Click
photo to play
Length: 2:40
JOHN ROBERTS: More now on the developments today from
CNN's Michael Ware in Baghdad, where it is also just
becoming daybreak. Michael, how could these new
relationships change the landscape in Iraq? There are
many people who believe that Iran already wields more
power in certain sectors of the Iraqi government than
the United States does. Put that together with Syria,
and does it become much more powerful?
MICHAEL WARE, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, absolutely,
John.
I mean, in fact, it's almost apparent that no matter
who is footing the bill, no matter who has the
141,000 troops here on the ground, be that America,
it's nonetheless Iran which has greater sway within
key elements, key factions of this government than
does Washington already.
Now, this is not a new relationship. It's not even a
new series of relationships. Baghdad and Tehran have
been talking to each other almost since the
beginning. We saw, under Prime Minister Jaafari, and
now under Prime Minister Maliki, the closeness of
that relationship become even greater.
I mean, it is nothing new, in that sense. We have an
Iranian ambassador here in Iraq. And, with Syria,
though this is now the formalization of the renewal
of the relationship, there has been communication
between Baghdad and Damascus for some time now.
The question is whether it's in anyone's interest for
the instability to end, essentially, for the attacks
against U.S. forces to stop. And the answer is no.
These guys can talk as much as they like, but, even
here in Iraq, it's still within many people's
interests within the government to see the Americans
attacked.
ROBERTS: Yeah. I was wondering, though, in terms of
the sectarian warfare that threatens to tear the
country apart, Michael, with both Syria and Iran now
getting involved in a diplomatic level with Iraq, is
there any expectation that that sectarian violence
might diminish some, at least during this period of
increased diplomatic overture?
WARE: No, not at all, not in the slightest. There's
no indication of that. There's no suggestion of that.
No one is saying that.
And, quite frankly, there's no incentive for that. I
mean, the U.S. -- General Casey, Ambassador
Khalilzad, the U.S. ambassador to Iraq -- have made
it very clear. They say that both Syria and Iran are
fund-- are arming and funding insurgents, and,
indeed, are directly contributing to and inflaming
the sectarian violence.
They have been doing this while they have been
talking for a year anyway. This makes absolutely no
difference to the civil war whatsoever.
ROBERTS: Another day of good news from there.
Michael Ware, as always, thanks very much. Appreciate
it.
Click
photo to play
Length: 4:36
JOHN ROBERTS: CNN is
following this story live from inside both Iran and
Iraq. Joining me from Tehran is Middle East
Correspondent Aneesh Rahman; and from Baghdad, CNN's
Michael Ware.
Michael, we just heard Jamie McIntyre and Barbara
Starr talk about rogue elements, militias that are
funded by Iran. That's long been known about on the
ground there in Iraq, but is there growing concern
about the size of this particular rogue element,
10,000 fighters according to McIntyre?
MICHAEL WARE, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, look, this is
absolutely nothing new. As you yourself said, John, I
mean, the fact that Central Command is now suddenly
saying that it is concerned that this may be
developing is frightening in itself. I mean, Central
Command has known this. They, like us here on the
ground, have been mapping the breaking away of the
factions from Muqtada al-Sadr's Mahdi Army.
So, I mean, this is not startling in the least.
What's startling is the fact that Central Command is
only saying it now and encouching it in such careful
terms.
We have seen that as elements break away from the
mainstream of the Mahdi Army, Iran has stepped in to
support them.
Now, we are seeing Iran stepping in to poach them and
draw them away. This is a period of Iranian
ascendancy. Syria will be capitalizing too, while
America appears weak, with its wheels spinning in the
mud here in the region.
ROBERTS: Iranian ascendancy. Aneesh Raman, do you
think that Iran is genuinely concerned about the
spiraling level of violence in Iraq? Or are these
talks purely designed to upstage American efforts?
ANEESH RAMAN, CNN MICCLE EAST CORRESPONDENT: Well, I
don't think anyone expects any change on the ground
because of the talks this weekend. It is, as you
mentioned, political theater more than anything else.
But Iran doesn't benefit from an Iraq that completely
falls apart. It benefits from a simmering situation
because it has leverage over the United States.
And as things have gotten worse, we have seen a
decrease in the public calls by Iranian leaders for
the U.S. to get out now. There is a quiet sense
within the government that if the U.S. were to do so,
Iran would be left with the situation in Iraq and
would be left fighting a Sunni insurgency that is in
part fighting against Iranian influence and not just
the Americans.
ROBERTS: Michael, do Iran and Syria have the
influence to curb the sectarian violence that's
brewing between Shiites and Sunnis. You know, Syria
is allowing these Sunni fighters and Sunni supporting
fighters to cross the border into Iraq. On the west,
the Shiite government of Iran is funding these Shiite
militias and these breakaway groups as we mentioned.
If they wanted to, could they say, enough, stop?
WARE: Well, they could do that and that would curb
the limit of their involvement. But the fact is that
the civil war here in Iraq that stemmed from those
circumstances under the American occupation now has
its own momentum.
So, even if you could seal the borders, so much blood
has been spilled here, nothing can turn back that
tide. Certainly, not anything in the immediate to
near term. And there is simply no reason for these
countries to stop. Now is their moment of advantage
and they're going to press it while there is a period
of strategic uncertainty in the United States and
America is unable to exert its will here in Iraq.
We're seeing more of the will of Iran being displayed
than that of Washington here on the ground.
ROBERTS: Aneesh Raman, you've spent an awful lot of
time in Tehran. You were also recently in Baghdad. We
spent some time there together, and Michael as well.
And you talked to a lot of people on the streets of
Tehran. Did they support their government's
involvement with these Shiite militias across the
border in Iraq?
RAMAN: Well, publicly they mimic everything that the
government says. You know, Iranians are observers.
They're not participants in this theocracy, nor are
they participants in its decision making.
When you talk to them about foreign affairs, they
really start to tune out. They don't pay much
attention here on the ground. Why? Because their
domestic concerns trump everything else. There's high
unemployment, high inflation. Iran's president was
elected to fix both. He hasn't. And it's actually
hard to find anyone here who thinks Mahmoud
Ahmadinejad will win reelection because of that.
So all of this is more a political theater to them.
They can't do much about it. It's where their
government is choosing to go. They are a bit
concerned in the situation in Iraq. They're watching
it closely. They are quietly concerned that Iran is
spending so much money in Lebanon, in the Palestinian
areas, in Iraq and not as much at home, but there's
very little they can do about that.
ROBERTS: Another emerging and interesting dynamic in
a place that never seems to cease surprising us.
Aneesh Raman in Tehran, Michael Ware in Baghdad,
thanks very much.