character to uphold humanity, and revolt inhumanity.

So that our children may at last live in peace.
ST


"I can imagine our children playing together."
SearingTruth

A Future of the Brave

[ozus]

bajajohn1,

Nice thoughts, but there are a couple of holes in your argument.

"The Irananian government is not really in a position to challenge the U.S. directly. . ." How direct would an Iranian nuclear weapon exploding on US soil be?

"Also remember, that politics and religion do not mix." There isn't much of a mix when religion dominates politics. It was religious fanatics that did the damage on 9/11.

Also how do you explain the recent harder line by Libya?

[bajajohn1]

When the Shah ser ved as a puppet for Western governments, Iran's people did not receive much of the wealth being generated by the oil fields. The revolt occurred because our influence in Iran favored the powerful interests in that country at the expense of the majority of the population. There is no excusing the takeover of the American Embassy. The hard-right extremists who commandeered the facility kept threatening to kill the hostages. President Carter is and was a Christian man. He chose not sacrifice the hostages, like Reagan promised to do if elected. For some reason, the Persian nation got suckered by the extremist Muslim Ayatollah Khomeni. When people are poor and desperate they turn to extremism to address their misery. Hopefully, we can began to to undo the legacy of recent history and began a search for peace. The Irananian government is not really in a position to challenge the U.S. directly but can and does by proxy. Harsh rhteroric does from Republicans on this board does not help fostering better relations. There remains a glimmer of hope that mutual ground for negotiations exists between the governments on issues of importance to both nations. Indeed, the moderate factions, those who are highly educated, want better relations with the West. Also remember, that politics and religion do not mix.

[searingtruth]

"One of the greatest tragedies of our existence is that we are a people united by so many common goals, but divided by so many uncommon beliefs.

I believe that our goals are more important. We all want to be free. We all want our children to be healthy and happy. Most all of us want peace so long as our own rights are protected.

These are the ideals that we can all strive for together. These are the threads of humanity that cannot be torn apart."
SearingTruth, A Future of the Brave

A Future of the Brave

[ozus]

arthur419,

What alternative? Iran and the US have not been at war over the past 30 years with the exception of the act of war on our embassy.

It is interesting to note that Libya became more cooperative with the US during the GWB years and since Obama took office has reverted to its militant ways. Is this the first dividend of the new administration's softer line?

[ozus]

ainttaken,

If you have to make stupid and incorrect physical comments, it shows you must have little grasp of politics, history or anything relevant.

I suppose your belief is that if Iran develops its bomb, Iraq is divided between Iran and Syria and Israel is given to Iranian-backed Palestinians, we can live happily ever after.