Israel's apparent raid into northern Syria has drawn enormous speculation throughout the world. There has also been much discussion as to the apparent goals — at least the tacit acquiescence of the United States (at the last minute, anyway) and probably Turkey — and the nature of North Korea's and Iran's involvement in Syria's chemical, biological, and nuclear developments.

There are, however, a number of things that have not happened, as well as a number of geopolitical implications, which are equally important to consider:

• Syria has a long-standing interest in creating or acquiring chemical and biological weapons going back to the late 1980s and 1990s. Such programs were generally situated near Kamishli in northwest Syria, as far away from Israel as possible. At that time there was even speculation, though never proven definitively, that Baxter International's chemical drug fabrication plant in Syria was in fact being used to manufacture toxic chemicals.
  
  
• Syria clearly has neither the resources, funds, nor materiel to provide Hizbullah with the weapons they need to wage its battles against Israel. Syria does provide a simple, porous, and acquiescent passage through which weapons from Iran can flow easily to its allies in Lebanon. This gives Syria a clear opportunity to demand various weapons of mass destruction, missiles, or weapons components as "reasonable" compensation for easing the weapons flow from Iran to Lebanon.
  
  
• While Damascus has not been a major player in the conflict in Iraq, Syria has been an active escape route and entry passage for various radical elements seeking to disrupt U.S. efforts there, especially Iranian-backed Shi'ite irregulars seeking to support their Iraqi friends. Again, Syria expects proper, "in kind" compensation for this. A U.S. effort to seal off the Syrian border and prevent the flow to and from Iraq largely has failed.
  
  
• World reaction to the apparent events in northern Syria, even within the Arab world, has been extraordinarily muted. There has been nary a voice of protest except toward the North Koreans who may well have been provider of whatever weapons or weapons systems the Syrians obtained. The extremely bland or gentle response of the Syrian government itself reflected both astonishment at Israel's brazenness on the one hand and perhaps Syria's culpability on the other. Only after two weeks has Syria circulated a letter of condemnation at the United Nations and has not demanded a emergency session at the UN to condemn Israel's violation of Syria's territorial integrity. This delay underscores Syrian concerns about what a UN investigation of the facts might discover.
  
  
• Israel's overall silence on the action also begs an explanation. It suggests that Israel did not necessarily complete the mission; otherwise, it probably would have declared publicly the results. It also left open the possibility in their minds — and the minds of the Syrians — that they may well be prepared to return to finish the job.
  
  
• The nature and tactics of the alleged raid also suggests the influence of newly appointed Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak. The former prime minister not only served with distinction in the Sayeret Matkal, the Israel Defense Forces' most elite tactical commando unit, and as the IDF chief of staff, but was one of the two most highly decorated soldiers ever to serve in the IDF.

Perhaps the most important unspoken message in this entire episode is Israel's willingness to make a statement to both its enemies and its friends. With Iran's nuclear ambitions presenting a threat to Israel's safety and security, Israel is announcing it is prepared to find ways to address such a threat should the circumstances demand it.

Equally important is Israel's message to Syria. The Israelis admit that while mistakes may have been made in permitting Iran's nuclear development to move so far along — something Israel prevented in Iraq in 1981 with its daring raid on Iraq's Osirak reactor — Israel is not prepared to allow any further regional introduction of WMDs that could threaten Israel's survival.

No one is interested in a new or additional confrontation in the region. All parties are prepared to blink (and some to give tactical and/or diplomatic support) if Israel is ready to handle its additional regional threats itself.