YES, I READ ABOUT THE CONFIDENTIAL IAEA REPORT-IT MEANS NOTHING. IT IS, CIA, LIKE THE REPORTS USED TO JUSTIFY THE WAR IN IRAQ, AND GOING BACK FURTHER, LIKE THE BOMBS SENT TO THE BABY'S MILK FACTORY IN SUDAN BECAUSE THERE WAS REALLY A CHEMICAL WEAPONS FACTORY THERE-RIGHT?

I BELIEVE SYRIA-THERE WAS NO NUCLEAR WEAPONS FACILITY THERE. SYRIA, COOPERATE WITH THE IAEA AND PROVE THEM WRONG -THOSE WITH THE KNEEJERK REACTIONS THAT STATE UNEQUIVOCALLY THAT SYRIA WAS BUILDING A NUCLEAR REACTOR THERE-I FIND THE PROPOSITION JUST AS RIDICULOUS AS I DID BACK IN 2003 - WITH THE UNEQUIVOCAL STATEMENT OF WMD IN IRAQ-IMPOSSIBLE-THAT WAS SADDAM BLUFFING-A BROKEN NATION BEING BULLIED AND A LEADER WHO HAD TO SHOW THAT HE COULD HURL IT BACK AT THE US-THAT'S ALL THAT WAS.

THAT'S WHAT THE WH/CIA IS TRYING TO DO TO SYRIA NOW-MAKE IT LIKE THEIR VERSION OF SADDAM'S IRAQ, AND MAKE IT LIKE IRAN-BUT IT IS NOT, AND NEVER COULD BE LIKE IRAQ, AND CERTAINLY NOT IRAN-IRAN IS AN HONEST TO GOD ENEMY-NOT SYRIA-AND THE SOONER THE HEADS OF THE CIA/NSA GET THAT THROUGH THEIR SKULLS-WELL, WE'LL SEE WHAT HAPPENS IN THE NEXT YEAR, WON'T WE? BUT EUROPE WILL HAVE MOVED WAY AWAY IN THAT SPHERE OF INFLUENCE, OF THAT, THERE CAN BE NO DOUBT!

CIA, CIA, DO YOU UNDERSTAND WHAT IS HAPPENING HERE? THERE'S NOTHING LEFT TO DECONSTRUCT ANYMORE-THE WHOLE WORLD, AND I MEAN THE WHOLE WORLD, PARTICULARLY IN THE MIDDLE EAST -THE TIES BETWEEN EUROPE AND THE ARAB WORLD,-THEY ARE CREATING, CIA, A NEW CONSTRUCT-AND YOU, OUT THERE STUCK IN THE TAR PITS OF LANGLEY-CAN'T SEEM TO SEE THAT YOU RESEMBLE THE MOST ANCIENT AND ABOUT TO BE EXTINCT DINOSAURS-PERHAPS YOU ARE A PERSONIFICATION OF THE US A AT THIS MOMENTOUS JUNCTURE IN HISTORY-DYING OUT THERE IN THE TAR PITS.

THE REST OF THE WORLD, CIA, HAS MOVED ON, IN FRANCE, THE UK, THE PRETENSE IS OVER, THE US IS BEING....OVERLOOKED, IN FAVOR OF THOSE WHO ENGAGE AND WANT REAL DIALOGUE, REAL DIALOGUE THAT DOESN'T PLAY ON HUMANITY'S FEARS IN ORDER TO SCORE SOME CHEAP POLITICAL POINTS. EUROPE AND THE ARAB WORLD ARE MOVING IN TANDEM, ONLY YOU, CIA, AND THIS COUNTRY, ARE WAY OUT THERE, WHERE NO ONE WANTS TO BE-DYING IN THE TAR PITS, WITH NO ONE THERE TO HELP YOU, BECAUSE YOU KNEW THE DANGERS BEFOREHAND, AND YOU WENT THERE ANYWAY, OH SO ARROGANTLY CONFIDENT-FOLLOWING YOUR LEADER-TO HELL.

Ignatius, did you see this article today in the London Times? THE REST OF EUROPE DOESN'T GIVE A DAMN ABOUT WH/CHENEY'S LITTLE DISINFORMATION WAR AGAINST SYRIA-THEY'RE PLOWING FULL STEAM AHEAD WITH PARTNERSHIPS WITH SYRIA-CIA, CIA, ARE YOU LISTENING? DO YOU FEEL LIKE THE DOPES THAT YOU REALLY ARE YET? DO YOU FEEL EMBARASSED YET ABOUT YOUR UNEQUIVOCAL PRONOUNCEMENT CONCERNING THAT ALLEGED NUCLEAR REACTOR? I SURE AS HELL WOULD, IF I WERE YOU! THANK GOD WE'LL HAVE A NEW ADMINISTRATION-AND I HOPE A CIA ADMIN. THAT REALIZES THAT SYRIA IS OUR FRIEND, NOT OUR ENEMY!

Britain re-establishes high-level intelligence links with Syria
(Atef Hassan/Reuters)
Syria is known to have excellent intelligence on tracking the movements of Islamic extremists into Iraq
Richard Beeston, Catherine Philp and Oliver August
Britain re-established high-level intelligence links with the Syrian authorities as David Miliband made his landmark visit to Damascus yesterday, according to senior Syrian officials.

The move, first raised earlier this year at a meeting in New York between the Foreign Secretary and his Syrian counterpart, Walid Moualem, was a key objective of the Syrian visit. The newly revived intelligence relationship could be hugely beneficial to Britain. Syria is known to have one of the best intelligence-gathering systems in the Middle East, in particular in tracking the movements of Islamic extremists into Iraq and around the region.

“Miliband asked Moualem in New York whether he could re-establish intelligence links at a senior level” after lower level contacts, a Syrian official said. Mr Moualem invited Mr Miliband to take intelligence officials with him on the trip to Damascus.

Mr Miliband's visit, the first by a British foreign secretary for seven years, was touted as an opportunity to test Syria's willingness to engage with the West, lifting it out of its current isolation.

Related Links
The time is right to seek a trade in allegiances
Miliband goes on a mission for peace
Miliband faces Israeli anger over West Bank goods
Washington has long insisted on isolating Syria but with a change of administration - and attitude - looming, Britain and France are leading efforts to lure Damascus out of the solitude it has found itself in since it was implicated in the murder of the former Lebanese Prime Minister, Rafiq Hariri, three years ago.

David Ignatius: “You can say whatever you like about these talks--that they're insincere, that they won't lead to a peace treaty, that they will or won't affect Syria's strategic relationship with Iran. To which I would respond: So???”

So, you don’t realize what you are up against. The Hebrews and Muslims of the Middle East are not going to accomplish anything with each other as long as each adheres to their scripture concerning genocide for those not of their tribe. See their own writings about each other and compare them to the modern day Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Perhaps a special court could be set up in Jerusalem in which a person could be tried on crimes against humanity for adhering to either Quran 9:29 or Torah 23:3.

Islam Quran sura 9:29: Fight those who do not believe in Allah, nor in the day of judgment, nor do they prohibit what Allah and His Messenger have prohibited, nor follow the religion of truth, out of those who have been given the Book (Mahayana, Torah and Bible), until they pay the tax in acknowledgment of superiority and they are in a state of subjection (saghiroon). The Arabic ‘saghiroon’ translates as : “contemptible; humbled, meek, dejected; submissive, servile; lowly subject” when applied to Jews and Christians.

Zion Torah Deuteronomy 23:3: "No Ammonite or Moabite (non-Hebrews) shall enter the assembly of YAHWEH; even to the tenth generation none belonging to them shall enter the assembly of YAHWEH for ever ... You shall not seek their peace or their prosperity all your days forever."
Zion Torah Deuteronomy 7:2: "You must utterly destroy them amongst you (non-Hebrews); you shall make no covenant with them, and show no mercy to them. You shall not make marriages with them, giving your daughters to their sons or taking their daughters for your sons."

Universal Declaration of Human Rights: Article 2. Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration. Article 7. All are equal before the law and are entitled to equal protection of the law. Article 17. Everyone has the right to own property alone as well as in association with others, and no one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his property. Article 30. Nothing in this Declaration may be interpreted as implying for any State, group or person any right to engage in any activity or to perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and freedoms set forth herein.

Ignatius-there are a LOT of VERY STRANGE THINGS REGARDING US FOREIGN POLICY AND SYRIA-I THINK IT POINTS TO ONE THING-THE MEDDLINGS OF THE EVIL AND INSIDIOUS VP CHENEY-HIS MALIGN INFLUENCE SEEMS TO BE DIRECTLY INVOLVED IN BUSH MAKING ALL THESE WARLIKE PRONOUNCEMENTS ABOUT SYRIA OVER THE PAST FEW YEARS THAT ARE INEXPLICABLE-YET EXPLICABLE IN THE SENSE THAT CHENEY SEES SYRIA TIED INEXTRICABLY TO IRAN.

BUT THAT JUST SHOWS YOU WHAT AN IDIOT CHENEY REALLY IS: THE IDEA THAT SYRIA AND IRAN ARE "ALIGNED" IS CRAZY-THE ENTIRE MIDDLE EAST FINDS THE IRANIANS CRAZY, NUTS, LETHAL-POISON-BUT THAT DOESN'T MEAN THAT SYRIA AND IRAN DO NOT HAVE CERTAIN PRAGMATIC INTERESTS IN COMMON-AND OF COURSE, ISRAEL WANTS TO CUT A DEAL WITH SYRIA ON ACCOUNT OF IRAN-ISOLATE IRAN IS THE KEY.

AND WHY ISN'T THE US IN ON THIS? BECAUSE CHENEY AND WH ET AL HAD THE RUG PULLED OUT FROM UNDER THEM-THE WH THOUGHT THE ISRAELIS WERE ALIGNED WITH THEM ON THE POSITION THAT IRAN AND SYRIA ARE AN AXIS AND SHOULD BE EQUALLY PUT DOWN. BUT THAT JUST SHOWS YOU WHAT DOPES WE HAVE IN THE WHITE HOUSE, AND ALSO AT THE CIA-THE AGENCY HASN'T APPEARED TO LEARN A THING FROM 2003, NOW HAVE THEY?'

CIA, DO TELL US, TELL US HERE! WHY DID YOU SAY, UNEQUIVOCALLY, THAT SYRIA HAD A NUCLEAR WEAPONS FACILITY-THAT YOU WERE ABSOLUTELY CERTAIN, I BELIEVE YOU WERE QUOTED IN THE POST AND OTHER PAPERS. AND NOW, YOU ARE DEAD SILENT ON THE SUBJECT! WHY IS THAT? WHY HAVEN'T YOU COME OUT WITH ANYTHING, CIA, ANYTHING AT ALL TO BACK UP YOUR POINT?

BECAUSE YOU KNOW IT'S NOT TRUE, THAT'S WHY! -AND YOU WERE ENGAGING IN A DISINFORMATION CAMPAIGN/INFORMATION WAR AGAINST SYRIA, RIGHT? YOU STILL ARE! YOU'RE STILL ACTING DOPEY, CIA!

THE CIA, ONCE AGAIN, AND INEXPLICABLY THIS TIME, PUT ITS REPUTATION ON THE LINE AND STATED SOMETHING THAT WAS FLAT OUT NOT TRUE-THERE WAS NOT, NOR EVER HAS BEEN A NUCLEAR WEAPONIZING FACILITY THERE.

AND ISRAEL, WHEN IT COMES TO ITS OWN SELF PRESERVATION, DOESN'T GIVE A DAMN ABOUT THE WHITE HOUSE AND CIA BLATHERING ON ABOUT SYRIA-IT NEEDS SYRIA -SO IT'S GOING ON ABOUT ITS BUSINESS-AND THE US? IT AIN'T INVITED TO THE PARTY.

THAT UGLY LITTLE BORDER FORAY INTO SYRIA-WAS A DICK CHENEY DIRECTED OPERATION-I'M QUITE SURE-JUST ONE MORE REASON TO DRIVE A WEDGE BETWEEN THE US AND SYRIA-THANK GOD, WE'LL HAVE A NEW ADMINISTRATION TO HOPEFULLY GET RID OF THESE A-HOLES AT THE WHITE HOUSE AND CIA WHO DON'T UNDERSTAND HOW VITAL SYRIA IS TO OUR INTERESTS, NOT JUST ISRAEL'S!

David Ignatious: "When I visited Damascus in late August to interview top Syrian officials, they made clear that President Bashar Assad wanted the United States to join France and Turkey as a co-sponsor of the indirect peace talks--and that if the U.S. did so, Syria was ready to meet directly with Israel."

This sounds like the Americans are once again being set up to be co-blamed for another negotiation failure like Syria and Iran have set up in the past. The Baathists and Pasdarin are contunually justifiying their 'great struggle' by linking Europe and America to Zionist conspiricies and then blaming the failure of negotians on the current 'international conspirecy'. Lets see what the Syrians do, not say, without any direct interaction with the United States and France in a Turkey sponsered dialog.

It is not terribly surprising that the U.S. is less than enthusiastic about a peace deal between Israel and Syria based on the premise that Syria will re-enter Lebanon, pacify Hezbollah, and re-establish the status quo ante, an occupation that precluded Lebanese independence. The United States plainly understood the expulsion of Syria from Lebanon as progress and is not inclined to support reversing it, even if Israel perceives near-term security advantages. In short, the fundamental Israeli and American analysis of the situation and national interests do no coincide, in the view of the Bush administration. It will be interesting to see if the Obama administration reverses course, and while that is distinctly possible, I would not bet even money.

We should encourage some continued State department dialogue until the new administration comes on board. Is Hillary going to make any difference? Jaybird2 seems to have it right for now.

Maybe the tail hasn't given us the requisite permission to wag.

I thought that we had done our work behind the scenes and it was now ready for an agreement. If so, it will be the first major benefits to come from our winning in Iraq.

Having observed large quantities of ME peace being processed, with the participation and/or brokerage of numerous US administrations, a reasonable question at this stage is: what makes anyone think that the results would be any worse if we don't participate?

What we need to remember is that there are 2 positions and 2 sides, and both have legitimate interests (whether or not they coincide with our interests)-our history in this region is not without fault-any permanent solution is going to require Syria, as well as the Arab League which has offered to recognize Israel and remove trade barriers in exchange for Israel giving up land it captured in the 1967 war for a Palestinian state-this should be the starting point for a comprehensive peace in the region

You're a lone dog in the wilderness, Dave. My dog will recite the complete works of Dante before the zionists in the White House make any serious effort for peace. Their lasting legacy, permanent wars for Israel, is all they have to show for their eight years of rapture-inspired terrorism against the free world. Don't expect the crazies to start growing any cranial stem-cells now, after getting their pee-pees whacked by Mother Superior at the polls last week.....

The Sherlock Holmes mystery is "Silver Blaze" (1892). The quote is:
"Is there any other point to which you would wish to draw my attention?"
"To the curious incident of the dog in the night-time."
"The dog did nothing in the night-time."
"That was the curious incident," remarked Sherlock Holmes.

Dear David,

It is not at all clear to me that US participation in these talks would be particularly constructive or more effective than it has been in past talks. For one thing we have our own contentious issues with Syria consequent to our invasion of Iraq. For another we have further issues with Syria over their relationship with Iran which has become much closer than it used to be.

It seems to me that the heart of the matter between Israel and Syria is the exchange of the Golan Heights for adequate security on Israel’s northern border (with Syria and Lebanon). In truth, the expulsion of Syria from Lebanon has reduced their ability to deliver in that negotiation; the best they can offer now is to cut off support for Hezbollah, not to exercise military control over them.

I don’t know if Israel actually sees the value of peace with Syria to be worth the cost of returning the Golan Heights. Such a deal would certainly have a distinct domestic political cost within Israel and by no means deals with the continuing threats from Hezbollah and Hamas. If the Turks can constructively put such a deal together, more power to them; it would be a great step forward.

We have problem enough already on our hands. That is the question of peace between the Palestinians and the Israelis, the two state solution. It remains to be seen whether the current round of crippled negotiations under our aegis have actually been constructive. Crippled by the civil war between Fatah and Hamas not to mention the fall from grace of Olmert and the potential disintegration of Kadima. It is not very promising, is it? I personally think we might well have done a lot better had we granted Hamas the legitimacy of their electoral victory and dealt with them accordingly. As it is, we are now effectively talking to some of those Palestinians on the West Bank and excluding those in Gaza.

It is hard to say whether President Obama will make much difference. US domestic politics has already extracted the usual unconditioned commitment to Israel from him so it is not likely we shall see our brokerage suddenly become more honest. But until it does, and until we are willing to take proper account of the legitimate interests of both Hesbollah and Hamas, demons or not, in addition to those of Israel, we are unlikely to help much in finding a basis for peace in this part of the world.

Oh let's see now. OK, the US is expected to give each side say, $10B dollars to consumate any peace agreement, is that why we should be there?

This reminds me a little bit of the IDF and Hamas several years back. Everytime Hamas looked like it was ready to agree to a cease fire, pow, another targeted assassination came from the IDF, leading to Hamas backtracking.
Not that I have any sympathy for scum like an Al Qaeda operator in Syria, far from it, but I just find it hard to believe that if such people were known by the US to be operating in Syria that they wouldn't have been targeted long ago. Maybe they have been and Syria is just choosing to make this one public in order to embarass Bush, in their minds. But as a non-partisan citizen, my only reaction to the October raid is, what took the Bush White House so long to do stuff like this, if indeed this is the first one in Syria- which I doubt.

Dear David:
Why do you sound like you were born yesterday? As if Syria and Israel are talking for the first time indirectly in Ankara. You are a veteran journalist and should know better. In the past, the US repeatedly sponsored talks between Damascus and Tel Aviv, what was the result, to put it in your words, nada…
Successive US administrations have tried their hands with Syrian-Israeli talks. Former Sec of State James Baker not only made Syria attend the Madrid Conference, along with Israeli officials in the room for the first time in history, but he went as far as enlisting late Syrian President Hafez Assad on board of an international coalition against Assad’s rival Saddam Hussein to liberate Kuwait in 1991.
What did Assad offer in return for US love when Syria was given an acknowledged role in Lebanon? He did not even bother to disarm Hezbollah or reign it in. He even used Hezbollah for more blackmail of the West.
Then former President Bill Clinton’s team followed suit to the extent that Clinton hosted a dinner in Camp David that was attended by Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak and Syrian Foreign Minister Farouk Sharaa, face-to-face. What were the results again? Nada, nothing, zero…
So now, what does Syria offer the US in return for peace with Israel? Reading your host analyst Sami Moubayyed on this blog, all what Syria offers is to play broker with Hamas, Hezbollah and Iran. If the US wants to talk to these non-state and state actors, there is no reason why Syria should be the intermediary.
The United States of America should talk to all of its enemies. And inasmuch as the United States should be sincere in its offers and in delivering them, so should the enemies be, unlike Syria, sincere. Syria seeks US friendship and then uses this friendship to ask for more and meanwhile, give nothing in return but false promises of changing a lousy tyrannical behavior inside Syria and bullying smaller neighbors like Lebanon.
You should know better David. Do not let your Syrian pampering on your trip in August fool you. Nothing is personal here. If Syria wants to behave, and if Assad wants to pull another Sadat or another Jordanian monarchy, the US will be realist enough to embrace him, even if at the expense of Syrian human rights.
One thing the Iraq war has taught us, there is no point for the US doing what is right and supporting democracy and freedom amongst people who apparently reject these principles. The US is certainly going back to realism in foreign policy, and this does not mean staying dumb like we were when we invaded Iraq. It means we become realistic and learn from history and past dealings with Assad, who seems to be even a lousier version of his shrewd father Hafez.

Thanks for the right-on-the-nose, witty and informative analysis.
One could think of two possible explanations, neither inconceivable: either some kind of snafu, or more cynically, a deliberate attempt at sabotaging the incoming adminsitration's future efforts.

More charitably, maybe the present administration is waiting for Obama to toss an extra-strength throat lozenge to the ailing doggie? Cheers

Because USA cannot help to be an HONEST BROKER and intermediary, due to its internal politics and the heavy Jewish lobby. Syrians also know this well.
In any case, this will not go anywhere because the two sides are talking past each other, not to each other (even indirectly). Each side to the argument has a different goal.

Syria cannot afford to give up the "leadership" Ba'athist pan-Arabist (self-appointed) role of being an Arab radical, because it cannot compete with Saudi Arabia, Gulfies and Egypt in Arab politics, especially as the Iraqi version of pan-Arabism is dead.

And the Israelis are not going to give up Golan Heights for the life in them. Their main goal in this latest round is to try to drive a wedge between Iran and Syria.

Thus the main point of "peace" gets losts in the muddle and the fudge.

Peace in the middle east would be a bad thing for the futures of certain political organizations on both sides. For instance, there are those in Israel who insist upon hegemony in the region, not unlike what the old Soviet Union had in eastern Europe.

Wait a minute. If they are talking on their own volition, Why should the U.S get involved? These talks are limited to the issues between Israel and Syria. Include the U.S and all of a sudden issues the U.S has with Syria suddenly appear on the table. Why complicate the talks by involving the U.S?

I think the main reason for us not participating in these talks, is because the mentality of the Bush foreign policy in the M.E is something like: "Don't forget who is the boss here, and before anything can happen, it must get our approval. Our way or no way". To emphasize this bullying behavior, Bush orders a strike on Syria, a country which beefed up its borders with Iraq to prevent infiltration of terrorists. Unless these bilateral talks are a sham, they can potentially signal a trend that the influence of the U.S is waning, and that interested parties in the region can talk peace without the heavy handed approach of a super power.

I really admire your work, and I hope this little doggie keeps sniffing around until he finds out who gave the order to attack Syria on Oct 26th. It looks to me like someone is trying to sabotage this current peace mission.

You forget that the Bush administration had mentally checked out oh, about 6-8 months or so ago. God has been too busy to give Dubya clearance for any peace between his favorite child (Israel) and his step children (the Arabs).

Condi tried her cold war Russia template and it didnt work (mainly because it was just a template with no content). Heck it doesnt even work with Russia anymore and Condi has no other tricks. She is probably busy sending her resume over to the University of Tel Aviv (or equivalent)

Dear Ignatius

A wonderful article from your desk

US policy in middle east all together having no logical conclusions.

I really do not know that either it is extra smart or simply foolish