Having handed Iraq to Iran, the US faces a strategic dilemma of enormous proportions, writes Mustafa El-Labbad Up to 1.2 million Iraqis may have been killed since the invasion of Iraq five years ago and many more have been displaced or have left the country. The US invaded Iraq to seize its oil, and what it did altered the balance of power in the region for years to come. Iraq, being a neighbour to six countries all with considerable weight in the region, is a major geopolitical asset. Since the Bush administration declared itself victorious in Iraq in summer 2003, resistance operations have not abated. Many inside and outside the region may agree today that the war was a big mistake and that the political process that followed was disastrous. But no one wants to see the Americans out yet -- no one, that is, except Iran. The invasion of Iraq has undermined the region's moderates, such as Egypt and Saudi Arabia, while boosting the fortunes of Tehran. Now the Americans cannot get out of Iraq without reaching some understanding with Iran. It is almost a classical standoff. The Americans have troops all over Iraq, but it is the Iranians who are running the show. Neither has managed to edge the other out of the picture. Tehran doesn't have the military wherewithal to expel the Americans, and Washington cannot remove Iran's allies from power. The latter not only control the country's politics, but also run their own militia inside the interior and foreign ministries. Shia organisations such as the Supreme Council of the Islamic Revolution in Iraq, Al-Daawa Party, Al-Fadila Party and the Sadr current have one thing in common -- they are all loyal to Tehran. Throughout history, Iran measured its external clout by its ability to control Iraq. The Safavids and Qajars signed treaties with the Ottomans, in which the provinces of Mosul, Baghdad and Basra featured highly. These treaties gave Iran, among other things, the right to supervise holy Shia shrines in Najaf and Karbala. In the early 16th century, Iran's Safavid ruler, Shah Abbas, travelled from his capital Asfahan to Najaf on foot, where he swept the tomb of the prophet's cousin, Ali. Returning home, Abbas had himself declared on the official currency as the "Dog of Ali's Threshold", turning an act of piety into a political claim. Within the span of three centuries, Iran signed with the Ottomans 14 treaties all tackling the issue of Iraqi borders. The US occupation of Iraq gave Iran a rare opportunity to spread its influence inside Iraq. Through its Shia connections and military and financial means, Tehran has more influence today in Iraq than it ever had in Ottoman times. The Iraq-Iran war, started by Saddam Hussein, while fomenting divisions within Iraqi society, gave Iran the incentive to forge strong alliances within Iraq. Iran was hoping for an opportunity to turn things around in Iraq; the Americans provided it. For all their differences, the Americans and the Iranians had to sit down and talk about Iraq. Washington was pushing the Iranians on the nuclear front in order to make them give way in Iraq. But Iran, aware of its advantage, wanted a serious quid pro quo. Iran also talked to Germany, France and the UK, but the talks failed. This is because Iran wanted international recognition of its regional role. This was something the Europeans couldn't promise; only the Americans could do that. Iran has infiltrated Iraqi politics under the very nose of the US occupation. In Iraq, the Iranians need no help from the Americans. But in the region, they do. The Iranians cannot have international recognition of their regional role without a green light from the US. Until then, Iran will keep obstructing the US every step of the way, from Iraq to Palestine. Iran has its ambitions, but it is not unaware of its limitations. The Iranians know that they can frustrate the Americans in the region, but they need the Americans for their regional role to be officially recognised. This is the nature of the current standoff in Iraq. Iran is not going to allow a US-backed, Sunni-dominated, anti-Iranian regime in Baghdad. And the Americans are not going to allow Iraq to fall under Iran's control. For the time being, the Americans are still hoping to leave Iraq in the hands of a government that would keep the Iranians at bay. And the Iranians want the Americans to turn around and run. Over the past few months, the Bush administration has adapted its negotiating tactics to some extent. But because of its lack of political imagination and poor knowledge of the region, it isn't making much headway. The Americans have had some success, however, with Sunni resistance battling pro-Iranian groups. And for now Washington is keeping a truce of sorts with Tehran, promising not to strike Iran without UN approval. The occupation of Iraq has adjusted the outcome of the Iraq-Iran war, turning it from a draw into a victory. The Iraq-Iran war may have ended 20 years ago, but the Iranians are reaping the fruits -- without having to fire a shot. Washington started a war that it doesn't know how to end. At one point, the Americans will have to recognise that the Iranians are not going to turn tail and run. Tehran is not only spearheading resistance to US-Zionist schemes in Lebanon and Palestine. It is the ultimate hand behind Iraq's politicians.
