".. For the Lebanese, a US intervention does not seem a decisive element in the existent conflict..

"..Israeli daily Maariv reported Friday that “there are US-Israeli understandings” on way to counter the repercussions of the Special Tribunal for Lebanon (STL) indictment against Hezbollah in the assassination case of former Premier Rafiq Hariri. The newspaper’s correspondent in Washington Shmuel Rosner said that the US administration was working on this track more than it was on the Israeli Palestinian track. He added it was surprising to see how busy the US official’s schedule on the Middle East, be it with Saudi or Israeli officials who have been to Washington lately.

Rosner also quoted a “well informed Israeli official on US-Israeli talks on Lebanon” as saying that “between Washington and Tel Aviv are understandings concerning what we will or will not do, in case of escalation in Lebanon...Washington had hinted that Israel could attack Lebanon” and that “this was the most efficient threat available, based on the hypothesis that the Americans will not send aircraft carriers to tackle the problem of Hezbollah in Lebanon.

The Maariv correspondent said that “the United States finds it difficult to solve the anticipated crisis in Lebanon; because the ball now is in Hezbollah’s court as the party has pointed out that it will not accept accusations against it and while Washington does not really know where Hezbollah’s counter action would lead; will it settle for a show of power, or will it try to topple the government? Will it content itself with pointing the finger towards Israel, or will it point its missiles towards it?”

Rosner stressed the “ability of the Americans to figure out scenarios, beware of Hezbollah, conduct talks, but eventually they will have to postpone their reactions on the events until the time that Hezbollah sets.” Maariv also said that US Undersecretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs Jeffrey Feltman “is deeply involved in the Lebanese quagmire and hopes to create a coalition that can stand in the face of Hezbollah in the aftermath of the STL indictment. Obama himself made a commitment towards Lebanon, and this underscores his will to do something. However, Obama did not pledge to keep Lebanon free; instead he only vowed to do what he can, as this means: everything that falls under the restraints he has.”

The Israeli newspaper quoted Feltman as saying that everyone working in Lebanon knows that the situation in this country does not allow those working inside or outside it, to control everything that’s happening there. This means, according to Maariv, that “if Lebanon was simply destroyed, the US would not necessarily be able or even be willing to try to save this country; this is what Feltman and Obama have implied. This is also what the Iranians, the Turks, Hezbollah, and Lebanese Cabinet members already know.”

Maariv concluded that “for the Lebanese, a US intervention does not seem a decisive element in the existent conflict. In fact the steps of the closer neighbors, including Israel, are very much more important (to them).” ..."