The latest diplomatic red herring is giving Iran “security guarantees.” In order to coax the mullahs to suspend enrichment activity, Europeans seek to assure them that America will not seek regime change or attack Iranian nuclear facilities.

On the Sunday talk shows, Secretary of State Rice denied anyone even requested such assurances. “I haven’t been asked by my colleagues if the United States will grant security guarantees to the Iranians,” she told NBC.

But France’s foreign minister, Philippe Douste-Blazy, publicly talked about “security guarantees,” and a European diplomat told me yesterday that German, French, and British negotiators hope for change in Washington’s thinking on such guarantees.

Like many incentives, this one was rejected by Iran before it was offered officially. It is America that “should ask other states to guarantee its security,” a foreign ministry spokesman, Hamid-Reza Asefi, said, according to the Fars news agency. “That the United States provides security guarantees for any world country is just an illusion.”

Such talk, as well as President Ahmadinejad’s bluster, is ignored or dismissed as hot air by those who seek to avoid the hard decisions on Iran.

“I certainly think that this a lot more than just rhetoric,” Prime Minister Olmert told CNN yesterday, on the eve of his first Washington visit in his new job. “I have all the legitimacy to be concerned and to motivate other nations to take the necessary measures” to stop Iran, he said. “We have to remember what happened when the world did not listen to dictators threatening other nations of annihilation.”

Mr. Olmert said that Israel did not “come close to even considering” a unilateral move reminiscent of the attack on Iraq’s Osirak plant. Mr. Olmert said, “Knowing President Bush, the depth of his commitment, and the extent of his understanding of world affairs and of the need to fight extremists and terrorists,” he trusts America’s leadership.

And at least publicly, Ms. Rice was not about to offer Iran any guarantees, saying, “It’s a little strange to talk about security guarantees when the question is Iranian behavior.”

Nevertheless, even after a declaration of war against Judaism, Christianity, and liberal democracies, as was pronounced by Mr. Ahmadinejad in a letter to Mr. Bush, Europeans believe some mullahs might restrain such extremism. “We have to strengthen the moderates in the regime,” the European diplomat told me, speaking on background.

But will the solution come from so-called moderate mullahs? Countering news accounts over the weekend, an Israeli Farsi broadcaster, Menashe Amir, said no new laws enforce yellow ribbons for Jews or other identifying marks for non-Muslims. He thinks, however, that the 13-part legislation that passed last week in Parliament is instructive.

Every year, before the hot summer begins, the mullahs try to impose ever stricter dress codes, but the new legislation, Mr. Amir said, is in the form of a “recommendation” for clothing manufacturers and designers, telling them how to create Islam-wear. “I suspect they will not be able to enforce those rules,” he says.

Ten years ago, female Islamic enforcers armed with razor blades would approach women who wore lipstick in public, wiping the paint and injuring lips in the name of religion. Now, according to Mr. Amir, such enforcers merely issue tickets to women and girls who, although fully covering their bodies, use fashion to display sexual allure. There are no good mullahs or bad mullahs, this suggests, only the hope that street defiance will force a change in the regime.

Meanwhile, Secretary-General Annan and a former secretary of state, Madeleine Albright, to name just two, advocate direct American-Iranian dialogue, arguing this is the path to a peaceful resolution.

But, as Mr. Amir noted, an apology was once issued to Iran by Ms. Albright in the name of the Clinton administration, and “the result was only more scorn to America inside Iran.” Direct American negotiation will only add prestige to the mullahs and entrench their hold on power, he said.

Rather than looking for “guarantees,” or more talk, the West should isolate the Islamic Republic, strengthen its opponents inside Iran, and, if necessary, prepare the use of force. If China and Russia do not go along, Europe and America should drop false “international unity,” and move without them.

As Mr. Olmert described the Iranian rhetoric yesterday, “It is inconceivable that having the experience that the Western nations has had with such leaders, that we will hear these words and not respond.”