In every sense, the meeting between the Iranian and US ambassadors in Baghdad on Monday was a positive turn in the tide for two countries still locked in confrontation.

Should this be hailed as a sign of a more pragmatic approach by both countries?

With talks confined to the subject of Iraq's security, the meeting offered a phenomenal opportunity.

The meeting, the second between Iranian and US officials in recent months, exhibited a subtle change in American diplomacy.

The change is a realistic approach to Iraq issues.

The US had refused to have dealings with Iran. But this policy was no longer workable. The reality of the Middle East is that the US cannot ignore Iran.

Iran said the two countries will meet again in less than a month.

The two sides' positive comments on the meeting may help move further talks forward.

Calling the meeting "businesslike", the US envoy agreed at "the level of policy and principle" that the Iranian position as articulated by his counterpart was very close to that of the US.

Despite the reported bluntness of some of the exchanges, there was broad policy agreement between the two envoys.

The meeting occurred in the midst of international tension.

Officials from the US, Japan, France and Britain raised concerns on Friday over the comments of Mohamed ElBaradei, director-general of the International Atomic Energy Agency, on Iran's uranium enrichment.

ElBaradei has called for a negotiated solution to Iran's nuclear issue, proposing that Iran be allowed to retain a limited enrichment program.

At the same time, the US has been conducting large-scale war games in the Gulf.

The ice-breaking session, according to both sides, did not veer into other difficult issues that encumber the US-Iranian relationship, with its more than a quarter century history of diplomatic estrangement.

Iran proposed what it called a trilateral forum in which the US, Iran and Iraq could meet regularly to discuss security matters.

The problems dividing the US and Iran remain formidable. Iran said it has no intention of backing down over its nuclear program, which the US claims is focused on building a nuclear weapon.

As long as the door to negotiations is left open, the two countries are likely to at least narrow their difference.

(China Daily May 30, 2007)