US Secretary of State Marco Rubio will travel to Israel on March 2-3 for high-level talks that, according to the State Department, will cover Iran, Lebanon, and President Trump's "20-Point Peace Plan for Gaza". The visit comes at a moment of extreme regional tension, as the United States has assembled the largest military force in the Middle East since the 2003 invasion of Iraq while simultaneously engaging in indirect nuclear negotiations with Tehran that have made "significant progress" on procedural matters but remain fundamentally deadlocked on substance. The juxtaposition of Rubio's diplomatic mission with the unprecedented military buildup and the recent authorization for non-emergency personnel to depart both the Beirut and Israel embassies paints a clear picture: Washington is preparing for war while going through the motions of diplomacy.
The third round of indirect US-Iran negotiations concluded in Geneva on Thursday with Omani mediators reporting "significant progress" and an atmosphere of "unprecedented openness to new and creative ideas and solutions". The talks, which stretched over five hours across two sessions, saw the Iranian delegation led by Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi and the American team headed by Special Envoy Steve Witkoff and presidential advisor Jared Kushner, with IAEA Director-General Rafael Grossi participating as a technical observer. Both sides exchanged what Iranian officials described as "very important and practical proposals" covering nuclear issues and sanctions relief, and they agreed to begin technical-level discussions in Vienna next week, with a fourth round of talks expected shortly thereafter.
Yet beneath this diplomatic veneer lies an unbridgeable chasm. Reports from Axios and The Wall Street Journal, citing US officials, reveal the maximalist nature of Washington's demands: a permanent agreement with no expiration date, the dismantling of Iran's three main nuclear facilities at Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan, and the transfer of all remaining enriched uranium, estimated at approximately 10,000 kilograms to the United States. Iranian state media has firmly rejected these terms, reiterating Tehran's red lines: no transfer of enriched uranium abroad, no cessation of enrichment on Iranian soil, no negotiation over the nation's defensive missile program, and no discussion of its support for regional allies including Hamas and Hezbollah. As Foreign Minister Araghchi stated, Iran has clearly spelled out "what needs to happen" from its side, and that does not include capitulation to American demands that would strip the Islamic Republic of its sovereign rights.
While diplomats talk in Geneva, the Pentagon has assembled forces that speak the unmistakable language of war. Two aircraft carrier strike groups, led by the USS Abraham Lincoln and the USS Gerald R. Ford, the world's largest warship, now operate within striking distance of Iran's coastline. More than 150 combat aircraft, including F-35 stealth fighters, F-22s, F-15s, and F-16s, have been moved to bases in Jordan and Israel, accompanied by dozens of refueling planes and hundreds of military cargo flights. The Washington Post reports that this concentration of assets is "among the largest" seen since the period preceding the 2003 Iraq war, and analysts examining the composition note that it suggests preparation for a sustained air campaign lasting weeks, not a limited strike.
The movement of six additional KC-46 aerial refueling aircraft to Israel's Ben Gurion Airport, alongside the arrival of 11 F-22 stealth fighters at Ovda Air Base, demonstrates that Washington is positioning for extended combat operations far beyond what would be required for a symbolic show of force.
The most telling indicators of imminent conflict are not the warships or the bombers but the quiet administrative actions that precede every American military engagement. The State Department has authorized the departure of non-emergency personnel and their families from the US Embassy in Israel, with Ambassador Mike Huckabee reportedly urging staff who wish to leave to do so immediately. This follows similar measures this week at the US Embassy in Beirut and comes as the United Kingdom has withdrawn staff from its embassy in Iran, citing the security situation. Multiple European governments have taken similar precautions, and Australia has advised citizens to avoid travel to Iran. These evacuations reflect a clear-eyed assessment within Western capitals that any conflict with Iran would be regional in scope, drawing in proxies from Lebanon to Yemen and putting American personnel throughout the Middle East in grave danger.
Rubio's visit to Israel comes as Israeli media report that a potential US attack on Iran "has become imminent" and that Tel Aviv has completed preparations for the possibility of multiple fronts being opened. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has long advocated for aggressive action against Iran's nuclear program and its regional allies, and his government has welcomed the American military buildup. Yet even Israel's staunchest allies are signaling reluctance to be drawn into conflict. Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, which host thousands of American troops, have made clear they would not allow their airspace to be used for attacks on Iran, reflecting deep regional fears of a devastating wider war.
Palestinian analyst Akram Atallah noted that Israel, though not at the negotiating table, is "the most influential actor" shaping the dynamics of the talks, with "many of the conditions being raised in this diplomatic process" being "Israeli conditions reflected in American demands". This observation underscores the fundamental reality that Washington's negotiating position is not designed to achieve a mutually acceptable compromise but to impose terms dictated by its closest regional ally, terms Tehran can never accept.
As Foreign Minister Araghchi described before heading to Geneva, this moment represents "a historic opportunity to strike an unprecedented agreement" that addresses mutual concerns and achieves mutual interests. Iran has demonstrated tactical flexibility, signaling willingness to cap enrichment at 3.67 percent, accept an international consortium for fuel supply, and place its 60 percent stockpile under continuous IAEA monitoring, all while keeping its missile program and regional allies off the table. But Washington's goal, as experts note, "goes beyond the narrow nuclear file to recalibrating the security environment surrounding Iran". This maximalist ambition ensures that no agreement is possible, while the armada grows by the day, the embassies empty, and the region slides inexorably toward a conflict that will spare no one.