Regionally, Lebanon is going through the optimal moment for cementing its stability, but it is not necessarily in accordance with the aspirations of some Lebanese sides that were disappointed by the results of the parliamentary elections. This moment represents the beginning of a new era in the region, characterized mainly by the pullout of the US Army from the Iraqi cities in a prelude for ending the occupation. It is also characterized by a deal or agreement that Washington is getting ready to conduct with Israel to end the predicament of the settlement activities, which obstructs President Barack Obama's plan to revive the peace process and end the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. From Iraq to Palestine, regardless of the cost of the US pullout from the Iraqi cities or the price in return for freezing the Jewish settlement activities, the juncture involves Lebanon because Iran, which sponsors its Lebanese allies, is threatened to lose the “occupation card” from Iraq to Gaza and the West Bank. This loss will weaken Iran's pretext or ability to use arenas that are far from Tehran to wage its wars with the “arrogant powers.” No less significant in the titles of this new era is the fact that Iran – which the Obama Administration is awaiting on the dialogue table – is not the same Iran that existed prior to the presidential elections which entrenched Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in this position. It can still claim to be a capable state, but the image of a just state has come under so many doubts that its image as a model for its allies in the Arab region is shaken. Most importantly, they cannot rule out of their calculations – both in Palestine and Lebanon and Iraq – the ability of the Iranian “pragmatism” to pay the bill of the dialogue with Washington, if it were to succeed. Even if this dialogue is crowned with success, it would not survive more than one year. Lebanon is concerned with all these changes, most importantly the renewed momentum of the Saudi-Syrian cooperation, which seems to be one of two wings of a quartet umbrella, while the second win is represented by the American-French [cooperation] to boost Lebanese stability in the period that followed the expiry of the Doha Agreement, and to preserve its security in order to avoid the huge repercussions of the new regional era. While the Saudi-Syrian cooperation seeks to promote the Arab aspect of the Lebanese issue, under the ceiling of initiative of the Servant of the Two Holy Shrines King Abdallah Bin Abd-al-Aziz for inter-Arab reconciliations, Washington and Paris continue the march of complete normalization with Damascus, so as to encourage it support of the stability of the Lebanese as a separate entity, and entice by a partnership whose revenues will give Damascus much more than it gains through its alliance with Tehran. It is a policy to break up this alliance step by step. The American-French praise of the regional role of Syria is an indication of the Washington and Paris satisfaction with what Damascus has offered with regard to the Lebanese and Iraqi and perhaps the Palestinian dossiers. Most importantly is the call for Syria for more: Obama is in a hurry to reach solutions on all tracks: from the Gulf to Palestine. During his visit to Beirut, Petraeus, the commander of the Multi-National Forces in Iraq, said that the Obama administration is also in a hurry to form the government headed by Saad al-Hariri, which the head of the parliamentary majority wants to be a national unity government. Therefore, this government will not exclude the allies of Damascus and Tehran. Its ministerial platform has three dimensions: from construction to facing the challenges and any Israeli aggression. The aggression will remain a major source of apprehension because the core of Netanyahu's “program” transcends the search for a victory for his government. It is rather about reshuffling the regional cards and revoking the American pressures aimed at accelerating a settlement upon the two-state solution. The question is: Will the opposition in Lebanon facilitate the mission of Saad al-Hariri amid his reassurances that his presence at the head of the government will make him a prime minister of a government for all the Lebanese, and that he will seek to reconcile the program of the majority and the concerns of the minority? If all indications point to a creative formula in order to bypass the dilemma of part of the opposition's demand to obtain a “guaranteeing third” (a blocking one) in the government, the wager remains on the role of President Michel Sleiman in his capacity as an arbitrator who will balance between consensus and democracy. In brief, the 8 March group realizes that the prime minister tasked with forming the government – along with the 14 March group – will not raise the issue of Hezbollah's arms except in the framework of a national dialogue. As such, the blocking third loses its raison d'etre. The most important priority of the majority also tops the agenda of the Saudi-Syrian communication, whose recent momentum coincided with a Saudi-Syrian summit and a Saudi-Egyptian summit, with two days separating them. Most important is indeed the willingness to contain the repercussions of the regional events, and prevent Israel and non-Arab sides from manipulating the weak points to settle certain calculations. Completing the last steps of political normalization between Lebanon and Syria requires inevitably opening a new chapter between Damascus and Saad al-Hariri who does not seem afraid of, as he has expressed his willingness to shoulder the responsibilities imposed by the prime minister. The test of mutual concessions awaits everyone to avoid obstructing the government. But the fear remains from harmed sides if they fail to foil the birth of Al-Hariri's government. The major fear is if the Palestinian reconciliation is thwarted during its last stage, if sedition is stirred up again in Iraq, and if Lebanon is once again used as an arena.
