Last night Tony Blair embraced the need for dialogue with the Syrian regime and its Iranian allies, after sending his envoy, Sir Nigel Sheinwald, on a secret reconciliation mission to President Assad, the Syrian leader.

In the coming weeks they are likely to be joined by some of the most senior figures in the Washington establishment, where neoconservative ideology is fast giving way to tried-and-tested realpolitik.

James Baker, the former secretary of state and co-chair of the Iraqi Study Group, is expected to report back to President Bush by the end of the year that the former members of the “axis of evil” are the ideal partners to help to extricate US and British troops from the quagmire of Iraq.

There is no question that Iran and Syria have enormous influence over their neighbour and could help to stabilise Iraq, where at present they are widely suspected of destabilising it.

Syria is home to tens of thousands of Iraqi expatriates, including members of the ousted Baathist regime, who continue to lead, arm and fund the insurgency across the border in Iraq.

Iran wields similar power over the growing Shia Muslim militias, who control much of central and southern Iraq and are responsible for most of the attacks against British forces based in and around Basra.

If these players were brought into the Iraqi process, and could be persuaded to help, it would certainly strip away support to some of the most dangerous groups.

Yet no one seems to have bothered to ask Syria and Iran if they are ready to bail out their erstwhile enemies.

Syria remembers the time it was described in Washington as “low-hanging fruit” because the regime seemed so weak it was ready for picking. It is also still smarting from its humiliating ousting from neighbouring Lebanon, largely because of American pressure.

Iran has even deeper antipathy towards America and the West. It is still stated US policy that America reserves the right to use force against Iran if it continues with its controversial nuclear programme.

As of yesterday it was in the interests of both countries to see America and Britain bogged down in Iraq and prevented from any further interference in the region.

Both countries have good reason to believe that relations are more likely to deteriorate than improve.

A United Nations investigation into the assassination of Rafik Hariri, the former Lebanese prime minister, is expected to name suspects by the end of the year. The list could include Syrian officials, possibly even members of Mr Assad’s ruling family. Washington and London have consistently backed the investigation and are pressing for any murder suspects to stand trial in a special tribunal, approved by the Lebanese Government yesterday.

America and Britain are also leading efforts at the UN to win support in the Security Council for sanctions against Iran. It has been warned to halt its uranium enrichment work.

Then there is the Arab-Israeli conflict. Syria and Iran openly support groups such as Hezbollah, the Shia militia in Lebanon, and Hamas, the militant Palestinian movement. Both are regarded as terrorist organisations by Washington and London.

On the surface, the hope of overcoming such obstacles between the two sides seems remote. Yet Tehran and Damascus have shown themselves in the past to be experts in the art of realpolitik and always open to a new offer and the promise of a deal.

With that in mind Mr Bush and Mr Blair can comfort themselves that this is a road worth travelling. But they should be warned that they had better come prepared with a generous offer. Asking their new friends in Iran and Syria to bail them out of Iraq will not come cheap.

Times Recommends

• Times Charity Appeal: SolarAid
• Is it Black Monday all over again for Dubai?
• Behind the scenes at the biggest deal