The missiles and bombs may have stopped, at least for the moment, but the war between the US and Iran continues. The Strait of Hormuz remains closed, the US sanctions remain in place, and the fundamental issues separating the combatants remain unresolved. The bilateral negotiations have gone nowhere, and the two sides remain far apart. This stalemate has puzzled observers since it’s not hard to see the outlines of a deal. For Iran, the minimum acceptable goal is regime survival. For the US, it is the end of the Iranian nuclear program, which poses an existential threat to America’s regional partners and, eventually, to Europe and South Asia. Since the regime’s survival and the end of its nuclear program are compatible goals, a deal should be possible. Once that deal is done, the Strait would reopen. If such a deal is possible in theory, why hasn’t it happened in practice? The short answer is that the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corp, which now controls the country, refuses to give up its more ambitious goals. What are those larger goals? There are at least three beyond the regime’s survival. Building its own nuclear weapons, developing a stockpile of missiles to deliver them, and supporting proxy forces, which extend the regime’s power across the Middle East and preoccupy its enemies. Since those larger goals are intolerable for the Trump administration, negotiations will fail as long as the Iranians refuse to budge. America’s regional partners share Trump’s resistance to Tehran’s demands. In fact, Israel and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) go further, believing it is impossible to tolerate the continuation of the Iranian regime. The problem, they have concluded, is not any particular negotiating item; it is the regime’s basic character and the on-going threat it poses to their safety. The Israelis reached that conclusion long ago and have plenty of experience to back it up. What’s new is the changed view of Arab Gulf states. They didn’t take kindly to being bombed by Tehran. The Iranian weapon turned out to be a boomerang. Tehran thought its coercive measures would produce compliance. They had the opposite effect. The shelling hardened the Gulf States’ resistance and strengthened their strategic ties to both America and Israel. Important as these allies are to America, they do not control what the Trump administration seeks or what it is willing to do. Those decisions are made in Washington, advancing America’s........

© The Spectator