While the first message of the deal between the Netanyahu-Mofaz duo is addressed to Iran, especially on the eve of the nuclear negotiations round between Tehran and the P5+1 states on May 23, the Khamenei-Ahmadinejad command cannot simply wager on the Israeli opposition's disgust vis-à-vis the stench of this deal, in order to distance the cup of the military attack against the nuclear facilities. And while the American Time magazine considered that the letter is addressed to both Iran and President Barack Obama's administration, saying that the Hebrew state was making its way toward the strike, Khamenei can also not wager on Mofaz' reluctance, after the latter suddenly accepted the alliance with the Israeli prime minister a few days after having described him of being a liar. True, the widest governmental coalition in Israel's history will allow Netanyahu to pass any law in Knesset. But what is also true is that the economic difficulties and the amendment of the military service law to spare the Jewish hardliners from it are not urgent to the point of forcing the Likud leader to seek a safety raft in what the opposition dubbed an “alliance of the cowards” between his party and Kadima. Israel is thus heralding the era of the widest governmental coalition or the largest political front (94 out of 120 deputies in Knesset) to manage the peace and war decisions, as well as the negotiations. And while no one in Israel gives Mofaz a zero at the level of his political approach (he is a dove in the opposition and an oscillating hawk in the army and in power) or at the level of his principles, none among the Palestinians believes Netanyahu as he is talking – following the deal – about his intentions to bring them back to the negotiations table in order to make peace. In form, the talk is about moving Israel toward the stage of preparation for peace with the Palestinian side which has nothing left but the international resolutions. However, behind the stench of the secret deal, there are doubts surrounding the beginning of the preparations for the stage of comprehensive war with Iran. In order to distance the threat of the strike, the West is still relying on the sword of the sanctions to get Iran to suspend its nuclear program. As to Tehran's wager, it is on leading the West toward further negotiation rounds that would extend the testing of intentions without any set deadline. What is certain nonetheless is that Washington and the European capitals allied with it in the increase of the sanctions', have sent enough signals saying that the rules of the game had changed and that Tehran was no longer in a position qualifying it to continue using the same old maneuvers or threatening with conditions for a greater deal. There is the stench of a deal in Israel, while Iran is seeking another deal, although the Americans and the Europeans are convinced they are able to prevent the Shiite Crescent – with the wealth of its region and its control over the maritime passageways – from being swallowed up by Tehran's fundamentalists. The rules of the game have changed and American Vice President Joe Biden is counting on Ahmadinejad's “disappearance” in two years. But what is more important is that he clearly determined Washington's perception – on the eve of the Baghdad round – of the changes which affected Tehran's regional influence after Syria has become weak and under siege, knowing that this is the only regime allied with Tehran in the region, while Iran itself does not conceal the impact of the American-European sanctions on it. The nuclear program is a red line. Is this a mere slogan issued by Obama's deputy to reassure the Israelis during the year of the American elections? And if it is true that Netanyahu succumbed to Obama's need to avoid the surprise of an Israeli strike against Iran this year, what was the price of the Likud-Kadima deal? The pragmatism of the Iranian regime – which generated controversy in the Hebrew state prior to the surprise of the two parties – definitely means that the Iranian command is not reassured about the alliance between the liar and the reluctant, just like the West is expressing its disgruntlement toward the Iranian dupery. And as long as it is exerting pressures to get Tehran to adopt practical measures during the Baghdad round, the scenario of the crisis seems ready: - Firstly because Khamenei will be unable to offer a public concession at the level of the nuclear file in exchange of the lifting – even the gradual one – of the sanctions, and will especially not tolerate the urgent search of the Parchin military compound. - Secondly because the West did not carry out a trade-off at the level of the nuclear program in exchange for an Iranian influence over the Gulf and the Hormuz Strait back when the Syrian ally enjoyed margins of maneuvers. So, why would it do so while this ally is under siege? - Thirdly, what is worse than America's and Europe's acceptance of Iran's hegemony over the Gulf region is the agreement to see Iran swallowing up Iraq, even if under the slogan of unity, while allowing Tehran to control massive oil reserves. Between the stench in Israel and the tug of war in Iran, what harm would it do to the West if the dance of death were to expand in the region?
