Secret Britain-Iran Talks in 2005 on Iraq, Tehran Nuclear Programme?

The BBC is claiming that secret discussions between Britain and Iran took place in 2005 on Tehran's role in Iraq and Iran's nuclear programme.

A BBC documentary tonight will claim that Iran made an "extraordinary offer" to stop attacking British troops in Iraq if Western countries accepted Iran's uranium enrichment programme.

The claim is made by Sir John Sawers (pictured), who was Britain's top political representative in Iraq and is now currently Britain's ambassador to the United Nations. He claims, "The Iranians wanted to strike a deal whereby they stopped killing our forces in iraq in return for them being allowed to carry on with their nuclear programme."

The British government rejected the offer.

Guantanamo Update: Binyam Mohamed Home Next Week

Details emerged this afternoon that suggest Ethiopian-born UK resident Binyam Mohamed will be freed from Guantánamo Bay- where he has been held since 2004- next week. The Washington Post, citing an anonymous British source, believes that Mohamed may be released as early as Monday.

The UK government will not, however, be pressing for the release of the remaining UK resident held at Guantánamo, Shaker Aamer- the BBC has been told by the Foreign Office that the UK is "no longer in active discussions" with the US over Aamer's release.

See also:

• British Officials Devised Torture Policy For Detainees


• Binyam Mohamed Coming Home, No Need To Talk About Torture


• Binyam Mohamed And The Hiding Of Torture Evidence

The Latest on Israel-Gaza-Palestine (20 February)

Evening Update: The wrangling over the formation of a new government in Israel continues. Meanwhile in the UK it has emerged that 400 BBC staff have signed a petition in protest at BBC Director General Mark Thompson's decision not to air the DEC's Gaza appeal.

3.30 p.m. GMT / 5.30 p.m. Israel/Palestine: A spokesman for Hamas has denied that it gave a letter for President Obama to Senator John Kerry yesterday, but at the same time stressed that Hamas is "open to hold dialogue with any country and our only enemy is the Zionist occupation."

Afternoon Update : The BBC reports that Likud's Benjamin Netanyahu will form the new Israeli cabinet. CNN also carries the story, and suggests that the support of other right-wing parties such as Yisrael Beytenu and the Orthodox Shas movement will allow Netanyahu to build a coalition.

Netanyahu has told reporters he wants to form a unity coalition with Kadima and Labour: "I call on Kadima chairwoman Tzipi Livni and Labour Party chairman Ehud Barak and I say to them -- let's unite to secure the future of the State of Israel. I ask to meet with you first to discuss with you a broad national unity government for the good of the people and the state."

Morning Update (8 a.m. GMT; 10 a.m. Israel/Palestine): No progress in Israel-Gaza talks with the continuing stalemate over the precondition of a prisoner swap including Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit (pictured). Senior Hamas official Mahmoud az-Zahar has tried to press Tel Aviv and secure Hamas' relations with Egypt, claiming that Cairo and the Gazan leadership are in agreement over the prisoner issue.

Two rockets landed near Sderot in southern Israel on Thursday night.

In an interesting intervention over recent Israeli-Turkish tensions, Congressman Robert Wexler visited Turkish officials and, on CNN-Turk, underlined the importance of Turkish-American relations. He warned Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan to leave behind his criticism of Israel's Gaza policy at the Davos Summit. Wexler said, “The close relationship with Israel is not going to change after taking over of the administration by President Obama. In the Middle East, whether in humanitarian or in security areas, Washington is going to continue standing by Israel.”

We remember Mr. Wexler in 2006 when Erdogan met with Hamas officials in Ankara. He urgently came to Turkey and warned Ankara in order to stop that unilateral political initiative that was not approved by American, European and Israeli leaders. This time, his warning is perceived as a much significant one, especially by the bureaucratic circles whilst anti-Israeli discourses backed up by the walkout in Davos may lead to a crisis among Israel, American, Turkey, and American Jewish lobbies in prior to the coming of a proposal concerning 'the approval of Armenian genocide' to the House of Representatives.

Scott Lucas on BBC1 TV "The Big Questions": Is Torture Ever Justified?

I thought this morning's live discussion "Is Torture Ever Justified?" on BBC1's The Big Questions raised some important points, especially given the limited time (25 minutes) available and the initial attempt to frame the question around the "ticking bomb" scenario.

It was a particular pleasure to talk with Moazzam Begg (pictured), who was detained and tortured in Afghanistan's Camp Bagram before being moved to Guantanamo Bay. He is now working with CagePrisoners, an organisation raising the cases of and providing assistance to detainees around the world.

The programme is available until next Sunday on the BBC iPlayer.

Iran's Presidential Election: What Difference Does Khatami Make?

Our colleague Chris Emery offers this incisive assessment of former President Mohammed Khatami's declaration that he will stand in June's Presidential Election in Iran, taking us beyond the simplistic formula of Ahmadinejad v. Khatami:

Former two-term Iranian President Mohammed Khatami waited until almost the last possible minute before deciding to put his name on the ballot for the presidential elections in June. He only declared after a careful examination of the political environment and, more importantly, his electoral chances.



This scrutiny was not matched by the western media.

Their haste was perhaps predictable: Khatami is well-known and respected in the West. It was just too tempting to paint him as the reformist liberal who, in conjunction with the new saviour of American diplomacy, could genuinely transform US-Iranian relations. So it will now hold its collective breath that he will prevail against the hard-line incumbent Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

The context of renewed hopes for rapprochement is, I suspect, of much less significance to the Iranian public’s perception of Khatami’s decision to run. And it is unlikely, though still unclear, that Khatami's decision was relatded President Ahmadinejad’s reciprocation of Barack Obama's offer for dialogue with America.

Whilst the prospect of a more moderate leadership in Washington and Tehran is gratifying, the characterisation of Khatami as "the Iranian Obama" or, even more erroneously, that Obama’s election provoked Khatami’s decision to run is patently false. Khatami’s decision to run rests on internal Iranian politics, the complex dynamics of which are hard to penetrate.

For example, it had been widely reported that Khatami would not run if former Prime Minister Mir-Hussein Mousavi chose to. Prior to his announcement, Khatami met with Mir Hossein Mousavi at the office of reformist politician and cleric Abdollah Nouri in northeast Tehran. So all Iranian eyes will now watch if Mousavi, another popular reformist, is now the one to withdraw.

Another egregious error, as typified by the BBC article that announced Khamtami’s decision, is the assumption that Iranians now face a choice between one hard-line conservative candidate (Ahmadinejad) and one liberal reformist (Khatami). Quite apart from failing to qualify terms such as "reformist", "liberal", and "conservative2, which have very different and dual meanings in Iran than in the West, it is rash to immediately reduce the election to a two horse race. Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, the popular Tehran mayor and veteran, remains firmly in the race and the chances of Mehdi Karoubi, who heads the reformist E'temad Melli Party, or former Prime Minister Mousavi cannot simply be discounted.

It is perhaps tempting, given the generally constructive rhetoric emerging from Washington, to link Khatami’s entry to the tentative prospect of normalised relations between Iran and the US. This is also an error. Firstly, Khatami's electoral prospects are not going to stand or fall on current developments in US-Iranian relations. Secondly, both sides will probably refrain from meaningfully pushing rapprochement until the election in Iran is finished. Thirdly, Khatami does not have a radically different attitude to Ahmadinejad on the main American concerns of Iran’s nuclear programme and its support for Hamas and Hezbollah. Fourthly, the final decision on rapprochement will not be made, in Tehran, by the president’s office- whoever is occupying it.

In any case, the election in June will not be fought over rapprochement with the US. Instead, if the contest comes down to a battle between Khatami and Ahmadinejad, it will be over presidential legacies and broken promises. Ahmadinejad’s failure to deliver on his promise to improve economic and employment conditions, at a time of increased oil revenue, has led to widespread disillusionment. Khatami has claimed a better economic record as president, yet he failed to deliver the reforms and greater openness his supporters sought.

Many questions, however, remain. Will Khatami’s entry damage the reformists’ prospects, uniting the conservatives against him, as Khatami must have feared? What will be the response of the influential former President Hashemi Rafsanjani who, according to different sources, is either refusing to support Khatami or trying to persuade Karoubi to step aside in favour of him?