Centrist political sources expect that the current Cabinet will last until parliamentary elections in 2013, an expectation that is based on regional and international players’ plan to maintain status quo in the region, including Lebanon.

They added that the country would be able to resolve its political disputes through national dialogue despite that fact that groups each view the country through their own narrow interests.

The sources, however, did not rule out the possibility of dramatic developments taking place in the region that could shake up the Lebanese Cabinet and with it, the positions of the opposition and majority.

These developments could include the fall of the Syrian regime and its potential fallout on Syria’s allies in Lebanon, or an American, Israeli or American-Israeli strike on nuclear facilities in Iran, or the renewal of Iran-Arab confrontation, starting from Iraq, which was left with a power vacuum following the recent departure of American forces.

These possible scenarios could directly affect stability in Lebanon as officials are focused on security incidents and tension in the south of the country, where extremist groups have taken again to launching rockets into Israel, and in Ain al-Hilweh, which has become an arena that reflects the neighboring regional crisis.

But how can a Cabinet survive two years facing such obstacles and hurdles, especially when those in power have adopted the principle of procrastination and patchwork solutions to carrying out administration reform?

In answer to this question, a Lebanese diplomat says Lebanon will be temporally placed in the waiting room because international diplomatic interest is focused on Syria. The events in Lebanon’s neighbor will require that the country postpone confronting divisive issues and instead pursue economic and social initiatives until a change in circumstances allows interest in Lebanon to return.

Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs Jeffrey Feltman echoed this view during his recent visit when he said that what is required now is preserving the domestic political and security balance. Feltman continued that, perhaps for this reason, we have seen openness by the March 14 toward Prime Minister Najib Mikati, illustrated by the coalition’s growing reluctance to openly insult him, unlike earlier this year.

In the West’s view, it is possible to work with Mikati, as opposed to the groups in the Cabinet, including Hezbollah and the Free Patriotic Movement, and other parties that openly stand as enemies of America and Israel and as allies of Iran and Syria. Thus, the Lebanese diplomat says March 14 was persuaded to strengthen its relationship with centrist political groups, and the coalition is supported in this move by the West and some Arab states which are convinced that the transition that Lebanon is going through should be concluded by 2013.

The diplomat also commented on Syria agreeing to the Arab League plan, under which Arab observers would be sent to Damascus, that the approval came after the Syrian regime could no longer delay the initiative, especially given recent Russian condemnation of the violence in Syria and the threat by some Arab states to raise the issue at the Security Council. Both of these developments forced the regime to capitulate to the demands of the league with some amendments, which Syrian Foreign Minister Walid al-Moallem discussed in his news conference.

The diplomat said that the regime would not have signed the agreement if not for the unprecedented international and Arab pressure which made clear to the regime that it could meet the same fate as other Arab regimes. He added, however, that it remained unclear whether observers in Syria would actually be able to perform their tasks.