Damascene Diversion

Christopher has a fine post...again, which is a must read. It pretty much wraps the whole Annapolis talks thing into one neat package.

Please try to ignore the lack of proofreading and editing, something you might expect from me. Am not sure why Christopher's story is so sloppy.

There's a Middle Eastern proverb making the rounds these days: You can't make war without Egypt and you can't have peace without Syria. And if Syria's sitting down at the table, as it's indicated it will do at next week, it's a safe bet that the fate of two key parts of the region -- the Golan and Lebanon -- are up for discussion.

In two of the most intractable problems of the region -- Lebanon and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict -- the Syrian regime has been the immovable obstacle. Because outside the U.S., the Middle East isn't just defined by the Israeli-Arab conflict. It's a Gordian Knot of conflicts involving Israelis and Palestinians, Israel and Arabs, Arab Shi'ites and Arab Sunnis, Arabs and Iranians and the West and Iran. They're all intertwined, but the common thread in this tangled skein is Syria and the regime of its President Bashar al-Assad.

There's a lot riding on the Annapolis talks. I think everyone has their fingers crossed on this including their trigger fingers.

I hate predictions because in hindsight they can really look lame, but my guess is they need some success in these talks or all hell is gonna break loose in the Mid-East.

Via Spot-On by way of Back to Iraq 3.0. Note: Same post at both links.