Show of Unity on Iraq Shows Its Differences

An international conference meant to throw united support behind Iraq was marred by conflict Tuesday as some delegates complained that the gathering did not call for postponing Iraqi elections or setting a timetable for U.S.-led forces to pull out of the country.

The meeting -- which included representatives from the Group of 8 leading industrialized countries, the United Nations, the Arab League, the Organization of the Islamic Conference, Iraq’s six immediate neighbors and others -- was called to shore up the nation-building effort amid Iraq’s continuing violence.

In the end, the unanimous final communique stuck to the most universally acceptable points among delegates. It urged Iraq’s diverse political and religious groups to take part in the country’s election scheduled for January, called for an end to the swelling violence and pledged to support the emerging government.

The two-day meeting unfolded before an uncomfortable backdrop: Tensions are strong between Iran and the United States, anger is intense over the recent U.S.-led assault on the Iraqi city of Fallouja, and many Arabs dismiss the interim Iraqi government as a puppet of the United States.

Defending the U.S. military presence in his country, Iraqi interim Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari told delegates Tuesday that the troops must stay until Iraqi security forces were strong enough to keep the peace. It was a bold stance in a part of the world where American-led forces are seen not as peacekeepers but as the primary source of Iraq’s instability.

“We must guarantee that all sectors of the Iraqi electorate have an equal chance to cast their vote free from intimidation, terror and fear,” Zebari said.

In the weeks leading up to the meeting, delegates had argued over whether to declare a deadline for troops to pull out of Iraq. In the end -- to the disappointment of Iran, France and Syria -- they decided not to.

Instead, the delegates had to be content with a reminder to the foreign forces that their mandate was “not open-ended.”

“We, and others, would have liked more precise language” on the withdrawal of troops, French Foreign Minister Michel Barnier said. But, he added, “this was a necessary step to the moment of truth: the January elections.”

Speaking with reporters in the lobby of a beachfront hotel, Iran’s foreign minister was more blunt. “Foreign troops have to be out of Iraq as soon as possible,” Kamal Kharrazi said. As long as the Americans stay, he said, “there will be enough excuse and pretext for those resisting.”

The gathering was tinged with apprehension about the approaching election, which the Iraqi government and the Americans say will take place Jan. 30 despite the continuing bloodshed and threats of boycott.

Some of Iraq’s minority Sunni Muslims, who wielded great power during the rule of Saddam Hussein and felt disenfranchised by the U.S.-led invasion, have said they will boycott the voting. Some observers fear that a partial election could do more harm than good, feeding the insurgency and creating hard feelings among Sunnis regionwide.

There is concern among Iraq’s neighbors about whether the election should take place as scheduled, and some delegates lobbied for postponement. Officials in countries with Sunni majorities -- Jordan, Saudi Arabia and Egypt -- argued in private diplomatic conversations that the election would be unfair without Iraq’s Sunnis.

But others argued that a delay could be dangerous if it convinced Iraqis that the United States was not sincere about establishing a free, democratic nation.

“If the election is not held, you have a feeling of deprivation,” said Malaysian Foreign Minister Syed Hamid Albar, who represented the Organization of the Islamic Conference. “If it is held, you have a feeling of injustice.”

The meetings were colored by anger over the recent bloodshed in Fallouja, where U.S. officials say about 1,200 Iraqi insurgents were killed in the last few weeks. A much-aired videotape of Marines entering a mosque and shooting to death a wounded Iraqi also has deeply angered the Arab world.

Some delegates pressed for reconciliation between the Iraqi government and militants willing to renounce violence. Bahrain offered to hold a conference for all Iraqi factions, but Zebari was leery at the prospect.

“We believe the best place for national reconciliation to take place is in Baghdad,” he said Tuesday.

He also criticized “those who believe in violence, in slaughtering children in the street, beheading people.... Those people have no place in the new Iraq.”

When Zebari took the microphone at a news conference, Arab journalists shouted questions about Fallouja and the possibility that Sunnis would not participate in the election.

“Fallouja is an Iraqi town and Fallouja citizens are Iraqi citizens,” the foreign minister said. “Military operations started after we ran out of nonmilitary solutions. The fight came to rid the country of car bombers and terrorists.”

There had been speculation that U.S. Secretary of State Colin L. Powell might hold talks with Iranian officials on the sidelines of the conference, but tensions remained thick between the nations. Kharrazi, the Iranian foreign minister, bridled at the suggestion that his country was cooperating with the Americans by supporting Iraq.

“Of course we’re not working with the United States in Iraq,” he said. “We’re just doing our job in terms of helping Iraqis solve their problems.”

Kharrazi was seated next to Powell during the conference dinner Monday night; it was the most extensive official contact between the countries in years. But asked Tuesday what the two men had talked about while they ate, the Iranian said sharply, “We didn’t discuss anything.”

“We shook hands and enjoyed dinner and exchanged polite conversation,” Powell told ABC News.

Powell held out hope that the U.S. might one day resume diplomatic relations, which were severed in 1979 after Iranians seized the U.S. Embassy in Tehran and took 52 Americans hostage.

“In due course, it might turn out to be the case,” Powell told ABC. “It is not in the best interests of international relations for there to be permanent enmity or animosity between two states.”

At the same time, Powell stressed that such a reversal could come about only if Tehran ended activities that had caused President Bush to include it on his “axis of evil” list in his 2002 State of the Union address.

Powell noted that “there is a history here, a 25-year history of difficult relations with Iran.” He cited the country’s support for terrorism, including groups such as Hezbollah, and its nuclear program. Tehran says it is developing nuclear power to generate electricity, but the U.S. is concerned that the real goal is to make an atomic weapon.

The decades-old antagonism between the U.S. and Iran grew more complicated with the American-led invasion of Iraq last year. U.S. officials worry about the flow of arms, money and fighters into Iraq from Iran. Powell said en route to the meeting that U.S. officials suspected Iran also might be trying to promote friendly candidates for the January election.

In a nod to concerns about foreign tampering in the political process, the delegates Tuesday pledged to follow “the principles of good neighborly relations and noninterference in the internal affairs of other nations.”