Iran Feature: And Now We Bring You This Diversion from Iraq

UPDATE 1730 GMT: So let's check in, after Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki's day in Tehran, to see if "diversion" is the right word....

Al-Maliki saw the Supreme Leader, who said, "Formation of a government as soon as possible and establishment of full security are among the important needs of Iraq because development and reconstruction of Iraq...can't be achieved without these two [conditions]." He continued, "All politicians and officials in Iraq should focus on formation of a new government as soon as possible," and then had a little dig at Washington, "I wish the almighty God ends America's menace over Iraq as soon as possible ... it will solve the Iraqi nation's problems."

It was more platitudes when al-Maliki saw Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who put out the sound-bite, "Regional countries and states can manage themselves and the region hand in hand, and by providing for one another's needs they can become each others supporters....Iran completely supports a united, strong and independent Iraq which serves the Iraqi people, Islamic ideals and progress of the region."

But for the most brazen tip-off --- either from al-Maliki or from Iranian state media putting words in his mouth --- that this was primarily a showpiece for the legitimacy of the Iranian Government rather than, in the overblown coverage of this morning, proof of Iran putting together Baghdad's leadership, let's close with the Iraqi Prime Minister's supposed greeting to Ahmadinejad....

""During your visit to Lebanon, the Zionist regime [of Israel] was on high [military] alert, which proved they are really cowards."

---

It's still 24 hours until the Supreme Leader seizes the headlines and, he hopes, the image of undisputed legitimacy with his trip to the religious centre of Qom. So, in the lull, we are treated to a propaganda special involving Iran's neighbour Iraq.

All weekend Iranian state media have been trumpeting the visit of Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki to Tehran. No surprises there: the photo opportunity boosts the message of President Ahmadinejad and the Supreme Leader that Iran is a leader of the region as it establishes its independence from attempted "Western" domination.

And no surprise that others would not be happy with that message. Al-Maliki's rival Iyad Allawi appeared on CNN yesterday to declare, "We know that unfortunately Iran is trying to wreak havoc on the region, and trying to destabilize the region by destabilizing Iraq, and destabilizing Lebanon and destabilizing the Palestinian issue."

Even more dramatic --- and being given lots of airtime by the BBC this morning --- is Sunday's breathless article in The Observer of London: "Iran has brokered a critical deal with its regional neighbours that could see a pro-Tehran government installed in Iraq....The Islamic republic was instrumental in forming an alliance between Iraq's Nouri al-Maliki, who is vying for a second term as prime minister, and the country's powerful radical Shia cleric leader, Moqtada al-Sadr."

The actual story is far more mundane, far more complicated, and far more concerned with Baghdad rather than Tehran. It is now 7 1/2 months since March's national elections, and --- with no party coming close to a majority of Parliamentary seats --- the haggling between factions continues. Al-Maliki is manoeuvring for a coalition for some (but not all) Shi'a parties that will keep him in power, and so he makes a visit to the region's other country with a Shi'a majority. Allawi wants to lead the next Government, so he counters with the accusation that Iran is pulling al-Maliki's strings. Martin Chulov, The Observer reporter, is fed information by "senior Iraqi officials" who are probably hostile to al-Maliki (significantly, the only source he names is Allawi's Osama al-Najaifi).

The down-and-dirty of politics is that Iran has an interest in a co-operative Iraqi government and an opportunity for political and economic influence. So does the US. So do Saudi Arabia and Syria, both of whom are also involved in discussions with Iraqi doors.

None of that necessarily translates to "dominance". Indeed, the key actors on Iraq's political stage are still Iraqis. Yet, because local politics often carries out its battles through propaganda about "the region", we are always prey to the diversion.

The Iranian Government, almost always needing the prop of the regional and international against domestic difficulties, bigs itself up. Others who see Iran primarily in those regional and international terms, rather than viewing it through the political, economic, and legal issues inside the country, hold up "the threat". And so it goes....

(A possible postscript, tucked away in the Chulov article. There may be an exception to my analysis in these words from "a senior Obama administration official": 

I would say Iraq is a sovereign government and we are not party to such discussions. With reference to the degree that Iraq's neighbours seek to play a constructive role, that is something we welcome. I emphasise "constructive". It is not about interaction with Iraq that matters but the quality of that interaction. If it is destructive, we condemn that.

Now is that official, if we take his words as a statement for the Administration, playing down the "Iran threat" story because Washington does not want an Iraqi diversion from the other issues involving Tehran, both outside and inside the country? And if so, is that because the US Government thinks the Number One Game now is the domestic wobbling of the Iranian regime or a possible "grand settlement" --- involving not only uranium enrichment but also Afghanistan, Iraq, and other parts of the Middle East --- with that regime?)