US President George W. Bush says he has lost patience with Syria's Bashar Al Assad and has ruled out opening a dialogue with him. What a pity, because you sit down and talk peace with your enemy, not your friend.
Or, as the European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso said recently of British Prime Minister Gordon Brown's refusal to attend a conference that had invited Zimbabwe's President Robert Mugabe: "Life has taught me that if you are in international politics, sometimes you have to meet people that your mother would not like to see you with."
If ever there is to be any form of understanding between the US and Syria, then it is essential there should be dialogue between the two nations. Not only for the stability of Lebanon - the reason for the present crisis - but also for the region as a whole.
The US accuses Al Assad of meddling in the internal affairs of Lebanon "because he houses Hamas, he facilitates Hezbollah, suiciders [sic] going from his country into Iraq and he destabilises Lebanon".
Yet Syria blames the US for interference in the Lebanese presidential crisis by allegedly blocking Syrian and French efforts to end the deadlock that has virtually paralysed Lebanon.
The country has been without a president for nearly a month since Emile Lahoud left office, refusing to continue in power until a successor was agreed upon, in the belief it would force a decision upon the political parties to choose a new president.
Now, while the pro-western ruling bloc and the pro-Syrian opposition agree on army chief General Michel Sulaiman as a presidential candidate, there are divisions on the composition of the new government.
Probably if external forces, be they US or Syrian, were not so involved, the problems could be resolved.
