The various visits of European officials to Syria are considered, in Syria, as a sign about the importance of the Syrian role in the region which perhaps explains the increasing Syrian confidence in its position. The Syrian president deputy mentioned, on more than one occasion, that Syria will defend itself if Israel attacks.

It is unclear what Israeli politicians conceal regarding Syria but if a war broke out in the northern front it is not difficult to predict that the July war with Hizbualla last July will be a nothing compared to the war with Syria. It is possible in this regard, to argue with great confidence, that the traditional concept of victory is not factual any more, especially if we consider that the destruction will not be only on the Syrian side, which enforces the question about -----who will regret the war?


- The writer is a Palestinian Norwegian historian. He can be contacted at: [email protected]

The third factor is the Syrian lessons drawn from the July war last year when Hizbu Allah succeeded in inflicting significant practical and moral loss on the Israeli side. This matter, which might encourage Syria to consider a limited but calculated war, could be like casting a stone in the quite waters. However despite the intensive Israeli talk about this question, Damascus said very little about it. The foreign minister has denied any Syrian thinking about the war. But there are more hints from Syria which indicates Syria is aware that it might use force at some period if there is no hope to restore its occupied territory peacefully.

It is not clear for now, the impact of other regional complications, which might push towards more instability such as the Iraqi question and the question of the international court which Syria views as being an instrument to punish Syria for its anti American policies. Recently there were some indications that Syria believes that it bypassed the hard times when it was isolated by Europe.

In the Syrian view, the Israeli conditions that Syria should cut its support to Hizbu Allah and cut the contact with Iran is a clear Israeli message that it is not interested of negotiations with Syria. Syria?s position has been made clear by its foreign minister Al Mualim,that any future negotiations must be about practical matters and not about its right to the whole occupied Syrian territory.

The second factor is that the Syrians are convinced that Olmert is too weak to decide major decisions, and more than that, the question of negotiating the withdrawal from the Golan Heights has become in the American hands, in the first place. According to this view some political analyst?s thinks that Syria is more interested in negotiating the American boss than Israel.

This view bases its argument on the Israeli tradition of beating the drums of war for the sake of calming down the critical voices. However whether this view is true or not, it is difficult to ignore the fact, that the absence of a foreseeable possible solution is dragging the region towards more violence and uncertainties, especially if we consider the American threats to Iran and the potential danger of this war on the whole region.

Some observers assume that when Al Assad affirmed that Syria cannot wait forever to restore its occupied Golan territory he is sending a clear message to Israel that if the ?no war no peace? situation continues Syria will consider all the alternatives to retain its rights. This view bases its analysis on three factors. The first fact is that Syria is convinced that Israel is not ready to give back the Golan Heights peacefully. There is no indication which demonstrates that there is some change in the Israeli political thinking.