“My view of the ideal nuclear world is not that much different from the total disarmers,” a former American ambassador to the United Nations, John Bolton, said. “They want to see a world where there is no country with nuclear weapons. I want to see a world where there is one country with nuclear weapons.”

This global toothpaste, regrettably, is unlikely to be squeezed back into its tube. Countries like Pakistan and India, not to mention China and Russia, will never disarm to allow a world where only America possesses the ultimate weapon. In one volatile region, however, Mr. Bolton’s dream remains a reality: the Middle East. But here, too, we are speedily approaching a dangerous change in the current equation, where the only regional nuclear power is a stable democracy — Israel.

In Vienna, the International Atomic Energy Agency’s director, Mohamed ElBaradei, is expected to issue his periodic report on Iran as early as this week, and diplomats expect it will supply little ammunition to those hoping for a real squeeze of the mullahs’ moolah. As one top Western diplomat predicted recently in a background briefing, Mr. ElBaradei’s report will be “factually correct, but positively spun” toward Iran. The Security Council is unlikely to follow with meaningful sanctions. Even as Moscow seems increasingly frustrated with Iran — especially after a recent Tehran visit by the Russian foreign minister, Sergey Lavrov — China’s main goal is to maintain its trade levels with Iran, the diplomat said. Tehran’s largest European economic partner, Germany, lowered its trade figures with Iran by 30%– 40% recently, but that progress was completely “offset by an increase in Chinese trade.”

As Israel’s military intelligence chief, Amos Yadlin, told the Cabinet in Jerusalem yesterday, recent sanctions imposed by the Treasury Department on three Iranian banks also failed to impress the mullahs. The banks, holding insignificant assets to begin with, easily bypassed the sanctions by switching from the dollar to the yen and the euro. European sanctions backed by France were coolly received in the continent, Mr. Yadlin said, also echoing the Western diplomat’s assessment that the IAEA report is unlikely to help the push for significant new sanctions at the Security Council. Stomping his old grounds Friday as part of a tour to promote his diplomatic memoir, “Surrender Is Not an Option,” Mr. Bolton reminded Turtle Bay reporters of his loathing of U.N. types considered secular deities. Mr. ElBaradei “may not think he is a secular pope, but he thinks he is a secular cardinal who is over and above the member governments,” Mr. Bolton said. As an “apologist to Iran,” he added, Mr. ElBaradei “is discrediting the IAEA and harming a very important U.N. agency.”

Mr. Bolton blames his State Department nemeses for dropping the ball on the drive in 2005 to unseat Mr. ElBaradei, who ran at that time for an unprecedented third term as the head of the agency. In reality, America lost that fight not so much because it failed to enlist allies to oppose Mr. ElBaradei, but because it failed to identify and prop up a viable candidate to replace him.

Either way, Mr. ElBaradei won, and he went on to receive the ultimate kiss of death from the Nobel committee. As a Vienna-based diplomat put it to me recently, the Nobel Peace Prize should only be accorded to retirees. Anyone receiving it while still in office is likely, like Mr. ElBaradei, to start acting as if he is above the rules governing the rest of the diplomatic crowd — a recipe for disaster.

Despite the efforts of the likes of Mr. ElBaradei, all is not yet lost in the realm of sanctions against Iran. Israel’s opposition leader, Benjamin Netanyahu, recently urged states to follow Governor Schwarzenegger of California by orchestrating a divestment drive against Iran, saying this truly could hurt the clerics and hasten the development of internal dissent that may lead to regime change.

Regime change is also the solution promoted by Mr. Bolton, but even under real economic pressure, it is unlikely to happen in Iran tomorrow morning. As diplomatic efforts to coax Tehran to voluntarily give up its nuclear ambitions show no sign of positive results, we are fast nearing the point where a choice has to be made. That choice is between the so-called “other option” and accepting a Middle East where there is more than one nuclear power and where all bets are off.