After his last ‘prognosis’, I think I’d like a second opinion on this one...
Anyone working for Kaddhafi deserved was coming to him, but I still wonder if he was guilty of that specific outrage:
A year or two after the bombing a number of articles appeared in the Sunday Times and other papers indicating that the terror action had been carried out by Palestinian groups (PFLP-GC was specifically mentioned) connected to Syria and Iran. At the time it seemed as clear cut a case as you can get In the murky world of spies and terrorists, and the State Dept was supposed to bring pressure on Syria.
But then Saddam invaded Kuwait, Mrs Thatcher performed the first ever back-bone transplant on a living President, and Syria suddenly became an ally in the war against Iraq.
Post-Gulf War I Baker and Bush Sr pushed the MidEast negotiations in Madrid where Syria was one of the pivotal partners. B & B could hardly force Shamir to carry out negotiations with a party that was responsible for one of the most dreadful terror attacks on the West (prior to 911), and the Syria track disappeared down the memory hole.
It is true that in late 2003 Libya acknowledged some sort of responsibility for the Lockerbie tragedy, but by that time US forces were in Baghdad, Saddam was on the run, and Libya was doing its utmost to get on the good side of the US government.