TEHRAN (Reuters) — Iran’s decision to attend a regional meeting in Iraq with US officials reflects a more conciliatory approach in its foreign policy and Tehran’s hope it might ease tensions in nuclear and other issues.But analysts say Iran remains wary US officials could use the gathering to berate Iran for what Washington calls its meddling in Iraq. If so, they say this would strengthen the hand of radical voices at home opposed to any rapprochement.

The meeting in Baghdad of Iraq’s neighbours starting on Saturday will provide a rare opportunity for officials from Washington and Tehran, which have not had diplomatic ties for more than a quarter of a century, to sit down at the same table.

Washington has left the door open for bilateral talks.

The meeting comes amid a debate among Iran’s political elite over whether Tehran should use what it sees as bargaining chips in Palestinian territories, Lebanon and Iraq to engage with its arch-foe.

“If the result of this meeting in Baghdad was good, maybe it will be the first step and a good start for negotiations in the future,” said Amir Mohebian, the political editor of the conservative Resalat newspaper. “If the result of this cooperation is a bad reaction from the United States, it will be a signal for any radical in Iran to say that cooperation with the United States has no result.”

“The ball is actually in the (court) of the United States.”

Iran has reason to be cautious, analysts say. Tehran joined multilateral talks with Washington in the wake of the 2001 war in Afghanistan when Iran felt it had been supportive in overthrowing the Taliban, who Washington and Tehran detested.

Shortly after, President George W. Bush branded Iran part of the “axis of evil”, a statement pounced on by Iran’s hardliners as justification for opposing rapprochement. There are those who fear Washington may use similar tactics in Baghdad.

“Now that we have accepted to take part in the meeting, we should end our presence if we see conspiracies,” wrote Hossein Shariatmadari, editor of Iran’s hardline Kayhan daily which regularly launches broadsides against the United States.

Mohebian said he was “not very optimistic”.

But analysts and diplomats say Iran, in the lead up to the Baghdad talks, has toned down its rhetoric on regional issues, a move that could help build US confidence and ease Arab suspicions about Iran’s bigger regional role.

“They are shaping their policy to be more constructive,” said a senior Arab diplomat working in the region. A sworn enemy of Israel and financer of the Islamist Hamas group, Iran has nevertheless welcomed a Saudi-brokered deal for a Palestinian unity government.

It has also talked to Riyadh about ways to ease Lebanon’s political crisis between that country’s US-backed government and an opposition that includes the Iranian-backed Hezbollah.

And it has agreed to go to the meeting in Iraq where Tehran has close ties with its co-religionists, Iraq’s majority Shi’ite Muslims. One Iranian analyst said Iran hoped the meeting in Iraq could “expand to other issues, like the nuclear issue”.

The United States is leading a push for tougher sanctions against Iran after it ignored a February 21 UN deadline to suspend sensitive atomic work, which Washington says is being used to build nuclear warheads. Iran says its plans are purely civilian. Iran has shown no signs of reining in its nuclear work. The analyst, who asked not to be identified, said Iranian foreign policy rhetoric became more radical after the 2005 election of anti-Western President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad but said the president’s comments had toned down amid growing worries among the ruling elite that he was exacerbating Iran’s problems.

But he said any milder tone did not mean Iran would abandon its “proxy forces” in the region that Tehran viewed as “leverage ... in terms of getting concessions”.

Ultimately, foreign policy is determined not by the president but Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the highest authority who analysts say takes decision not in isolation but by drawing on views of several factions among the elite.

Increasingly, as Ahmadinejad has come under pressure over the economy and at the ballot box in December council polls, more moderate voices have called for less confrontation.

Tehran mayor Mohammed Baqer Qalibaf, a prominent moderate conservative who lost to Ahmadinejad in the 2005 presidential race, told a meeting of academics and diplomats this month:

“No longer does the Islamic Republic need to be confrontational because it has all the power ingredients and the necessary confidence to deal with its neighbours and compete with regional and international actors.”