Eagle, I don't want to form an alliance anymore.

U.S. Secretary of State Baker flew to Vienna, where Soviet Foreign Minister Nympur was already waiting.

Vienna was a meeting place acceptable to both the US and the Soviet Union, and many sensitive diplomatic contacts took place in this city over the decades of the Cold War.

The two sat down in a hotel conference room. Baker had a document with him, and so did Director Nian.

Baker laid out the American proposal on the table and spoke first:

"Ms. Ivanova, on behalf of President Gephat, I would like to inform the Soviet side of the following."

"First, the United States has reached an operational framework with Israel. Israel's retaliatory action will be confined to Anbar province in western Iraq, targeting only Scud missile launch sites. Israel will not enter Syrian airspace, will not attack Lebanon, and will not attack Iraqi cities."

"Second, the United States requested that the Soviet Union force Saddam Hussein to stop launching missiles at Israel within 72 hours, because Israel's retaliation was likely not limited to Iraq. If the Soviet Union could get Saddam to stop attacking Israel, the United States would do its utmost to ensure that Israel would cease its foreign operations."

He pushed the document towards the leader.

“Third—” Baker’s voice lowered slightly, “The United States wanted the Soviet Union to understand a reality—Israel is a sovereign state and its nuclear arsenal exists.”

If the situation continues to escalate, if Saddam uses chemical warheads against Israel—

He paused for a second.

"Then something that none of us want to see could happen."

Director Nian sat opposite her, her expression unchanged. She knew what Baker was doing.

While Baker claimed they couldn't control Israel, he secretly thought that this mad dog was conveniently putting pressure on them. The 72-hour time limit wasn't given by Israel—it was given to the Soviet Union by the United States through Israel.

As for the nuclear weapons statement—that's just diplomatic intimidation, nothing to worry about. Because if NATO and the Warsaw Pact really go to war, given Israel's tiny size, a few nuclear missiles could wipe this festering sore on the Arab world off the map.

Director Nian did not answer immediately; instead, she produced documents from the Soviet Union.

“Mr. Secretary of State,” she said, “the Soviet side has taken note of Israel’s actions, and we have a few points to make.”

"First, the Soviet military presence in Syria is defensive in nature. They will not attack Israel proactively, but if any Israeli military action enters Syrian airspace or threatens the safety of Soviet troops, the Soviet Union will exercise its legitimate right to self-defense."

The Soviet Union believed that no matter how hawkish Israel's leadership was, they would not intentionally create a scenario of direct conflict with a nuclear power.

During the Fourth Middle East War in 1970, the Soviet Union deployed air defense missile units and pilots to Egypt. The Israeli Air Force engaged Soviet pilots over the Suez Canal and shot down several Soviet MiG-21s.

Upon realizing they had shot down a Soviet aircraft, Israel immediately scaled back its operations, as they understood that continuing the fighting could indeed drag the Soviet Union into the conflict. This was even with Soviet troops secretly participating as "volunteers."

The Soviet Union now openly has troops stationed in Syria, leaving no room for ambiguity if Israel were to actually attack.

"Regarding Saddam's missile strikes against Israel, the Soviet Union is exerting maximum diplomatic and economic pressure on Iraq. But please understand, Mr. Secretary, that the Soviet Union cannot order a sovereign nation to cease military operations—just as the United States cannot order Israel to cease military operations."

She glanced at Baker as she said those last words—

You use the excuse that Israel is a sovereign state and I can't control it as a shield; I can use the same argument to block you out.

"Regarding the 72-hour time limit, the Soviet side felt that this time limit was too tight, that diplomatic mediation would take time, and that we needed at least a week."

Baker shook his head: "Seventy-two hours."

"One week."

“If Saddam is still launching missiles within 72 hours, we cannot appease Israel, and the military's actions will escalate,” Baker said. “At that point—”

"What will happen then? Will Israeli bombs fall on the heads of the Warsaw Pact forces?" Director Nian asked with great interest, his arms crossed.

"Mr. Secretary, can I interpret this as the United States threatening the Soviet Union with Israel's so-called 'nuclear weapons'?"

“No—no! Of course not. The United States has always been a peace-loving country, and we have always been committed to promoting the resolution of issues through dialogue and international cooperation. What we were just describing was a possibility that none of us would want to see.” Baker smiled.

The probing between the two sides has yielded results, and no further action is needed.

The two stared at each other for a few seconds.

"Five days," Director Nian said.

Baker thought for a moment.

“Five days,” he replied.

Director Nian stood up and said, "Then it's settled. If there's nothing else, I need to call Moscow immediately."

Baker shook hands with her: "Thank you for the Soviet Union's understanding. I also need to convey this message to the White House immediately. The President is very concerned about this matter."

Director Nian turned and walked towards the door. When she reached the door, she paused and turned back.

“Mr. Secretary of State, regarding your ‘mad dog’—please keep it on a leash.”

Baker smiled and nodded, his expression unchanged from the beginning, as he watched her walk out.

The door closed.

Sigrún has taught at the Iceland University of the Arts as a part-time lecturer since and was Dean of the Department of Fine Art from -. In – she held a research position at Reykjavík Art Museum focusing on the role of women in Icelandic art. She studied fine art at the Icelandic College of Arts and Crafts and at Pratt Institute, New York, and holds BA and MA degrees in art history and philosophy from the University of Iceland. Sigrún lives and works in Iceland.

On the night that the leader flew back from Vienna, Slava convened an emergency meeting at the Kremlin.

There were only three people present—Slava, Nian Dao, and Chebrikov; even Sokolov and Ogarkov weren't called.

Because the fewer people who know about what we're about to discuss, the better.

Director Nian gave a briefing on the situation in Vienna.

“Starting today, we have to get Saddam to stop firing missiles at Israel within five days, or Israel will join the war, which is not good news for us,” Slava said.

He looked at Chebrkov and asked, "Is it possible?"

Chebrikoff thought for a moment.

“It’s impossible to just tell him to stop. Saddam is in a bad state right now. His army is being bombed, half of his air force has fled to our side, and his command system is half paralyzed. Under these circumstances, the Scud missile is the only card he can still play proactively.”

Asking him to put down this card is like asking him to relinquish his last bit of control. He won't listen.

“Moreover,” Chebrikov added, “we can’t publicly tell him to stop.”

If the Soviet Union had publicly demanded that Iraq cease its attacks on Israel, the Arab world would have said that the Soviet Union was speaking for Israel and that Moscow was aiding Zionism, thus destroying the image of the Soviet Union as a friend of the Arab people that it had cultivated over decades in the Middle East.

"So, what are everyone's thoughts?" Slava asked.

Chebrikov spoke with Nian, the Foreign Minister, for a while. Nian was knowledgeable about diplomatic affairs, while Chebrikov was the KGB Chairman and knew the feasibility of secret foreign intervention.

The three of them eventually came up with a solution:

The first step was to cut off the missile supply. The Scud ballistic missiles were made by the Soviet Union; Iraq didn't have the capability to manufacture them, and its existing stock was limited—each missile launched meant one less to be fired.

Chebrkov believed that Iraq had previously obtained a batch of ammunition and missile parts from Iran, and this channel had to be blocked. The Soviet Union suspended arms sales to Iran, including ballistic missiles and other long-range lethal weapons.

However, Iran is a regional power, and it shares common interests with countries like Iraq on the issue of Israel. If the Soviet Union wanted Iran to suspend missile sales to Iraq, it would have to concede some benefits.

Slava then ordered the KGB to convey a message to Tehran—the Soviet Union was willing to give Iran a place in the post-war Middle East security architecture, provided that Iran cooperated with the Soviet Union to cut off some arms shipments to Iraq.

Another approach is to infiltrate from within.

Saddam's inner circle was a weakness; the Soviet Union could use his military advisors to relay information and calculate economic benefits for Saddam.

The Soviet Union directly revealed the parameters of the US Patriot missile defense system to Iraq, saying that the US had deployed the Patriot missile defense system to Israel.

Patriot missiles were touted as successfully intercepting the majority of Scud missiles, but post-war analysis showed the actual interception rate was far lower than claimed—perhaps only around 10% to 20%. What's needed now is a political effect.

Meanwhile, the Soviet Union also revealed to Iraq that the US military had launched a large-scale Scud killing operation, with Israel sending special forces and fighter jets to search for mobile missile launchers in the western Iraqi desert.

Historically, this operation consumed a significant amount of coalition air resources with limited effectiveness—the Scud launchers were moved within minutes of launch, and Iraq used numerous decoy vehicles. However, it also served a political function—demonstrating to Iraq that the United States and Israel were actively involved.

On the one hand, they say that Iraq's war results are almost zero, and on the other hand, they say that every missile fired is one less missile available, so it's better to keep them as a deterrent. Saddam Hussein, who has no missiles, can't offer a single bargaining chip at the negotiating table!

Finally, they will take action in the diplomatic sphere within the Arab world.

This path was proposed by Nian Dao: "Saddam's core need for launching missiles was that he needed to prove he was still resisting, and he needed the Arab streets to continue cheering for him."

“If we give him another way to satisfy this need—to allow him to continue being a hero in the eyes of the Arab world without firing missiles—he might be willing to stop.”

Iraq's missile launch was also risky, because although everyone had grudges against Israel, no one attacked Israel first; Iraq did it first, and Israel would attack Iraq first in any future conflict. Saddam Hussein risked retaliation from Israel.

Her proposal was for the Soviet Union to launch a new diplomatic offensive in the Security Council, proposing a draft resolution with wording roughly as follows: "calling for comprehensive peace in the Middle East and a just resolution of all disputes, including the Palestinian question."

Like the United States, the Soviet Union needed to compete for influence in the Arab region, and it also wanted to link the Palestinian issue with the Kuwaiti issue.

Coincidentally, Saddam Hussein wanted to do the same thing—after invading Kuwait, he tried to bring the Palestinian issue into the picture and portray himself as a defender of the Arab cause.

“We called this resolution the ‘Comprehensive Middle East Peace Resolution,’ and then we presented this narrative to Saddam—you see, we spoke for you at the United Nations. Your missiles have completed their political mission: Israel has been dragged in, the Palestinian issue has been put on the international agenda, and the whole world has seen you as the hero of the Arab world.”

Continuing to fire now is becoming increasingly ineffective. If you stop and cooperate with our diplomatic offensive, you'll be the hero who has earned leverage on the battlefield and made it to the negotiating table.

“Give him a way out. Make him feel that stopping the launch was not forced, but his own strategic choice.”

Slava agreed after hearing the proposal.

"But if—" He didn't finish his sentence.

But what if none of the three options work?

Saddam Hussein continued to launch missiles, and Israel continued to retaliate, escalating its actions from the western desert of Iraq to other parts of Iraq and even touching the edges of Syria.

The situation escalated, drawing in the 190,000 Soviet troops stationed in Syria and leading to a direct confrontation between the US and the USSR in the Middle East...

This worst-case scenario is being pushed toward reality by missile after missile.

Slava turned around: "Comrade Chebrikov!"

"exist."

Do you have information on the location of Scud missile launch sites in Iraq?

"Yes, our satellites and intelligence network can provide the location of launch sites with an accuracy of one or two kilometers."

"Okay, if all other methods fail, I need you to pass on the location information of Iraqi missile launch sites and warehouses to the Americans."

While the KGB and CIA were adversaries during the Cold War, they maintained channels of communication in private—sometimes when the KPIs set by their superiors were difficult to achieve, they would try to understand and compromise with each other.

Chebrikov said, "Absolutely no problem, Comrade General Secretary!"

"Okay, if Saddam is still firing missiles on the fourth day, we'll activate the backup plan. If the Americans don't intend to take action, we'll do it ourselves."

He turned back to the window. Outside, Moscow lay silent in the darkness.

He knew what he was doing. He spoke for the Arab cause in the Security Council, and he secretly helped the United States disarm its Arab allies—both of these things existed within him simultaneously.

He wasn't the first leader to do this, nor will he be the last. Great power leaders, under impossible constraints, make impossible choices. If he hadn't made this choice, he would have faced an even worse outcome—escalating the situation to a direct confrontation between the US and the Soviet Union in the Middle East.

He had no other choice.

...

As the third day arrived, both the United States and the Soviet Union submitted draft resolutions concerning the Palestinian question to the Security Council.

Both sides claim to want to resolve the Palestinian issue, but the solutions they seek are completely different!

What the United States wants is a peace process led by the US and conducted within a bilateral negotiation framework. The US wants to act as a mediator, facilitating direct negotiations between Israel and Palestine, with the US acting as the middleman and defining the outcome. The Madrid Peace Conference and the Oslo Accords in real history followed this model. The essence of this framework was to exclude the Soviet Union—the peace process was in the hands of the US, and Arab countries that wanted to promote Palestinian statehood had to deal with the US, while the Soviet Union was sidelined.

What the Soviet Union wanted was a multilateral international conference within the framework of the United Nations. In this framework, the Soviet Union, as a permanent member of the Security Council, naturally possessed a seat and a voice, and the majority of the UN General Assembly consisted of Third World countries, making the voting results almost inevitably biased towards the Palestinian position. The more the Soviet Union pushed this issue to the UN, the greater its influence became, and the more passive the United States and Israel became.

On January 26, the Soviet Union introduced a resolution on the Palestinian question in the Security Council, which included recognizing the Palestinian people's right to self-determination, demanding that Israel withdraw from all territories occupied in 1967, and calling for an international peace conference with the participation of the five permanent members of the Security Council.

The United States vetoed the resolution outright. This was because the framework placed the Soviet Union on an equal footing with the United States, and Israel could never accept the requirement to "withdraw from all territories occupied in 1967." The reasons given by the United States for its veto were quite compelling:

"...We support the legitimate rights of the Palestinian people, but peace must be achieved through direct negotiations rather than external imposition. The wording of this resolution is not conducive to creating an atmosphere for negotiations."

The United States introduced a similar resolution in the Security Council, which called on Israel and Palestine to begin direct negotiations, welcomed the participation of all parties in the region in the peace process, and supported the principle of land for peace.

The wording was deliberately vague, omitting specific territorial boundaries, international conferences, and the roles of the five permanent members of the Security Council.

The Soviet Union, however, vetoed the proposal on technical grounds:

"...This resolution does not mention the central role of the United Nations in the peace process, does not explicitly quote the full contents of Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338, and does not affirm the Palestinian people's right to self-determination, so it is an 'incomplete and flawed' resolution."

The Soviet Union's position was not against peace; rather, it opposed a unilateral peace that excluded the international community.

At the Security Council level, the US and the Soviet Union vetoed each other. This was itself part of the game, and each veto was a signal to their respective customer groups.

The real battleground was outside the UN Security Council. After the Security Council vetoed each other, both sides turned to other platforms.

The Soviet Union would push the issue to the United Nations General Assembly.

The conference lacks veto power, and with Third World countries forming an absolute majority, any resolution supporting Palestine can be easily passed. Conference resolutions are not legally binding but carry immense political symbolism.

The Soviet Union could pass resolution after resolution supporting Palestine at the congress, each time getting the United States and Israel to vote against it, and each time creating the image of the whole world standing on the side of Palestine while the United States and Israel were isolated. This had a lasting effect on Arab public opinion.

The United States bypassed the United Nations and pursued bilateral and small-scale multilateral diplomacy. It directly invited the Israeli prime minister and Palestinian representatives to Washington for talks. It also brought in Egypt and Jordan as representatives of the "Arab moderates," excluding the Soviet Union from the negotiating table.

But as everyone knows, the essence of the unresolved Palestinian issue is not a legal issue but a power issue. Israel occupies land, has an army, and has nuclear weapons. Even if the UN General Assembly passes a hundred resolutions, it cannot move a single Israeli settlement!

A genuine peace process requires Israel's participation, but Israel only talks to America's allies. Arab countries will eventually find that voting alongside the Soviet Union at the UN General Assembly feels good, but only the United States can truly push Israel to make concessions.

Thus, even though it was Iraq that was fighting Israel, both the US and the Soviet Union brought up the issue of Palestine at the conference.

January 27th arrived. During this period, Israel continued to bomb Iraq, and Israeli planes also directly violated Syrian airspace in an attempt to provoke. The Soviet Union had anticipated Israel's actions, and hundreds of Warsaw Pact aircraft were on standby around the clock. Israel did not dare to fire at Soviet planes and could only sheepishly detour through Jordan to attack Iraq.