It has been said that how people react to a crisis helps to shape the character of that person. No other test than the recent Lebanese crisis has helped people understand just what kind of leader President Bashar Al-Assad is and what kind of government he is leading. For many, Lebanon was going to test the strength of the Damascus regime. It has in many ways. Articles circulating in the wake of the international response to Al-Hariri's assassination and calls for Syria's withdrawal reported both Chirac and Sharon preparing for the possible collapse of President Al-Assad's regime. It is still to be seen whether those events in neighbouring Lebanon will have a bigger impact in Syria.

Research has helped us comprehend the intentions of President Hafez Al-Assad during his tenure in office, but to many, Dr. Bashar Al-Assad remains an enigma. Through analysis on the responses of the Syrian government, particularly President Al-Assad, we can now formulate an opinion regarding the intentions of this government. The Lebanese situation is a good place to start with this analysis, so I shall first focus on the regime's response to UNSC Resolution 1559.

1559 was adopted on September 2, 2004 to help prevent Syria from extending pro-Syrian President Emille Lahoud's term in office for another three years, and in order to get Syria out of Lebanon. The initial reaction from Damascus was to ignore it. This was a confirmation from Syria that the policy of not giving in to international demands immediately was still on the agenda in Damascus. Syria has long wished to represent herself as the last bastion of Arab nationalism opposed to meddling by outsides in her affairs. However, Damascus did send its own message to the UN, advising it to stay out of its affairs since this issue solely involved Syrian-Lebanese relations. Two months later, after the Lebanese constitution was amended, Lahoud was re-elected as the President of Lebanon.

Fast forward to February 14, 2005. Anti-Syran Lebanese start blaming Syria for the assassination of Former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Al-Hariri, but Damascus denies these accusations, and in turn, blames Israel for provoking further anti-Syrian sentiment. The day of Al-Hariri's funeral and a day after the USA recalled its ambassador to Damascus, Syrian Prime Minister Naji Al-Otri meets with the Iranian government and a united front against American threats is established.

When pro-Syrian Lebanese Prime Minister Omar Karameh announces the resignation of his government on February 21st, Lahoud reappoints him to form a new government. In fact, Syria doesn't formally respond to Lebanese calls for Syrian withdrawal until March 5th, almost three weeks later after Al-Hariri's assassination. In his speech to the People's Assembly, President Bashar Al-Assad announces a partial withdrawal of Syrian troops to the Bekaa Valley, defying President Bush's demands against 'half-hearted measures'.

The fact that Syria didn't carry out all the wishes of the international community for a long time suggests that it refuses to be told what to do. By sending this message, Syria wants to distinguish herself from her fellow Arab neighbours, who she may label as sell-outs. For example, despite Syria's isolation following the events in Beirut, many still respect the Damascus government for refusing to allow western powers to dictate to it what needs to be done and when. British MP George Galloway described the Damascus government as 'dignified' and urged it to remain steadfast.

It is true that Syria felt the pressure of the international community and left Lebanon, but she did so in her own way, without much regard for what western powers thought of her.

When Pope John Paul II died, Syria hadn't yet withdrawn all of her forces from Lebanon. People were doubtful whether President Bashar Al-Assad, seen as a controversial leader, would actually attend the funeral of the Pontiff. However, he defied the odds and headed for the Vatican. That, alone, sent a message to the world leaders around him that he had no plans to hide in a shell like Saddam Hussein, the man many in Washington like to compare him to. In truth, however, President Al-Assad is nothing like Saddam Hussein.

As Washington seized the moment over Lebanon to strike at Syria, other accusations soon followed. The Bush Administration began accusing Syria of not doing enough to prevent insurgents from crossing to Iraq on the Syrian-Iraqi border. The Damascus government kept telling anyone who listened that it was very difficult to protect the whole border, and even provided evidence that in the past, Saddam Hussein had used the unprotected border to send trucks carrying bombs to Syria because of his opposition to the Damascus Baathists. The fact that Syria couldn't protect herself then meant that she couldn't protect America either. The Americans even refused to work with the Syrians to patrol the border. In an effort to get the USA to stop throwing baseless accusations at Damascus, the Al-Assad government announced that it was ceasing cooperation with the Americans. To many, this was a risk, but to Syria, it was a way to reassert its refusal to be talked down to.

Now President Bashar Al-Assad is preparing to go to New York for the UN World Summit. This sends yet another message to Washington that Syria refuses to be set aside. President Al-Assad is also sending another message to the international community: that despite the negative campaign against Syria throughout the year, he still wants to clean up that image and move Syria forward.

When drawing conclusions about Syria's response to international pressure, I can see that she refuses to be told what to do and she refuses to be left aside. The risks Damascus is taking in order to keep up with its aims are testament to why George Galloway described the Syrian government as 'dignified'.