‘Damascus and Beirut are heading toward normalization and full diplomatic relations for the first time in their modern history, which the Lebanese expect will usher in a relationship based on mutual respect for each other’s sovereignty and the Syrians hope will improve their ties with the rest of the world,’ the ME Times reports. (more…)

Although I’m a fervent critic of Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, I’ve got to say that I appreciate his role as ‘Middle Eastern Mediator.’ Turkey is a unique country, in a unique decision. It’s a Muslim country, but focused on the West, modern and secular. It’s friends with most other Muslim countries - most of whom aren’t secular - but it’s also friends with European countries, the United States and, yes, Israel; the Jewish nation-state. (more…)

The German newspaper the Spiegel published a fairly good article about the latest controversy surrounding Dutch MP Geert Wilders. As you all will know by now, Wilders has produced an anti-Islam movie called “Fitna.” Shortly after word came out that he would make such a movie, all hell broke loose. People - even governments and government officials - asked or demanded Wilders not to go ahead with the plan. Fundamentalist Muslims in foreign countries found out about the plan, and started threatening the Dutch government and people. But Wilders refused to bow to the pressure. (more…)

Before and after the Israeli strike. A nice clean-up job by the Syrians.

A senior U.S. intelligence officer:

It’s a magic act — here today, gone tomorrow. It doesn’t lower suspicions, it raises them. This was not a long-term decommissioning of a building, which can take a year. It was speedy. It’s incredible that they could have gone to that effort to make something go away.

David Albright, president of the Institute for Science and International Security:

It looks like Syria is trying to hide something and destroy the evidence of some activity. But it won’t work. Syria has got to answer questions about what it was doing.

Joseph Cirincione, an expert on nuclear proliferation at the Center for American Progress:

It’s clearly very suspicious. The Syrians were up to something that they clearly didn’t want the world to know about.

I wonder what that could be.

“A Syrian court on Sunday sentenced two pro-democracy campaigners, Michel Kilo and Mahmoud Issa, to three years in prison each for spreading false news, weakening national feeling and inciting sectarian sentiments.”

The total number of government critics and human rights campaigners to be convicted in the last month in Syria: four.

I’m sure glad that Pelosi believes that Assad is a good man.

The Jerusalem Post reports:

The IDF on Thursday held intensive training maneuvers in preparation for a feared Syrian attack on the Golan Heights.

Hundreds of tanks and thousands of soldiers, backed by helicopters and Unmanned Aerial Vehicles, massed in the Judean Desert to drill simulations of war. The training exercise focused on Brigade 401 and its utilization of Israel’s most advanced tank - the Merkava Mark 4 - against the Syrian advanced Russian-made T-72.

Since the Second Lebanon War, Military Intelligence has claimed that war with Syria is now closer than ever, and the IDF is on heightened alert in the North in preparation for the possibility of a surprise attack.

President Bashar Assad, analysts have said, was empowered by Hizbullah’s surprise success while fighting the IDF. The assessment is that he might be motivated to launch hostilities in an effort to retrieve the Golan Heights, either by initiating a surprise attack to capture one or two Israeli communities or by firing long-range ballistic missiles at the home front.

But Nancy said Assad was a good, reasonable man!

Couldn’t resist that snark.

Israel still has the strongest military in the region, an attack by Syria would - most likely - be a major mistake. On the other hand, one also has to keep in mind that the anti-Israel crowd has quite a PR machine going. This PR machine could result in so much pressure on Israel, that Olmert will, once again, pull out too quickly / fight back with too little troops / commitment.

H/t Swaraaj Chauhan

America, fear no more! If you’re not happy with Bush’s foreign policy, I have good news for you: the Democrats have a foreign policy of their own. Rep. Tom Lantos, a San Mateo Democrat and chairman of the House Foreign Relations Committee:

“We have an alternative Democratic foreign policy. I view my job as beginning with restoring overseas credibility and respect for the United States.”

An alternative Democratic foreign policy? Probably because it is incredibly important for a country not to send mixed messages, right?

This is unbelievable: they’re now even saying it. I do not see how reasonable, not-overly partisan Democrats can defend Pelosi’s conduct.

I’m with the Washington Post.

Pelosi is hurting the Democratic Party by, yes, overreaching.

Also read this article at the Wall Street Journal.

Nancy Pelosi recently said that she “had relayed a message from Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, to the effect that Israel was ready for peace talks with Syria.” Syria responded that it’s ready for talks. There is but one little problem: Israel denies “that [it] relayed a message to Syria”.

In fact, Olmert’s office said that: “what was discussed with the House speaker did not include any change in Israel’s policy, as it has been presented to international parties involved in the matter.”

And, according to the prime minister’s office, Olmert told Pelosi that “Israel continued to regard Syria as ‘part of the axis of evil and a party encouraging terrorism in the entire Middle East’.”

I wonder, like Hot Air’s A.P., whether “she bungled the offer unintentionally, out of sheer, royal stupidity, or she didn’t bungle it at all and there’s simply been a miscommunication somewhere.”

This is quite unbelievable. I am not sure what to think of it. Miscommunication, stupidity… intentional?

Ed Morrissey comments: and this is exactly why foreign policy belongs in the executive branch.

I believe that Pelosi should never have traveled to the Mideast, and especially not if she wants to do more than just chitchat. This is none of her business. If Israel wants to give a message to Syria, it would do so through the President of the U.S. or, more likely, its secretary of state.

This is truly a sign of major incompetence.

The Jerusalem Post has an highly, highly interesting article up. It seems that Jacques Chirac urged Israel to attack Syria last summer, and not Lebanon. If Israel would do so, it would have the full support of France.

According to Chirac, not Iran but Syria “is the main one responsible for Hizbullah’s armament in Lebanon”.

Ed Morrissey has a great post up about this. His main point: Israel attacked the wrong country last year. Chirac was right: Israel should not have invaded southern Lebanon, it should have invaded Syria and removed Assad from power.

Olmert didn’t want to do what he had to do: Israel fought half-heartedly. It should’ve gone in full force. Now, looking back, one might, indeed, argue that it would be even best for Israel to have invaded Syria. On the other hand, if Israel would have invaded Syria, the need for determination and conviction would have been even more: if Israel would have fought against Syria like it fought against Hezbollah, half-heartedly that is, it would be a total disaster.