U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry returned home Tuesday from the Middle East for the fifth time with little to show for his efforts. It is the latest in a long history of peace efforts that have failed.

On Aug. 20, 2010, Kerry’s predecessor, Hillary Clinton, invited Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas to Washington to reengage in peace talks which had been stalled since 2008. At the time, Trumpet columnist Ron Fraser wrote about how the peace talks were destined to fail, citing events surrounding the meeting.

Nearly three years later, the smoldering ruins of those peace talks, shot down by a barrage of impossible preconditions, clearly illustrate their failure. But should that surprise anyone?

The Israelis demand the Palestinian Authority recognize Israel as a legitimate nation. The PA demands Israel release over 100 prisoners and freeze all settlement building on lands that the PA hopes will one day form a Palestinian state. These demands are not part of the peace negotiations, they are just the preconditions to peace negotiations. And both sides are asking the impossible of each other.

For the PA to recognize Israel, it would have to go against decades of anti-Israeli sentiment pulsating through the Middle East. A few of the nations that don’t recognize Israel are: Bahrain, Iraq, Lebanon, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iran. Saudi Arabia backs the PA financially. There are also Arabic nations like Bahrain which support the PA’s attempt at gaining legitimate statehood. Of course, Iran is always in the mix, with constant attempts to empower Israel’s enemies. It ships weapons to the West Bank along with other forms of non-military aid, helping the PA to grow militarily and economically. How would these nations respond if the PA was to step out and recognize Israel as a nation?

From Israel’s perspective, the preconditions are equally impossible. To release over 100 prisoners that have been in jail since the Oslo accords were signed would be to send convicted murdering terrorists back out onto the streets—terrorists committed to attacking Israel again. To halt settlement construction would require Netanyahu to completely backflip on current policies. The prime minister has been eager to continue establishing settlements in the West Bank, which strengthens Israel’s position and weakens the PA’s claim on the land.

The impossible preconditions leave little room for talks to even begin. But what if, by some turn of events, the leaders did sit down and speak to one another? What would be needed to bring about peace? The truth is that the conditions for peace, as dictated by the two parties, are just as impossible as the preconditions for talks. Much hinges on the ever elusive “two-state solution.”

The “two-state solution” is a source of international controversy. While efforts to bring about a Palestinian state have been slow, gains in recent years, particularly in the United Nations, have brought the PA much-needed forward momentum. Now recognized as an “observer nation,” the Palestinians want borders of a Palestinian nation drawn up on the 1967 borders. Those are the borders that Israel held before it was attacked by the surrounding Arabic nations.

Israel has refused to recognize the 1967 border as the outline of a future Palestinian state, claiming that it wouldn’t be able to defend the border which runs through East Jerusalem. If that border was recognized, the Israelis would have another nation—whose people are virulently anti-Israeli—living right inside Jerusalem. The security concerns would be immense. Israel would also no longer have the right to a military presence in the West Bank, and would have to secure a border literally on the doorstep of the capital city.

Despite the severe difficulties of signing a peace treaty between Israel and the PA, the U.S. and other nations continue to push failed plans. Not only do they ignore the improbability of a resolution, they fail to see that the geopolitical climate in the Middle East has not changed for the better since the failed talks in 2010, the 2008 Israel-Hamas ceasefire, the 2003 “Road Map for Peace,” the 2002 Beirut Summit, the 2000 Clinton Parameters plan, the 2000 Camp David Summit, the 1998 Wye River Memorandum, the 1997 Hebron Agreement, the 1993 Oslo accords, the 1991 Madrid Conference, or any of the other failed treaties and peace initiatives.

The truth is, Kerry cannot be successful in his effort to bring about lasting peace. At base he is a utopianist, his political philosophy rooted in the delusional thinking of the liberal who somehow thinks human nature can be changed for the better. It can’t. Ultimately he is fighting against impossible demands and a history of animosity fueled by an ingrained hatred by the Palestinians—and many of their Islamist associates—of the nation of Israel.

As the Prophet Amos asked, “Can two walk together unless they be agreed?” (Amos 3:3) There is not even a beginning point of agreement between the Israelis and Palestinians. Therefore such peace negotiations are destined to fail.

1 Thessalonians 5:3 says, “For when they shall say, peace and safety; then sudden destruction cometh upon them, as travail upon a woman with child; and they shall not escape.” This prophecy points to the outcome of Middle East peace talks. The entire world will be changed by this prophecy and what it leads to. For proof that the Bible reveals the peace talks are destined to fail, read History and Prophecy of the Middle East.

But there is a happy ending. Events in the world are leading to the return of Christ and the establishment of God’s government. There will be no negotiating peace. Christ will install perfect government, and man will come to understand the true happiness and blessings that come from living God’s way. Israelis and Arabs will finallylive together in peace.