It is difficult to recall a time when the US has had less influence in the Middle East than it does now. The Middle East is being fundamentally reshaped - politically, ideologically, economically, socially, geo-strategically - and it is almost impossible to discern the faintest degree of US influence, prestige or even, beyond the narrowest security concerns, serious engagement.
The Middle East remains an area of intense importance to the US, although this is declining as US dependence on the Middle East for energy declines. US allies, Japan and much of Europe, are still dependent on the Middle East for energy, but that is different from the US itself having this dependence.
Meanwhile, it is hard to know even what Washington's policy is, beyond wishing the region well and hoping the Iranians don't get nuclear weapons.
Egypt is on the cusp. Its brief excursion into democracy ended disastrously. The two most powerful institutions, the military and the Muslim Brotherhood, don't care for democracy.
The Muslim Brotherhood's excursion into government was a dismal failure. It was incompetent, dragged the economy ever further into the mire, and governed undemocratically, getting rid of the parliament, arresting and harassing opponents, granting the president sweeping powers, producing a constitution that would cement the Brotherhood into power.
Liberal and secular Egyptians hated it, not to mention the substantial Christian minority. But so did a swathe of Egyptian society, which was Muslim but put priority on the economy.
The army has now demonstrated that it too, like the Muslim Brotherhood, can mobilise hundreds of thousands of people on to the streets in popular demonstrations. In certain very dangerous ways the situation is reminiscent of Indonesia in the early 1960s when the army and the communists were the two most powerful forces. Their final confrontation was exceptionally bloody.
The Americans more or less supported the overthrow of their long-time ally in Egypt, Hosni Mubarak, and they have more or less welcomed the overthrow of his successor, Mohammed Morsi.
The US's direct interests in Egypt are clear enough: maintaining the Egypt-Israel peace, protecting the Suez Canal, fighting terrorism, not least in the Sinai Peninsula, keeping Egypt broadly aligned with US policy, and preventing chaos and economic breakdown. But it is difficult to see how these interests are playing out in the unrolling and extraordinarily dangerous civil conflicts in Egypt today.
The dynamics in the broader Middle East now have very little to do with the US. Qatar bankrolled Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood. As soon as Morsi was overthrown, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, which both hate the Muslim Brotherhood, immediately started to bankroll the new military government.
All these Gulf states are notionally allies of the US, but they are producing directly contradictory strategic programs.
All Washington does is repeat its kumbayah calls for elections and moderation.
Yet Egypt lacks the key ingredients that make elections work - national leaders who appeal beyond sectarian sub-groups, a broad consensus of what constitutes the national interest, credible institutions, any tradition or willingness to compromise beyond a winner takes all mentality, and legal and constitutional guarantees of minimum human rights, especially for minorities.
What is the US doing in all this?
John Kerry, the good-looking actor hired to play the role of US Secretary of State, is brokering new talks between the Israelis and the Palestinians, an old script from the wrong movie.
But no one who lives on Planet Earth believes a peace deal can be negotiated between Israel and the Palestinians while the whole of the Middle East is in turmoil. In the rest of the Middle East, US aims are unclear or failing.
In Syria, the humanitarian outcome is appalling. President Bashar al-Assad has stayed in office; Russia and Iran and Hezbollah have enhanced their influence, and the Islamists are prevailing within the opposition. In Yemen, there is a new sanctuary, beyond the capital, Sanaa, for al-Qa'ida, which is also resurgent in Iraq. Washington got its way in the overthrow of Libya's Muammar Gaddafi, but the consequences were the murder of an American ambassador, the control of the country by armed gangs, the delivery of huge amounts of weapons to terrorists and the apparent death of the Right to Protect doctrine.
In the Gulf, Washington's role is limited to guaranteeing military support to the Gulf states against Iran. There is no sign of US success in preventing Iran pushing on to a nuclear weapons capacity.
According to the Pew polling organisation, the standing of the US in the Middle East is now lower than it was when George W. Bush was president. Barack Obama's only defence is that the situation is not amenable to US leadership.
Of course, when you don't try to lead, you certainly won't lead.
