U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry warned of a return to Palestinian violence and Israel’s isolation if the faltering peace talks between Israel and the Palestinians ultimately fail. This is a typical leftist Pavlovian response to the impasse in Israeli-Palestinian negotiations that is over a decade old. Such thinking reflects primarily in the frustration that the optimistic evaluations that the conflict can be ended quickly remain unfulfilled and the absence of a learning curve.

There is definitely a possibility that the Palestinians, in particular the radical forces, will return to violence. Actually, they try to kill Israelis all the time and we see no more terrorist attacks only due to the work of the Israeli security organs. Yet, the likelihood of massive organized violence by the Palestinian Authority is small. Rocking the boat endangers too many vested interests of the Palestinian ruling class. The PA leadership has probably registered the heavy price paid by the Palestinians during their terrorist campaign at the beginning of the 21st century as a result of the Israeli countermeasures.

Moreover, even if the Palestinians miscalculate once again and go for a third intifada, Israel’s capability to contain terrorism and other modes of civilian struggle is high. The Israeli army can be trusted to meet all challenges successfully. Most important, a large majority of Israelis believe that the Palestinian demands, such as Jerusalem and the “right of return,” are the obstacles for peace. This large consensus about Palestinian intransigence allows for significant social mobilization and resilience in protracted conflict. Israelis will go once more to war with a feeling that “ein breira” (there is no choice) and are likely to win that engagement as well.

Large parts of the hypocritical world may indeed see Israel as the culprit for the failure of the negotiations and for a new round of Israeli-Palestinian violence. But such negative attitudes do not necessarily lead to international isolation. Public statements and the voting record of states at the U.N. — an ineffective, morally bankrupt organization — are not indicative of the true nature of interstate relations.

National interests dictate state actions, and in most cases bilateral relations with Israel are hardly affected by the ups and downs in the peace talks with the Palestinians. For example, India and China, rising powers, have expanded their bilateral ties because it is their interest to engage a successful state such as Israel. Nowadays, when the Iranian threat dominates the region, Arab Sunni states such as Egypt, Jordan and Saudi Arabia, exasperated with American behavior, are in the same strategic boat with Israel. Generally, the Middle East, nowadays in the throes of a colossal political, social and economic crisis, is hardly paying attention to the Palestinian issue. In the Caucasus and in Central Asia, Muslim Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan are friendly to Israel.

Moreover, isolation of Israel is unlikely because of the large existing reservoirs of support for Israel in many quarters. Canada and Australia are ruled by governments most responsive to Israeli concerns. Even in West Europe, concerns about Muslim immigration and foreign aid put the Palestinians in a problematic spot. Above all, two-thirds of Americans consistently favor Israel over the past two decades, which is translated into Congressional support. The U.S. is Israel’s most important ally and even the Obama administration has maintained the strong support and cooperation in the military sphere.

But the Obama administration does not understand the Middle East. The Kerry threats are just another facet of the American misguided foreign policy adopted by the Obama-Kerry team. An American foreign policy that supports the Muslim Brotherhood, estranges its traditional Arab allies such as Egypt and Saudi Arabia, allows Iran to get closer to the bomb, believes Assad’s promise to give up its chemical weapons arsenal, sees in Turkey’s Erdogan a great friend of the West, and insists that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict can be ended in nine months is dangerous and does more damage that good. Similar complaints about U.S. poor political judgment are abundantly voiced by America’s friends in Asian and East European capitals.

It is the enemies of the U.S. that rejoice in President Barack Obama’s foreign policy and that relish in America’s perceived decline in world affairs.

Ironically, at this historic juncture, even an isolationist America would be a better alternative for those that want the good guys to win. Therefore, dear President Obama, do us a favor, save some money and keep Kerry at home.

Efraim Inbar, director of the Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies, is a professor of political studies at Bar-Ilan University and a fellow at the Middle East Forum.