Two events are dominating conversation this week in Lebanon, which is already struggling with internal conflict among its factions, driven by issues both familiar and new. The first event was American Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs Jeffrey Feltman’s visit to Beirut, where he met with political figures.

The second was Friday’s bomb attack that targeted a French patrol operating as part of the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon in the city of Tyre, which could be a message to French authorities for the leading role they have played in opposing the Syrian regime.

There are doubts among some European ambassadors based in the Middle East that change in Syria that would allow the opposition to take power is inevitable. Perhaps it is for this reason that the American ambassador returned to Damascus to monitor the latest developments and send reports of them back home.

Sources say that official military forces remain dominant in cities and towns at Syria’s core but the periphery is under the control of anti-regime armed groups that have the backing of regional and international players.

According to political observers, Feltman’s visit to Beirut was a step toward preparing the country for the consequences of international measures against Syria. If states escalate their action, Lebanon must support the Syrian uprising, according to Feltman, and thus must support the opposition, either by funneling to them arms through the eastern side of the Syrian-Lebanese border or by creating humanitarian routes which sources say could be established under the supervision of an American delegation.

The Lebanese government remains, however, controlled by parties that reject the idea of establishing humanitarian pathways for fear that they would become new camps, like those for Palestinian refugees, and could tip the demographic balance in favor of March 14 and its foreign supporters.

It is also still possible that the Syrian crisis could be resolved politically. Indeed there are rumors of talks taking place behind closed doors to find an exit to the situation that would keep President Bashar Assad in power on the condition that reforms are carried out in the regime’s domestic policy – such as the start of a dialogue with members of the opposition – and also a change in its regional policies – such as preparing to begin a peace process with Israel under the patronage of the United States.

However, this second possibility was not addressed by Feltman in the meetings, during which he emphasized the possibility of increased confrontation with Syria.

Political sources revealed that the stances of Lebanese leaders overlapped substantially in these meetings. They said that challenges for Lebanon on the international arena can summarized by the importance of implementing international resolutions, an obligation that was recently demonstrated when Lebanon paid its share of funding to the Special Tribunal for Lebanon. There is also Resolution 1701 which the Lebanese state is working to implement in the hopes of reaching a permanent cease fire with Israel.

On the regional stage, the Lebanese officials stressed the need to keep pace with democratic changes in the Arab world, while making sure that country does not isolate or antagonize any Arab state. Here they were speaking mainly of Syria and those meeting with Feltman expressed their hopes that Lebanon would support the rights and demands of the Syrian people while at the same time helping the country avoid civil and sectarian war, which, should it take place, could throw the region into turmoil.

As for the domestic level, they emphasized the importance of strengthening civil peace and launching national dialogue, a topic reiterated more than once by both Speaker Nabih Berri and PSP leader Walid Jumblatt.