There was an article, I can’t remember who by, in the WSJ detailing Carter’s approach to the ME question. He wanted the “big bang,” a comprehensive settlement, of everything: Egypt, Syria, Jordan, the Palestinians, Israel, the whole thing. Coming from the perspective (shared by Obama btw) that Israel’s existence creates war and terrorism, the trick is to negotiate it out of existence.

Sadat was interested in peace with Israel, facing threats internally and on his Sudanese and Libyan borders. He broke, deliberately, with Carter and made his peace. Now Carter was in a bind. He officially sanctioned the deal though he seethed at it.

Now, we have not even a Sadat eager for a side-deal. Hamas and Hezbollah will stop attacking Israel, nor will Iran (the latter for domestic reasons). Syria will not stop holding on to Lebanon nor will it deal with Israel, who in turn will not deal with it either.

Obama can offer all the carrots he wants, he cannot get even a side-deal. He can tell Assad there will be no indictment. What would Assad care one way or another? An indictment is meaningless, only military action removing him is a threat.

Israel is likely to bet on military action, not diplomacy, no matter what Obama says or offers. In fact, Obama’s habit of throwing allies like Eastern Europe or India under the bus means no one in Israel is likely to trust him, his Muslim background and sympathies and pro-Muslim Baker/Power aides aside.

Iran is likely to up it’s hand in the region, and Obama can offer them nothing but abject surrender that would make them happy.

A fool’s errand, by a fool.