Will Syria Be Scapegoated?

According to the American State department’s top official on Iraq policy, the Americans could talk with Iran but will ignore Syria.

Remember David Satterfield, the Harry-Potter lookalike who used to be the American Ambassador in Beirut? In his new function as Condi’s top official on Iraq policy, he was explaining to the Senate (which now has a new democratic majority), why the state department is ruling out talking with Syria, but might consider Iran:

“With respect to Syria, we do not believe that the issue involving Syria’s negative behaviors toward Iraq, Hizbullah, Lebanon, Iran or Palestinian radical groups is a question of lack of dialogue or lack of engagement,” Mr Satterfield said. “With respect to Iran, we are prepared, in principle, to discuss Iranian activities in Iraq. The timing of such a direct dialogue is one we still have under review.”

His remarks appeared to conflict with the position taken by President George Bush — that the Iranians would have to bring a verifiable halt to the enrichment of uranium before talks could occur.

In the above light, perhaps, just perhaps, what if Iran decides to play ball?

In an Assafir story yesterday, Iran denied the accusations of March 14 by pointing out the good relationship it had with Hariri the father. Could it be that Iran wants to wash its hands of the Hariri tribunal?

If we combine the above with the “bouquet of suggestions” offered by foreign diplomats to the Lebanese parties, where the solution starts by choosing a new, neutral, President, we could sense that Iran’s allies Hezbollah might eventually let go of Syria’s Ally Lahhoud, for Iranian regional gains at the expense of Syria… If, a big if, the Americans pay the right price with regards to Iran’s nuclear program.

Syria won’t be happy, Israel won’t be happy, and they might both work towards sabotaging such a deal. Only time can tell..