Back to Gideon RachmanThere is a fascinating page in this morning’s FT on the latest “will they, won’t they” speculation on an Israeli attack on Iran.
The big third player in this drama is the US. As ever the questions are - will the Israelis be able to persuade the Americans to attack? If not, will they get the green light from the Americans to stage an attack themselves?
Like everything else in the US at the moment, the Iran question is being seen through the prism of the presidential election.
Last time I was in Washington, it was explained to me that President Bush - if left to his own devices (never a great idea) - would like to bomb. But he faces clear opposition from the American military, which was underlined by the head of the Joint Chiefs just yesterday. That means that an American attack is unlikely - but an Israeli attack is still a distinct possibility.
The McCain people rather relish the idea of an Israeli raid. That is partly because they think it is a good idea. (Their candidate is, after all, the man who sang - ‘bomb, bomb, bomb Iran’). But they also think it would mean that national security issues were back at the centre of the election, which might favour McCain. And they relish the thought of the difficulties that an Israeli bombing raid would pose for Obama.
My assumption is that Obama - given his recent courtship of the Israel lobby - would be unable to condemn an Israeli raid on Iran. I put this to someone who works for Obama, who replied - “I’m not sure what he would do. But I certainly wouldn’t want to be the guy writing the press release.”
A lot would depend on the attitude of the American military. If it were clear that senior American generals were unhappy with an Israeli attack on Iran, that might give Obama cover to come out against it.
This blog covers a variety of topics from US foreign policy to European politics and the Middle East - and whatever else happens to be in the news or catch my attention. I joined the FT as chief foreign affairs commentator in 2006, after a 15-year career at The Economist which included stints as a correspondent in Brussels, Bangkok and Washington. I write a weekly column on foreign affairs, which appears in the paper on Tuesdays. Occasionally my FT colleagues contribute posts to this blog.
Geoff Dyer is the FT's China bureau chief. He has been a correspondent in Shanghai and in Brazil and has also covered the pharmaceuticals and biotechnology industries from London.
Roula Khalaf is the FT's Middle East editor. She has worked for the FT since 1995, first as North Africa correspondent, then Middle East correspondent and most recently as Middle East editor. Before joining the FT, she was a staff writer for Forbes magazine in New York. 
James Blitz is the FT's defence and diplomatic editor. He has been the FT's political editor, based in London, and Rome bureau chief. James is a former Moscow bureau chief for the Sunday Times.
Alan Beattie is the FT's world trade editor. He has previously been economics leader writer and spent two years in Washington DC as chief US economics correspondent. Before joining the FT, Alan was an economist at the Bank of England. 
Victor Mallet is the FT's Madrid correspondent. He is a former Asia editor of the FT, and, in more than 20 years at the organisation, has also worked in Africa, Europe and the Middle East. In 1990 he escaped from Kuwait after being one of the few foreign correspondents there when Iraq invaded. 
Stefan Wagstyl is the FT's eastern Europe editor, co-ordinating coverage of the region. He has also been the FT's bureau chief in Tokyo and New Delhi.
