In the winter of 2013, the Middle East was captivated by then US Secretary of State John Kerry's shuttle diplomacy, watching him hop from Ramallah to Jerusalem, to Amman, over and over again. Kerry was on an obsessive mission to bring peace between Israel and the Palestinians.
Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram
At the time, I told a US official that I was worried. "History suggests that peace efforts in this region culminate with war, what is your fallback position?" The official replied that there was no Plan B.
We all know what ultimately unfolded: The peace process died and three Israeli teens were abducted, triggering the 51-day Operation Protective Edge. Kerry's tennis match with the region's capitals ended with the US flunking Middle East 101 once again.
It was only the latest futile effort at understanding the region. An inexhaustive list includes its ill-fated support of Ayatollah Khomeini during the Carter administration; President George W. Bush's illusion that toppling Saddam would usher in a prosperous Iraq; Condoleezza Rice's insistence that the Palestinian Authority conduct elections that ultimately had Hamas take over Gaza; and Barack Obama's Cairo Address in 2009 and his siding with the protesters who wanted to take down then Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak two years later, which paved the way for the Muslim Brotherhood's rise to power.
Over the past 18 months, the world has been watching the US play another match of regional tennis: the nuclear talks with Iran. Tehran and the West have each been hitting the ball back and forth. We occasionally get news about the deal being "closer" or that the latest draft is "the final offer" and that it is "just a matter of days" or that "the window is closing." Both sides prefer this process to play itself out forever, very much like various inconclusive sporting events. Or as US chief negotiator Rob Malley said, "We are always open to diplomatic arrangements with Iran."
Iran is hardly the most pressing issue on the US foreign policy docket. As for Iran, time is on their side, because a protracted process allows it to continue with the nuclear program. Enrichment levels have already reached 60% purity levels; Tehrna's coffers from trade have been filling up, in part because of the rise in oil and fuels prices and Chinese consumption; and Russia has been buying Iranian arms. On top of that, the Iranian regime is not facing an existential threat.
It is sad that the US has once again fallen into this pattern of having its pursuit of peace lead to a potential war. The Iranians' response to the latest offer has confirmed my suspicions – which are shared by others – that Iran doesn't want a deal but only wants to use the talks to buy time.
The talks have allowed Iran to divert attention from what it really cares about: shortening the time it would take to reach a bomb – the breakout time – to zero. This means it would be ready to break toward a nuclear weapon once the talks collapse and by the time the US comes up with a Plan B, it will have already gotten a bomb.
For Iran, the never-ending tennis match is just a ruse for the real game. From what has been reported in the media, the breakout time currently stands at several weeks. One can assume that Iran will not be foolish enough to show their hand, holding some cards close to the chest. Thus, when the talks are history, they will break toward to bomb and the US will face an excruciating dilemma it had wanted to avoid all along: accepting a nuclear-armed Iran or a bloody war with the murderous regime in Tehran. To paraphrase the famous Churchillian adage, the US was given the choice between war and dishonor; it chose dishonor, but both Israel and the US are facing the real prospect of war.
Subscribe to Israel Hayom's daily newsletter and never miss our top stories!
