Next, war on Syria?

As fighting in Lebanon continued over the past two weeks, world leaders discussed ways to end the Israeli offensive that has so far claimed over 350 civilian lives, with a call by UN Secretary General Kofi Annan for an immediate ceasefire between Israel and Hezbollah, and weak condemnation from Arab and European States of the unjustified Israeli aggression and disproportioned use of force against the Lebanese population.

But amidst all these calls, condemnations and diplomatic meetings, one major player was absent, it's the American President George W. Bush, who publicly supported the Israeli killing machine in Lebanon, saying that Israel had the right to defend itself.

Bush was quick to accuse Syria of trying to get back into Lebanon, demanding Damascus to use its influence on the Lebanese resistance movement, Hezbollah, to release the Israeli soldiers it captured earlier this month.

"The root cause of the problem is Hezbollah, and that problem must be addressed- It can be addressed internationally by making it clear to Syria that they've got to stop their support to Hezbollah," he said.

Damascus continues to face baseless allegations that it aids Palestinian resistance groups and Lebanon's Hezbollah, even though it willingly bowed to international pressure last year and agreed to withdraw its forces from Lebanon following the assassination of PM Rafiq Al Hariri.

A recent editorial on Saudi Arabia's Arabic-language Al-Sharq Al-Awsat asks whether the United States would approve an Israeli proposal to invade Syria.

The article argues that Syria may have committed a fatal mistake by hinting that it has hampered a deal for the return of the Israeli soldier the Palestinian resistance fighters captured to pressure the Jewish State release Palestinian detainees it holds, and therefore, "an Israeli invasion with Washington's tacit approval may be imminent."

For many reasons, most of the Middle East governments want to keep Syria out of the hostage crisis between Lebanon and Israel. But the foremost reason is that they're not willing to open another battle front in the region.

Even Jordan, Egypt and Gulf countries, who disagree with Syria's policies and alleged support to the Lebanese and Palestinian resistance movements, don't want this war to reach Damascus.

An Arab official was quoted by Al-Sharq Al-Awsat as suggesting that reaching a deal with the Palestinians over the captured soldier Gilad Shalit could have prevented the Lebanese resistance movement Hezbollah from capturing two Israeli soldiers a few days later, which some analysts , as well as the Israeli government, claim was the main reason behind Israel's decision to begin aggression on the Lebanese territories.

However, "In spite of all this, there is an agreement that the fire should not reach Syria, since the Lebanese people would pay dearly for any destabilization that hits Syria," the official said.

Attacking Syria would spread turmoil across the Middle East, for, unlike Lebanon, a country without a strong and reliable central government, Damascus enjoys a well-settled political system.

Disrupting Syria's stability would spread chaos across the region. It is this likelihood of chaos that so frightens the Middle East countries.

The Arabs don't want to see another Iraq.