Yes, Syria wants the Golan back. For Damascus the Golan represents far more than a territory lost among the spoils of a war fought 41 years ago. The Golan is Syria's pride and honor. Anyone vaguely familiar with the Middle East mindset will recognize how important that is.

The Golan is important enough to Syria that Damascus would, in all probability, be willing to sacrifice its close working relationship with Hezbollah, and by default its relationship with Iran.

And if as part of any agreement Syria's President Bashar Assad manages to convince his Israeli and American interlocutors that Lebanon needs to be thrown into the deal, then that would be an added bonus for Damascus.

But under no circumstances would Syria's leadership be tempted to take on Israel.

Syrian ambassador to Washington Imad Mustapha said it very clearly at a press conference a few months ago when he denied that Syria was building a nuclear weapon after Israel destroyed what it claimed was a nuclear facility in northwestern Syria.

If the Syrian ambassador was short on truth about the destroyed facility, it was possibly because he didn't know what was being developed there; or he was repeating what his bosses in Damascus told him to say; or more probably, he had not been let into a closely-guarded family secret. (Information on the building of nuclear facilities anywhere is usually imparted on a need to know basis.)

But whatever the reason, he made it very clear that Damascus was fully aware of Israel's air superiority and that with command of the sky, Israel is guaranteed command of the battlefield.

However, with the U.S. president occupying the White House for only a few months more and the Israeli prime minister in a similar situation, nothing positive is likely to happen on the peace front.

It is precisely because of this interim period that greater caution must be taken. Syria may not want war, but new Israeli threats directed at Lebanon regarding Israel's reaction in the event of a new war with Hezbollah are indeed very worrisome.