The United States and Iran are a long way from a deal over Iraq, but there are alarm bells going off all over the Arab world, and inside Iraq among Sunnis and nationalists, that Washington and Tehran might settle their differences by carving up Iraq. The idea isn't so far-fetched. The United States could settle on some version of the tripartite partiion for Iraq, creating a Kurdish north, a Sunni rump state, and a Shia-dominated south (including most of Baghdad), the scheme proposed in various forms by Sen. Biden, Peter Galbraith, Leslie Gelb, and others. Iran might be happy with that result, since it would dominate the southern bloc and have enormous influence with the Kurds. Alternately, the United States and Iran might agree on joint support for a centralized Iraqi state, under the control of the Shia, which isn't too different from the current arrangement.

The most strident statement of opposition to a U.S.-Iran accord comes, not surprisingly, from the Baath Party. In a declaration released on May 28, the party (which claims to lead the Iraqi resistance), warned that the United States and Iran are determined to eliminate Iraq's "Arab identity," adding:

The US-Iranian alliance is the number one enemy of Iraq and of the Arab nation, for it is an official alliance and is de facto based on wiping out Iraq's Arab identity, dismembering and sharing Iraq's loot and turning Iraq's Arabs into a meaningless neglected minority.

The Baath Party goes on to urge Arab countries to support the Iraqi resistance movement, rejecting negotiations with the United States unless Washington meets the resistance's conditions, centered around a ceasefire and withdrawal plan.

The historical and the decisive riposte against the latest US-Iranian move should be the intensification of the resistance's armed operations based on its combat unity, to reject joining the so called political process, and to stand firm against every divider who wants to create problems in amongst the resistance ranks under whatever pretexts or reasons. The resistance's unity is the only secret password to defeat the US-Iranian invasion and there is no other.

Bombast aside, the central fact of the past four years in Iraq is that if there were no armed Sunni-led reistance to the U.S. invasion and occupation, the American effort would have succeeded in installing a mostly pro-American, Iranian-supported Shia-Kurdish regime in Baghdad, and President Bush's war would have been successful. That doesn't mean that the Baath Party is the dominant force in the resistance. While talking to Iran about exiting Iraq, which is Part I of the new strategy taking shape inside the administration, Washington is also clearly working with Saudi Arabia to corral Sunni resistance leaders and tribes into an anti-Al Qaeda alliance. A good question is: What is the United States telling the Saudis about the prospects of a deal with Iran? How far is Saudi Arabia willing to go to accommodate a deal with Iran? No doubt, at the very least, Washington will give Riyadh iron-clad guarantees that an Iranian-Shia dominated Iraq will not be allowed the threaten the Arab Gulf.

The Baathists know this. From their statement, with its emphasis on unity in the resistance, it seems clear that the party is worried that the resistance will fragment, into pro-Baath and pro-Saudi factions (both opposed to Al Qaeda). And they're warning the Arab Gulf states not to trust the United States:

All the Arab regimes should draw the right hard lesson given by Baghdad meeting in between US and Iranian ambassadors, i.e. all the Arab regimes with no exception are on the list of the US-Iranian deals and compromises regardless of how much these regimes give up and service the US in Iraq and elsewhere.