Diplomatic sources in a major capital city express their belief that the events surrounding Qornit Al-Sawda and its resulting security and political implications, may lead to a change in the trajectory of the presidential file in Lebanon. They affirm that what has occurred has a direct link to the presidential file and the dispute over supporting nominations for the presidency and the available opportunities for candidates.
The recent security situation and its implications have captured the attention of major embassies in Lebanon, reflected in their reports to their respective governments. Stakeholders within the country are awaiting the impact of these developments on the positions of foreign countries regarding the presidential process. It remains uncertain whether a president will be elected before the end of the current month, and regardless of the circumstances, it is expected that the Lebanese army will take control of the security situation, despite the accusations indirectly directed at it in the beforementioned incident.
According to what Western sources told “Sawt Beirut International,” in the view of the US administration, any deputy who voted for presidential candidate Suleiman Frangieh is considered affiliated with Hezbollah. The sources do not hide that Washington wants the Lebanese army commander, General Joseph Aoun, to become the president, although it does not want to imply any interference in the presidential issue or express any intention to interfere.

The sources confirm that there is a direct link between the presidential file and the ongoing US-Iranian negotiations regarding Tehran’s nuclear program. At this stage, Hezbollah is demanding a price for its consent to a president, and this demand is no longer a secret but rather publicly declared.
The sources indicate that the primary concern lies in Hezbollah’s stance in the US-Iranian negotiations and the extent to which it will benefit from their outcomes. There are three possibilities: First, Hezbollah could deepen its control over the country and insist on its presidential candidate, while encircling state authority and any external sponsorship that Lebanon may receive to regain its economic and political stability. This would mean that Lebanon is left to deal with the negotiation’s consequences, which Hezbollah seems to be counting on as it exerts pressure to prolong the presidential vacuum.
The second possibility is that Hezbollah may relinquish its presidential candidate as part of an Iranian concession on several issues in the Lebanese context. In this scenario, the search for a genuine consensus president would gain momentum, satisfying all parties involved and leading to an internal and international-regional settlement. Additionally, it would not hinder the rescue process through cooperation with the International Monetary Fund.

As for the third possibility, it involves the United States and Iran sharing influence in Lebanon and effectively managing its affairs together.