The lengthy discussions in Lebanon's Parliament of the policy of Prime Minister Najib Mikati's government have revealed the degree to which the crisis in Syria is affecting Lebanese political life and the domestic political equation, and the degree of confusion caused by this prolonged crisis for political groups, especially those making up the current Cabinet. It is a situation in which they are compelled to say one thing, as well as the opposite. This appears to be natural; Miqati's Cabinet emerged as the result of a political equation in which the Syrians were a leading player. However, the Syrian authorities have become weak as the result of the domestic crisis in their country, to the point that Syria has become a burden on its allies in Lebanon, and its allies in the region and the world. This is irrespective of the attempts to polish the image of the Syrian regime, as if it is able to rule Lebanon as it did before the outbreak of popular protests in Syrian some 14 months ago. This damaged equation, because of what is happening in Syria, has affected the Lebanese Cabinet. Miqati's government has been unable to retain the momentum it enjoyed upon its formation, as the key player at the time, the Syrians, have experienced a change in their conditions. Syrian influence (at least) is now subject to momentous challenges, with the regime's rule in Syria itself in question. This is irrespective of the direction that events will take in Syria, irrespective of how long the crisis will last, and irrespective of how long it takes for developments to crystallize as foreign countries manage the crisis. In their view of the Syrian crisis, the partners in the Lebanese Cabinet have seen their honeymoon end. This is evident from the disputes over how to deal with caring for Syrian refugees, and Beirut's stance in regional and international forums. However, a leading party in the government, i.e. Hezbollah, refuses to acknowledge that the situation has changed, as the world waits to see how the foreign treatments of the crisis will lead to a new political equation. In the meantime, the government will be divided between two groups. There are those who will try to benefit from their presence in office to the very end, in terms of procuring services, money and a reach in the state bureaucracy, to safeguard their influence in the run-up to next year's parliamentary elections. There are also those who will try to freeze issues to which the other side wishes to see a speedy resolution, as if the political equation has not changed, refusing to acknowledge that the Syrian element has been damaged. It was not for nothing that during the parliamentary debate, opposition MPs focused their verbal attacks on the ministers of Michel Aoun, and the weapons of Hezbollah, compared to the criticisms leveled at Miqati. Meanwhile, the ministers representing Walid Jumblatt were practically immune from criticism, since Jumblatt supports the uprising in Syria against the regime. The disputes inside the government are impeding its full exercise of power; yet, refusing to acknowledge the change in the political equation that produced this government is postponing its departure, and also forces the parties making up the Cabinet to defend the Syrian regime, by denying this change and the damage done to the old political equation. This explains the increasingly sharp tone of the debate in Parliament. It also explains the call by a Hezbollah MP during the morning session for dialogue, while his colleague, during the evening session, headed off any rational discourse with the other camp. It explains one MP's praise of the policy of disassociation from the crisis in Syria in supporting the government, and the criticism by his colleague of the same policy, as he urged that it be abandoned. All of this explains the feeling of disgust about the session that was expressed by Speaker Nabih Berri. More than anyone, he is aware of the confusion that has beset all of Lebanon, due to the imbalance in the political equation, which requires more dialogue and cooling-off in rhetoric, as the country awaits developments to play out. Most likely, this situation also explains why Miqati has disassociated himself from commenting one way or the other. He is aware that a new, hybrid situation must be dealt with, because the formula that brought him to power has changed. Most likely, he has begun to feel that his stay in the Grand Serail is tantamount to remaining in an opulent prison, while he can enjoy a more luxurious life elsewhere. Mikati is no longer able to satisfy his opponents, or his supporters, but he can leave office. However, an alternative must be selected, so that Mikati does not linger on in a caretaker capacity. The matter is not of great import to him. In contrast, if he remains as prime minister, he will be unable to avoid the wrath of his opponents, or satisfy his supporters who brought him to the prime minister's post, no matter what he does. As for the talk of corruption and scandals during the session, talk is cheap.
