On Saturday U.S. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta stopped by the Saban Forum in Washington, marked by a large Kadima presence, to convey two messages to Israel. First, don't attack Iran alone, but in full coordination with the U.S. Second, "get back to the damn table" and restart negotiations with the Palestinians. While not Siamese twins, there is a certain connection between the two issues. On efforts to foil Iran's nuclear ambitions, Panetta who is a friend of Israel is bursting through an open door. More than the calf wants to suckle, the cow wants to nurse. It is Jerusalem that seeks closer cooperation with Washington, with enlightened Western countries and the U.N. It is they who show reluctance and hesitancy, maintaining a flaccid relationship at best. Any political, diplomatic or even violent act that America seeks to undertake would be warmly welcomed in Israel. The steps it has taken so far are commendable, but fall short of resolving the greatest threat to the region. The U.S. initiated sanctions, egging on Europe by saying that unless they punish Iran's economy, it will be impossible to stop the IDF. Well done. But what is the U.S. prepared to do if all these steps turn out to be too little, too late, and ineffectual- Get the Israel Hayom newsletter sent to your mailbox! On Saturday, Defense Minister Ehud Barak responded on "Meet the Press" with Rina Matzliach, by saying he has a private channel of communication with Panetta. Still, neither the average Israeli nor our defense minister can say with any certainty whether America will stop Iran from getting the bomb. And if not, what justification can there be in demanding that Israel relinquish its sovereign right to make its own decisions over how to eliminate, reduce or delay the threat? Panetta said that a successful attack would only delay production of the ayatollahs' bomb by two years. If Barak's assessment is correct (there are those who dispute it), and the Iranians are closer to producing a bomb than initially estimated by former Mossad chief Meir Dagan and company, then even two years is a significant chunk of time. That does not mean that if the worst happens, Israel must attack in total isolation. What it means is that America, which is asking Israel to refrain from any independent exercise of force, needs to draw up its own plan to prevent Iran from putting together a bomb. Israeli-Palestinian negotiations will not soften up Iran, nor will they turn the ayatollahs into moderates. However, they are necessary for both sides and for the rest of the world with the exception of the extremists, who openly seek to destroy Israel. Panetta's "damn table" remark makes it clear that he sees Israel as responsible for the failure of negotiations. Not necessarily exclusively. Perhaps he also holds the Palestinians responsible. On Saturday, however, he was only pointing the finger at Israel, and that's a bad sign. If that's how it is in a U.S. election year, what will happen afterward? Well, maybe those "damn" negotiations will resume after all?
