This is at a time when talks on long-term strategic cooperation between Baghdad and Washington have stalled. That will have pleased Tehran. The agreement they are trying to reach would contradict Iranian interests.

The Iraqi prime minister is in an awkward situation. He wants good relations both with Iran and the United States. Ideally, he would like to have agreements with both of them, but the tensions between Iran and the United States make this all but impossible.

What should Maliki do? He cannot do without Iran's help, considering its influence on Iraq's Shiites. Iran could explode the situation in Iraq at any time, but it also could choose to reduce tensions. In any event, the Iraqi prime minister cannot afford to quarrel with Tehran.

But at the same time, he badly needs a treaty with the United States.

The U.N. mandate for the international military presence in Iraq expires on Dec. 31, and the Iraqi security forces are far from strong enough to stand alone without Western support. Maliki cannot replace international troops with Iranian forces. Neither the United States nor Iraq's Arab neighbors would allow this to happen, and even if they did, it probably would lead to conflict with Iraq's Sunnis and Kurds. When Tehran offered aid to Baghdad, most probably it did not mean to send its troops there -- this would be way too much.

The Iraqi prime minister's only option is to attempt the Herculean task of reconciling the United States and Iran, its two greatest allies, and the only powers that can guarantee tranquility in Iraq. So far he has made little progress. During his latest trip to Tehran, he tried at least to convince the Iranian government that a treaty between Baghdad and Washington would not threaten Iran.

Maliki tried to reassure the Iranians that Iraq would not become a bridgehead for U.S. aggression against neighboring countries. This was after the British Independent and several other newspapers published a supposedly leaked draft of the agreement between Baghdad and Washington. There is no obvious evidence on the document's authenticity, but the publications made a lot of noise, threatening to wreck the talks between Iraq and the United States.

The most controversial of the "draft treaty's" clauses provide for establishment of about 50 U.S. military bases on Iraqi territory; immunity for American servicemen and professional soldiers from Iraqi laws; freedom of action for the United States in conducting arrests and taking military action without preliminary consultations with the authorities; control over Iraq's air space at an altitude below around 28,000 feet; control over Iraq's military contracts and security decisions for the next few years; and the right to attack "any country that poses a threat to international stability" from Iraqi territory. The last is a clear reference to Iran.

These provisions were bound to cause indignation both in Iraq and beyond, most of all in Tehran. U.S. officials, however, deny the existence of such ideas in the draft agreement.

Next: What will happen if Obama wins the U.S. presidency?

(Maria Appakova is a commentator for RIA Novosti. This article is reprinted by permission of RIA Novosti. The opinions expressed in this article are the author's and do not necessarily represent those of RIA Novosti.)

(United Press International's "Outside View" commentaries are written by outside contributors who specialize in a variety of important issues. The views expressed do not necessarily reflect those of United Press International. In the interests of creating an open forum, original submissions are invited.)

Related Links
Iraq: The first technology war of the 21st century

Memory Foam Mattress Review

SPACE MEDIA NETWORK PROMOTIONS Solar Energy Solutions Tempur-Pedic Mattress Comparison ... Newsletters :: SpaceDaily :: SpaceWar :: TerraDaily :: Energy Daily XML Feeds :: Space News :: Earth News :: War News :: Solar Energy News