Could Syria have been so stupid?

i havent discussed the haririkiri report much - i cant believe that syria could possibly have been so stupid - the Guardian tries to answer it

"Could Syria have been so stupid?

Many people still question whether Syria could really have been so stupid as to assassinate Hariri. What did it hope to gain? How on earth did it expect to get away with it?

There are several possible explanations. One is that it was a standard knee-jerk reaction from an old-style intelligence apparatus. With Hariri in opposition Syria saw its influence in Lebanon slipping away and thought it could call a halt by eliminating him and sending a warning to others. There may also have been an element of retribution, since Hariri was perceived - perhaps correctly - as the instigator, via his French pals, of resolution 1559.

According to Mehlis, whoever killed Hariri also went to the trouble of setting up a fake culprit - creating an imaginary Islamist group to claim responsibility, abducting a devout young Lebanese man to be framed as the suicide bomber and selecting a type of explosives favoured by militants in Iraq.

At the time, of course, the Syrians and their Lebanese security allies were still in control and would have had no reason to expect that independent investigators would challenge their account or trace their phone calls.

Their main miscalculation was to underestimate the international response to the assassination, and the protests inside Lebanon. Looking back, it seems obvious there would be an outcry, but perhaps it was not so obvious to the perpetrators at the time." (link)