Moqtada al-Sadr declines to be an American target for the second time.

The Americans have made it clear that they wish to have direct, peaceful talks with Moqtada al-Sadr. As I pointed out recently, the last time al-Sadr attended peace talks the Americans tried to kill him. I always thought that this would make getting al-Sadr to attend future peace talks almost impossible to achieve, and so it turns out. Al-Sadr has utterly rejected the American advances.

"There is nothing to talk about," he said angrily. "The Americans are occupiers and thieves, and they must set a timetable to leave this country. We must know that they are leaving, and we must know when." He has reason to be wary of US offers to negotiate. As revealed by The Independent last month, respected Iraqi political figures believe the US army tried to kill or capture Mr Sadr after luring him to peace talks in Najaf in 2004.

"We are fighting the enemy that is greater in strength, but we are in the right," he said. "Even if that means our deaths, we will not stand idly by and suffer from this occupation. Islam exhorts us to die with dignity rather than live in shame."

This is a further example of the lack of coherence in the American plans. They have suddenly realised that al-Sadr might be important in any peace talks with the insurgency, but their previous attempts to murder him as he attended peace talks have made his attendance at any future peace talks almost impossible to organise.

As I said at the time: "It is hard to believe that an order to engage in this kind of treachery and double dealing could have come from anywhere but the very heights of the Bush administration. To allow an enemy to attend peace talks at which you attempt to kill them has got to be the lowest of the low. How could anyone ever again agree to attend any conference or negotiations that these people attempt to set up?"

And as predicted, al-Sadr has given this as the reason why he will not attend any future peace talks:

The Shia cleric told The Independent on Sunday in an exclusive interview: "The Americans have tried to kill me in the past, but have failed... It is certain that the Americans still want me dead and are still trying to assassinate me.

"I am an Iraqi, I am a Muslim, I am free and I reject all forms of occupation. I want to help the Iraqi people. This is everything the Americans hate."

So, due to past American tactics, another avenue to ending the occupation with Iraqi co-operation is closed.

My objection to their attempting to kill al-Sadr as he attended peace talks wasn't simply that it was objectionable from a moral standpoint, though it was certainly that, it was also that such a tactic could only be attempted once and closed the door to all further communication with the al-Sadr and the Mahdi Army.

The order to kill al-Sadr as he attended peace talks must have come from quite high up the food chain, and ranks beside the decision to attempt to kidnap Mohammed Jafari and General Minojahar Frouzanda in a botched raid in Arbil whilst they were on an official visit to meet with Iraqi President, as a further example of the Bush regime feeling that they can operate outside the standard rules of warfare and that they can do so with impunity.

Al-Sadr's refusal to meet with them again proves that this is not the case. There are consequences to such actions.

As Bush might say, "Fool me once...."