There have been several foreign visits in the direction of Lebanon, and Lebanese visits in the direction of the outside world, the latest being the visit by Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan to Beirut, a visit distinguished by both popular and official embrace. Such visits hint that there is both a regional and an international agreement on fostering the situation Lebanon, in order to protect it from any explosion or instability. This comes after it became apparent in recent months that the impasse resulting from division over the Special Tribunal for Lebanon, might deteriorate into a crisis, possibly spreading to the street and leading to a coup, as the prospect of civil strife has become hard to dismiss. It has been thus proven that avoiding strife, with regional and international pressure to prevent such an outcome, is possible. Also proven was what was said by Prime Minister Saad Hariri and his team, along with other political leaders, since the outbreak of the “indictment” crisis - which Hezbollah threatened in July, could deteriorate into strife. What Hariri and others have said then, is that the decision of strife is in the hands of none other than the Lebanese leaders: It is them who would permit it to happen, and it is them who can prevent it, meaning that strife was not preordained. Or at least, this is what the state of relative calm for two weeks has hinted at. The foreign visits to Lebanon might not all be coordinated, although it is no coincidence that the last two weeks have seen this amount of international attention paid to Lebanon. Beginning with the visit of former French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner to Beirut, followed by Hariri's visit to Moscow, and then Saudi Arabia, the Free Patriotic Movement leader General Michel Aoun then visited France, which will also be the destination of Hariri and other Lebanese leaders in the near future. The Qatari Prime Minister Hamad bin Jassem Al Thanialso also visited Lebanon, which was followed by a visit by President Michel Suleiman to Qatar, not to mention Erdogan's visit to Lebanon. And then tomorrow, Prime Minister Hariri will visit Tehran, and there will be more to come. And although the Lebanese differ over the objective of American involvement in Lebanon, as well as that of the European Union and NATO, this does not cancel out the fact that these are part of the foreign interest in the Lebanese crisis. In fact, Washington places its engagement in Lebanon and that of its allies in the context of its efforts to achieve balance among the pressuring elements of the Lebanese crisis. However, the common denominator of all these foreign movements, and the coming ones, can be summed up as follows: 1-The implicit, or explicit, acknowledgment that, according to each state or group, there is no way to abolish the STL or influence the indictment that it will issue. Hence, the focus is to deal with its repercussions through steps taken before or after the issuing of the indictment, or both. 2- The support given for the ongoing Saudi-Syrian dialogue away from the spotlight, over the form of a settlement among the Lebanese. At minimum, [the belligerents] are awaiting the results of this dialogue before interacting with its content, and [have decided] not to get ahead of things. Moreover, some groups are wagering on these results, whatever they are, while others are following the dialogue in order to ascertain its broad outlines. Meanwhile, there is heavy secrecy about this topic, with discussions limited to a very small number of high-level officials in Saudi Arabia and Syria. 3-Guaranteeing stability in Lebanon and keeping the country away from the brink to hedge against broader instability in the region, while the international community seeks to find a formula of resuming peace negotiations. 4-Most of these foreign movements are distinguished by endorsing Hariri's stance, as a central element of any settlement and a symbol of the ability to sustain stability. This is owing to his unwavering commitment to Saudi-Syrian efforts, and also to his embrace of calm, based on the Doha Accord, while rejecting the massive pressures put on him, and which have continued in recent months. If the regional and international concern regarding the Lebanese situation succeeds in containing the premises for tension until the settlement being prepared by Riyadh and Damascus matures, and safeguards Lebanon in the run-up to some kind of a settlement, this means that many leaders will have to prepare to pay the price of being sensible, as required by any settlement. In recent months, many politicians have crossed the line of sensibility, as their words have taken them to the edge of the abyss, with no regard to the repercussion of pouring oil on the fire. Amid this foreign interest and regional embrace of the Lebanese situation in the hope of a settlement, the types of escalation that have been threatened in recent months, such as the “false witnesses” issue that has paralyzed the state and halted meetings of the Cabinet, become pointless, in light of what Lebanon is being prepared for. This escalation, which was contrived for the sake of fomenting a crisis, does not serve the purpose of finding a solution.
