Syrian rift

Syria is the object of media attention these days for two reasons. The most recent is the attack last Sunday by US forces from Iraq into Syria that destroyed a house in a village 8 kms inside the border. Four US helicopters were involved in the attack, two for defense and two on attack, and they completely destroyed the compound and reportedly killed 8 people. According to Syrian sources the people killed were a peaceful family with 4 children; according to US sources in the Pentagon this was the operations center of Abu Ghadiyeh, the most active al Qaeda supplier of men and materiel across the Syrian border into Iraq to attack American and Iraqi forces. US intelligence discovered that he was planning a raid and for the first time sought to interdict him within Syrian territory. According to US reports Abu Ghadiyeh and his men were killed. The funeral held Monday was of 8 men.
The Syrian FM visiting London strongly criticized the US for breaching its sovereignty and vowed that any further attacks would be met with strong resistance. As a reaction the Syrian Govt. announced the closure of the American School and the American cultural center in Damascus. While the US issued no formal statement on the attack it was considered to be a warning that now that most al Qaeda forces in Iraq have been defeated, the US will not tolerate such blatant breaches of international law that have been going on for years while Syria has lied time and time again that it does ntot allow terrorists to train on its territory and then cross the border to attack US and Iraqi forces.
One wonders what an Obama presidency would make of this raid. Is it Bush trying to implicate the US in a third war, or is it merely a long overdue extension of the Iraq war to protect US forces and the nascent Iraqi state from terrorist attacks from Syria? I have little doubt that a McCain presidency would understand and support it.
The other major move by Syria was a joint statement last week that Syria and Lebanon will mutually recogize each other, exchange ambassadors and define the border between their two countries. Many people were not aware that Syria never recognized the existence of the State of Lebanon, and regarded its setting up by France in the 1930's to protect the rights of the Christian minority as illegitimate. The Syrian attitude has been much like that of Saddam's Iraq regarding Kuwait, or of China regarding Taiwan, namely that it was a Syrian province with no legitimate sovereignty. However, in the case of Lebanon the country has existed for 70 years and is recognized by the UN and most of the world. This late recognition of Lebanese sovereignty comes as Syria continues to support Hizbollah by arming it and cooperating with its pro-Iranian leaders. Under the Doha agreement arrived at several months ago, Hizbollah now has a veto over any actions of the Lebanese Govt. So actually while Syria is recognizing Lebanese sovereignty with one hand it is taking it away with the other.