The poisoned chalice

Tony Blair's swansong at the Guildhall, which may be his last major speech on foreign policy before such a distinguished gathering prior to his resignation next June, was notable for its major turnaround. Instead of labelling Syria and Iran the leading enemies of the West in fostering international terrorism and violence in Iraq, as he has done in the past, he called them potential partners, and gave a list of what Iran should do to be accepted by the West, otherwise they will be "isolated." As if they care! He also labeled the Arab-Israel conflict as the "core" of all conflicts in the Middle East. It amazes me that a leader of such insight should repeat this shallow observation. How would solving the Palestine conflict, assuming that were possible, cause the reduction of violence in Iraq or cause Iran to stop developing an atomic weapon? I fail to see the logic of it. Would it suddenly persuade the Sunnis or the Shia that America is indeed their friend? No, on the contrary, it would be considered a victory for them and goad them on to further anti-Western efforts.
At the same time Pres. Bush was also back-tracking. In his meeting with PM Olmert in Washington he specifically mentioned that the US is not seeking a military solution to the Iran situation. This is not what he said previously, when he announced that all options were on the table. Iran, already flushed with the "victory" of the Democrats against the Iraq war, are now positively happy. They are not stupid, they see the nuanced back-tracking going on on both sides of the Atlantic. Bush rules out force in solving the Iranian nuclear crisis, and Blair calls for talks with Syria and Iran to solve their problems. This is climb-down time for the US and UK. The Iranians have won a round and see that the US involvement in Iraq is a step too far for them. There will be no more US reinforcements sent to Iraq, instead there will be a backing down, and there certainly is no basis for an American military confrontation with Iran.
Once again, Israel is left alone holding the poisoned chalice. Noone else in the world, although the whole Western world is threatened by the Iranian nuclear gambit, will do anything except talk, while Iran continues furiously to develop its nuclear bomb and prepares to use it on Israel and whoever else it chooses. Such is the level of defeatism and appeasement in the West. So the Islamists did not need to carry out another 9/11 type attack on the US, all they had to do was threaten terrorism and this had the desired effect. By being prepared to die in Iraq, and hitting US forces, they avoided the need to hit the US at home. They have been trying (e.g. the liquid explosive plan on trans-Atlantic flights), however, they can save the major effort for later, no need for it now. They know full well that democracies can't stand casualties, and now the US for all its strength is crumbling in Iraq.
Meanwhile, according to Israeli security chief Avi Dichter, Egypt is conniving in massive arms smuggling into Gaza, just as Syria and Iran have been doing in Lebanon. The strategy is to bleed Israel on two fronts with Hizbollah and Hamas acting as armed insurgents. Those who said that we could not trust Egypt and should not leave security on the Gaza border to them have been proven right.
At present the situation in both the PA and Lebanon is fluid. In the PA there is talk of a Unity Government that may or may not accept the conditions of the international community and Israel to enable negotiations. And in Lebanon the ramifications of the "victory" of Hizbollah in the Lebanon war with Israel are now coming home to roost, as Hizbollah is making a play to take over the Lebanese Government by challenging the anti-Syrian forces to a potential civil war, in the expectation that they will back down rather than risk fighting Hizbollah. Either way things do not look good for the future.