U.S. ambassador to Iraq Zalmay Khalilzad recently sent a message to Iranian officials calling for direct Iran-U.S. talks on Iraq.

Some sources said the Afghan-born U.S. ambassador presented his call in a letter written in Persian.

Afterwards, Seyyed Abdul-Aziz al-Hakim, the leader of the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq (SCIRI), the leading party in Iraq's Shia United Iraqi Alliance, called upon Iran to take part in negotiations with the United States to help stabilize Iraq.

Although it seems that talks between Iran and the United States would be harmless, the question of why the U.S. has asked Iran for help in the current situation still arises.

Out of humanitarian concern, Iran has agreed to hold negotiations with the United States to help Iraq resolve the current crisis.

Iran’s Supreme National Security Council Secretary General Ali Larijani declared at a press conference on Thursday that Iran would appoint a delegation for talks with the U.S. ambassador in the near future.

However, it is odd that this request comes at a time when the United States is piling pressure on the United Nations Security Council to issue a strong-worded statement about Iran’s nuclear program.

Without any evidence, some U.S. officials have repeatedly accused Iran of being behind the insecurity in Iraq, but each time they had to correct themselves by saying that they had no proof of Iranian interference in Iraq.

Some analysts say there are domestic and regional considerations behind the United States’ decision to send negotiation signals to Iran.

Some of them say these signals are a U.S. trap. These analysts believe that with Iran’s nuclear dossier being discussed at the UN Security Council, the United States is trying to create the appearance that Iran is cooperating with the U.S. in efforts to subdue the terrorists in Iraq in order to provoke terrorist actions against Iran.

On the other hand, neighboring Arab countries will suspect that Iran is cooperating with the United States in restricting the religious minorities and helping the Shias in Iraq. Accordingly, this suspicion will influence Iran’s ties with regional Arab countries.

Both scenarios would benefit the United States.

However, nothing is fixed in political and international relations, and many nations which were once enemies later set aside their animosities due to certain political expediencies, as was the case in U.S. relations with Vietnam and Japan.

Meanwhile, Iran has political influence, especially in the region, which it can use to help resolve many crises.

With the United States facing a security challenge in Iraq, Iran can use its spiritual influence in the country to help the Iraqi people and prevent a possible humanitarian catastrophe in the neighboring country.

The possible Iran-U.S. talks will either bear fruit and open a new chapter in Iran’s international relations, or will be fruitless, in which case the two countries will lose nothing.

However, we must wait for further analysis of the U.S. signals. Any prejudgment or irresponsible comments may influence the talks, which would be harmful for the Iraqi people.