Lebanon's Presidential Elections : explode-defuse, explode-defuse.... it is a 45/55 case

The Lebanese parliament has until the 23rd of November to elect a President, that is no more than 5 days. The term of the current president, Emile Lahoud, will end on the 24th, day on which he will hand-over power...but to who ?
The constitution stipulates that the president "shall be elected by secret ballot and by a two thirds majority of the Chamber of Deputies. After a first ballot, an absolute majority shall be sufficient. see constitution . In a manner reminiscent of the dynamics of the last Turkish presidential elections the Hizbollah-Aounist opposition interprets the constitution as requiring a 2/3 quorum for all sessions. The president is to be elected for a 6 years-term, and by customs has to be Maronite. One can dwell endlessly on the details, but suffice to state that the parliament (128 seats) is divided between a Sunni-Christian (ca 70) majority of and a Shiite-Christian (Hezbollah-Amal-Aounist) minority (ca 58).
The opposition's quorum claim has super-heated the debate for anything else than a consensus candidate (a candidate elected with a 2/3 quorum) would lead to the opposition to claim that since the majority had acted unconstitutionally, it was entitled to act as such and to elect its own president. yes, Lebanon might well have 2 presidents and two governments by the end of the week.

Behind the two blocs hide all major regional powers. The majority has the open support of France, the US, and Saudi Arabia, while the minority can count on Iran and Syria. One noteworthy absentee from this shortlist is Israel...the reason for that is that the US represents its case.

Two questions will need to be answered before a presidential nominee will be agreed on. Firstly, will the US agree to talk eye to eye with Syria and to accommodate their requests for a president acceptable to Syria ? Or will they instead beat the democracy drum and tell Syria, for a second time, that it is either "with them or against them"?
The second question is who is an acceptable candidate for the Syrians ?

On the first question, the US willingness to backtrack on its democratic rhetoric vis a vis a plainly undemocratic regime bent on using muscles and TNT to get things its way in Lebanon is a function of US and Israeli interests. The US republican administration needs to stabilise Iraq, and contain Iran's nuclear ambitions. In both case they will need the support of Saudi Arabia and also of Syria. The crux of the matter is that Saudis and Syrians aren't on speaking terms anymore. As to the Israeli, its interests lie in prolonging the current rock-bottom weakness of the Arab states in order to settle its borders and its issue with Palestinians under favourable terms. Translated into a Syria-policy, this means keep the Assad regime, enlist it into a Palestinian peace deal favourable to Israel in return for which the Syrians will get the Golan. The alternative for Assad is such a messy anti-Semitic/turbocharged fundamentalist perspective that Assad is honey to the Israeli. The only regime, they argue that can rein over Hezbollah and the fundamentalist forces of the Levant is the Assad dynasty. Regarding Iran, Israel has a very clear incentive to contain its ambitions as well.
To sum it all, the only hurdle to a US-Syrian entente is Saudi Arabia. The tensions between Saudi Arabia and Syria are essentially about the leadership of the Sunni world, and of the fight against the historic enemy Israel. Since Saudis also have an interest in bringing Syria back to the anti-Iranian league, they might well support an entente with Syria but at what price ? Presumably, Saudi could just be satisfied with a Syrian-acceptable president in Lebanon if the Prime Minister is a strong Sunni figure and if Syria supports an Annapolis peace deal at the end of November. To reach that the US will need to pressurize Israel to make the necessary concessions to the Palestinians, allow a pro-Syrian candidate to emerge in Lebanon, and squeeze Walid Jumblatt and Samir Geagea a bit.

As to the Syria-acceptable candidates. There are too many Maronite in Lebanon to present an exhaustive list. A better approach would be to proceed by elimination. As a principle Syria will want a president who guarantees that it keeps some form of control of Hezbollah, and that slows down the development of the Harriri tribunal. Nassib Lahoud is out of question for his strong affiliation with the Harriri camp. Michel Aoun, would be too risky for unpredictable and capable of cornering Hezbollah if he unifies the christians. Demenaos Katar, possible. Robert Ghanem, acceptable, due to his decent stance towards Syria and his Bekaa constituency which makes him an easy subject of Syrian intelligence services.

My hunch is that it will be either Katar or Ghanem. The next questions however, will be who will be Prime Minister.
Although tensions are likely to defuse in the short-term as the elections of a president pushes away the prospect of two governments in Lebanon, no solutions will offer magic answers regarding the electoral law that requires drafting before 2009, the Harriri tribunal, and Hezbollah's normalisation into Lebanon's polity.

Lebanon will be the last neighbour of Israel to stabilise. First the Palestinian will need their just deal. Then the Syrians will have to get their shore on the Lake of Galilea. And then only will it be possible to have realistic hopes that Lebanon will enjoy political stability, economic reform, and peace. Look at Annapolis Peace conference if you want an indicator of where the country's prospects stand.