According to an AFP/Yahoo! News article, the US recently debated launching military strikes in Syria at camps allegedly harbouring Iraq war insurgents.
According to Newsweek, Condi Rice “successfully opposed” the strikes at a meeting held Oct 1, 2005. Part of her reasoning was that the UN may soon issue a report blaming Syria for the assassination of former Lebanese premier Rafiq Hariri. The consequences of such a report are unstated.
Under mounting pressure from Iraq and the United States, “Syria had ended all security and intelligence cooperation with the United States several months ago after growing frustrated with persistent public criticism from Washington.” The diplomatic tension is palpable.
“We are willing to re-engage the moment you want but one condition,” the magazine quotes Moustapha as saying.
“You have to acknowledge that we are helping.”
Moustapha also confirmed an account from a US intelligence official that Damascus had been angered when Washington exposed one of its operatives.
The fact that the Bush administration actually considered military strikes in a country it is not at war with is disturbing. US troops recently launched a campaign that destroyed 12 bridges along the Euphrates River to stop the passage of insurgents from Syria. Whether Bushco can be held off from such aggressive action within Syria itself in the future remains to be seen, but such a tactical offensive could have far broader consequences for the current situation in the Middle East if yet more insurgents are emboldened to fight off the Americans.
This Newsweek story could also very well be a leak from inside the administration used as a warning shot for Syria if it refuses to cooperate with US demands. At this point, however, it appears the diplomatic problems with Syria may only escalate as a result.
