Talk of a possible Israeli attack on Iran has entered a dangerous phase, with the likes of John Bolton, the former American ambassador to the United Nations, specifying when this attack is most likely to be carried out.
According to Bolton, a prominent propagator of war and an anti-United Nations (read diplomacy) advocate, the attack would have to be between November and January because Tel Aviv wouldn't want to put its plans on hold with the inauguration of a new American president. Time is running out and Israel should strike sooner, he has suggested.
The statement of the hawkish Bolton comes as the United States seems to be taking a backseat to others in addressing regional issues.
This was apparent in the Doha Agreement for Lebanon, the recent negotiations between Syria and Israel in Turkey, and the recent truce between Israel and Hamas - all seemingly without US approval.
Thus the American neocons are looking for another player to engage in their favourite war games. Israel has an interest in stopping Iran's nuclear programme and is willing to do whatever it can, with its recent military exercise in preparation for such an attack serving as a prime example.
Threatening to attack Iran only ignites fear and suspicion. We know now that the issue with Iran is not just its nuclear programme. Instead, it is being used as an excuse to reshape Western strategies in the region.
At the moment, the EU package to Iran is the best option on the table and should be considered seriously by both sides. If it is indeed accepted, it would entail serious negotiations over Iran's nuclear programme.
For its part, the Iranian leadership should not participate in this dangerous verbal diatribe because it only makes matters worse. There is a greater need now more than ever to engage in direct negotiations to avoid another catastrophe in the region.
