No one doubts that the Syrian president supports the “resistance” and its weapons. But the fact that he reached out to Hezbollah’s newspaper and told them that no one should dare touch the resistance or its arms (English) smacks of overcompensation in my eyes.
Perhaps those like Michael Young who are arguing that Syria wants to limit Hezbollah’s influence are up to something after all. Here’s an instructive passage from Young’s article today (emphasis mine)
It would be too simplistic to suggest that the Syrians provoked the Hizbullah-Ahbash confrontation in order to bring their army back to Lebanon. Bashar Assad would like to do so, because only a military presence allows him to truly control the country and regain the Lebanese card regionally. However, such a process requires time, careful preparation regionally and internationally, and patience. For now the Syrians are focusing on gaining leverage against Hizbullah, which holds the political and military initiative in the country.
Could Mr. Assad’s embrace be the hug before the stab?
Hello, my name is Mustapha and I've been blogging about Lebanese society, business and politics since February 2005.
War drums are beating into synchronicity, in other words, the fix is in. What do you think Arab chances are this time?
How about this view? The West wants to pry Syria away from Iran. Syria, being more pragmatic than ideological, wants compensation (read, Lebanon). So the West arranges to absolve Syrian involvement with the Hariri assasination and sticks Hezbullah with the can. Syria only needs Hezbullah to maintain its influence in Lebanon but this approach eliminates Hezbullah’s usefulness. Also, since Syria’s goal has always been \Greater Syria\, Iran’s influence is greatly diminished adding a big plus to the equation.