gerard,

I neglected to include France on the list of those who had opposed direct negotiations with Iran concerning Afghanistan for nearly the last decade. 

This latest “news” of Iran’s inclusion is but a very public acknowledgment, I believe, intended to exhibit public pressure.

The point is, discussions with Iran in regards to Afghanistan have been steadily moving/changing/progressing since late 2001. - When the Head of the Afghan Desk at the State Dept. meets with Iranian officials in Brussels (4 times between 2002 - 07) it’s a fair bet Afghanistan is a leading topic. - While the State Dept. reports official travel it rarely makes the nightly news or New York Times.

Because it’s not “in the news” doesn’t mean it’s not happening.  And this type of public negotiation with Iran over Afghanistan is not the first.  It is only the first that you’ve recently become aware of during the Obama administration. 

-

This “News” we have both recently seen is not a revelation.  It’s one of many “public diplomatic encounters” with Iran.  I wouldn’t hold my breath.

gerard,

The United States has three (3) times attempted to engage and include Iran in negotiations regarding Afghanistan.  Unfortunately Russia, Italy and the Karzai governments have resisted the idea.  The OIC too has counseled against including Tehran.

My sincerest hope is that one day we can have a discussion on global affairs without your entire focus on the United States.

In any previous decade, this would not be news. Of course Iran has a huge interest in what happens to Afghanistan. I just hope the Sunni/Shiite bullshit doesn’t ruin the opportunities for some final peace. It’s obvious that it’s the two enemy little dogs joining up against the big dog, but so be it. We need to stop the killing.

GRYM: Sorry, my statement was far from clear. It
just struck me as something of a good sign that Iran was included.  After all, we have recently been talking carelessly about bombing Iran so I was surprised to see them included in talks about how to make peace with Afghanistan.

gerard, - “This represents something like a “first” in international efforts—having various nations with differeint concerns come together to try to iron out the complications of a possible agreement to end a war and perhaps prevent other wars.”

-

This is something like a first?  This gathering is but one of hundreds of like in the past decade alone.

This represents something like a “first” in international efforts—having various nations with differeint concerns come together to try to iron out the complications of a possible agreement to end a war and perhaps prevent other wars.

If the minds of most—or even some—of the participants are at least halfway open, a lot will be learned by all, to say the least.  At the most, a precedent may be set for future negotiations and conciliations where vastly different interests are at stake.  Common interests may be discovered and explored.  Sounds better than continued ignorance confounded by continuing war.