John Kerry's vaulting ambitions for US diplomacy Nobody ever accused John Kerry of lacking self-belief. Nor are they ever likely to. This week, for the fourth time since taking over from Hillary Clinton in February, Mr Kerry arrives for talks in Israel and Palestine, where he hopes to twitch the corpse of two-state peace talks back to life. His chances are not good. Next month, he will take on even steeper odds as host of a conference in Geneva aimed at stopping the slaughter in Syria. In addition to hopes of a settlement with Iran, he is enthusiastic about a transatlantic trade deal, reviving global warming talks and so on. For many secretaries of state, fixing the Syrian quagmire would be ambition enough, particularly if it hinged on winning help from Russia. Last week's decision by Moscow to go ahead with missile sales to Bashar al-Assad's regime underlines the difficulty of Mr Kerry's task. But from someone who in 2004 almost took the White House - and still believes he could have - such bold diplomatic initiatives should come as no surprise. As Joe Biden, the vice-president, recently joked to a European gathering, the new US secretary of state has an eye on the Nobel Peace Prize. He will have to get used to derision. Haaretz, the Israeli newspaper, last week ran a story likening Mr Kerry's efforts to a "bull in a china shop." It also quoted a senior Israeli official calling him "messianic." Yet Mr Kerry offers a welcome break from the passivity that had descended on US diplomacy in the Middle East and beyond. For one reason or another - often because she was blocked by an instinctively cautious White House - Hillary Clinton took a back seat on the Muslim world's big challenges, Syria and Afghanistan included. Mr Kerry is diving in headfirst. Amid awareness of his steep odds, there is also encouragement. "Kerry has the makings of being a strategic secretary of state in contrast to Hillary Clinton, whom I would describe as more cause-oriented - global issues, human rights, gender, and so on," says Zbigniew Brzezinski, who was national security adviser to President Jimmy Carter. He is taking on the issues that shape the international system. This will make him a very serious player in my view. Even people close to Hillary Clinton agree that Mr Kerry is likely to be much less risk-averse. Mrs Clinton outsourced the "AfPak" portfolio to the late Richard Holbrooke and passed on the ill-fated Arab-Israeli initiative to George Mitchell. Mr Kerry has not yet farmed out anything. This raises the chances that he will fall flat on his face. He seems to have decided the risks are worth it. "Kerry has come to terms with the fact that he is a silver medallist - this is probably his last big job and he wants to make an impact," says a former senior US diplomat. For Hillary, there was always the sense that gold remained a possibility. Mr Kerry faces two immediate problems. The first is flying solo. Almost all the key players in Mrs Clinton's state department, including Jeffrey Feltman, who was in charge of the Middle East division, Kurt Campbell, who headed Asia, and Philip Gordon, who managed Europe relations, have left and are yet to be replaced. Others include Robert Hormats, who was in charge of US economic diplomacy, and Robert Einhorn, the point man on proliferation. Replacing such a team will not be easy. At the very least, Mr Kerry must prod a dilatory White House into submitting nominations. It is almost June yet the State Department remains half empty. Having spent barely two weeks in the building since early February, Mr Kerry has yet to master things back in Washington. Likewise he will need to figure out how to navigate an unusually White House-centric administration. He cannot rely indefinitely on the free rein he has been given by President Barack Obama. The White House has been distracted by rolling domestic crises all year. Once things are calmer, the president is likely to put tighter curbs on Mr Kerry's freelancing. Friends of Mr Kerry also worry that he has no executive experience. After 30 years on Capitol Hill, he is used to talking rather than doing. Each senator likes to play sun to their own solar system - and Mr Kerry chaired the Senate foreign policy committee. Now he must adjust to being a planet. "With Kerry there is always a danger he will get too far ahead of Obama," says a senior European diplomat. Most of all, the former senator's allies hope that he does not get wrecked by the Middle East, as probability dictates. David Rothkopf, chief executive of Foreign Policy and a former senior official under President Bill Clinton, likens the situation facing new US secretaries of state to being in a garden with an apple tree. They believe if they pluck the fruit of Middle East peace they will gain immortality. Although they will be banished if they fail, few can resist trying. In contrast, Mrs Clinton's focus was the pivot to Asia. "It would be an irony if we swapped Middle East wars for equally fruitless Middle East diplomacy at the expense of the bigger strategic challenges," says Mr Rothkopf. At the end of the day, he adds, Mr Kerry's greatest weakness is also his biggest strength - an immense self-confidence. Since February, there has been a new sense of purpose to US diplomacy. No one should be surprised that Mr Kerry is reaching for that apple.