By Antoine Ghattas Saab
Western diplomats seem to be divided currently into two groups: one supportive of the Syrian rebels and the other skeptical over the true objectives of the popular uprising, which they fear could lead to Al-Qaeda-inspired Sunni extremism if President Bashar Assad’s regime is toppled. The skeptics are arguing that in the case of Egypt, Western countries fully backed the popular uprising, but this support has given way to fears that the Muslim Brotherhood will take over power through democratic means, similar to the victory by Hamas in legislative elections in the Palestinian territories in 2006.

Observers are surprised that Western powers continue to condemn authoritarian regimes in the region, despite diplomatic reports filed by Western diplomats in Beirut and Damascus that warn of the uncertain future of the states in turmoil.

Syrian Sunni officials in exile say they fear mounting divisions within the Sunni community, as chaos spreads through Syrian towns and cities under the regime’s plan to divide the opposition, luring some of its factions into dialogue to show to the West that it is turning to peaceful democratic means. The officials predict that while the Syrian regime’s plan to divide the ranks of the opposition may allow it some room to maneuver, it will ultimately fail.

On the other side of the political divide, a senior politician close to the Syrian government said that Damascus is worried that extremist groups active on the Syrian-Iraqi border may carry out terrorist acts against Western interests in a bid to frame Syrian authorities. The official, who did not specify the possible locations of such acts, did also express fear that such operations could be undertaken in Lebanon, given Tuesday’s attack in the southern city of Sidon against the French regiment of the peacekeeping forces.

The situation in Lebanon, however, is different than Syria’s: Unlike Assad, whom the U.S. has described as “not indispensable,” Prime Minister Najib Mikati still has an opportunity to enjoy strong ties with Western countries. Despite its reservations on the influence of Hezbollah within Mikati’s government, the West is adopting a wait-and-see approach with regard to the Cabinet’s course of action, as well as its domestic policies.

As for foreign relations, many diplomats are blaming Mikati for failing to fulfill promises on several levels, including the issue of the Special Tribunal for Lebanon and adopting a policy of moderation that would allay fears of retribution against senior civil servants seen as loyal to the March 14 coalition. But overall, the West will wait a few months before coming to a verdict on the new government.

Mikati is expected to be made aware of those facts by Qatari Prime Minister Sheikh Hamad bin Jassem al-Khalifa during his visit to Paris, which comes in line with Qatar’s decision, along with the U.S. and the European Union, to preserve the status quo in Lebanon until the turbulence in the wider regional situation settles down.

Until then, one should pay attention to Progressive Socialist Party leader Walid Jumblatt’s remarks about what he called “the Syrian revolution.” Jumblatt wouldn’t have made them if he did not pick up suitable political “signals” during his recent visit to Moscow. Surprises are possible, but how will we deal with them?