Earlier this week, the AP reported, Syria and Lebanon Set Up Formal Ties:
The initiative by President Bashar al-Assad of Syria ends six decades of nonrecognition and meets a demand by the United States that Syria act to help achieve stability in the region, even as Syria pursued indirect peace talks with Israel. Syria and Lebanon said they planned to open embassies by the end of the year.
Just peachy, right?
And the article concludes:
Syria has dominated Lebanon for decades and long kept a military presence there, regarding it as a Syrian province.
Note that the word “occupation” is never used. Also note the uncertain tense of that sentence. Does Syria still regard Lebanon as its own? The AP won’t tell you that, but Jonathan Spyer will. In An iron fist in a velvet glove, Spyer writes:
Lebanese commentators are expressing cautious optimism. However, the more likely prognosis is that Syria will continue to exercise its will in Lebanon through a combination of diplomacy and other means. Syria apparently expects that the Lebanese opposition will make significant gains in the elections scheduled for March.
Damascus is also understood to expect that a Barack Obama victory in the US presidential election will mark the end of Syrian international isolation.
The independent military capacity wielded by Hizbullah – pointed at Israel and, where necessary, at pro-Western forces in Lebanon – continues to be supplied via Damascus. This capacity holds the final word in Lebanon. Nothing can happen without its consent.
Nothing’s changed. Syria’s making a cosmetic change for international consumption but isn’t giving up its designs on Lebanon.
Crossposted on Soccer Dad.