"Not all of the demonstrators were Hezbollah or Syrians," says Dr. Nizar Hamzeh, a Hezbollah expert and professor at the American University of Beirut. "But the protest did try to reflect the other voices of Lebanon, not just the ones that have been heard in the opposition. There is a high level of frustration displayed by people that maybe are not really supporters of Hezbollah or [the more moderate Shiite group] AMAL, but wanted their voices heard."

"There was a definitely genuine Shiite element to the rally," according to Malik Habib, a pro-opposition intellectual who teaches at the Lebanese American University. "There were people who had things in common with Hezbollah, and the Shiite have historically been marginalized in Lebanese society. They have been the rural poor and now are politically coming into their own and making their presence in the political scene felt."

The opposition, Hezbollah's Hajaralli says, brought the wrath of Hezbollah on itself by reaching out to the international community to solve what Hezbollah sees as a Syrian-Lebanese issue. And the group -- which has an estimated 20,000 fighters on the border with Israel, and 13 members of Parliament -- dropped its pretense of neutrality when it saw the opposition acting to remove the leaders of the country.

"Lately, people have felt this is an attempt to divide Lebanon toward political chaos by creating a political void," Hajaralli says. "The resignation of the government represents such a void. We feel there is hostility [from the opposition] towards the security situation, so Lebanon will fall into a void and the international community can use this an as excuse to further intervene here."

Opposition sources, who asked to remain anonymous, have said that they respect Hezbollah's political power and military might -- its well-trained and experienced militia could probably defeat the Lebanese Army itself -- and want an open dialogue with it. For his part, Hajaralli alternated between calling for an open dialogue with the opposition on the role of Syria in Lebanon's affairs, and accusing the opposition of not supporting Hezbollah's continued resistance against the Israeli occupation of a small portion of southern Lebanon.

"Dialogue is the basis for any solution," Hajaralli says. "We should launch an internal dialogue among the Lebanese to reach a conclusion that is a unified opinion of the government toward the presence of Syria in Lebanon. But the opposition, by making contacts with the international community, had escalated the situation more and more, undermining national unity in an effort to draw international pressure for its goals."

"This international pressure is backed now by the threat of military intervention," he adds. "The opposition is living an illusion because it thinks it represents the voice of the Lebanese people. And this erroneous image was shown around the world in the media. We did not make this demonstration to organize a showdown with the opposition. We held it because it showed the voice of Lebanese concern."

But it remains unclear what Hezbollah really wants. Is it jockeying for position as a political party in a post-Syria Lebanon, or does it want to remain a resistance group? The potential loss of its protector -- Syria provides a safe haven, while Iran supplies much of the group's cash -- would leave Hezbollah in a vulnerable position.

Hajaralli addressed accusations that Hezbollah is Syria's cat's paw by going on the offensive. "Let's stop beating around the bush. When the opposition says that there can be no talks as long as there is Syrian influence, they are insulting us," Hajaralli says. "As if we are the servants of Syria, which is not true. The Lebanese need to stop pointing fingers at themselves and stop calling each other traitors. [That is why] we have not called the opposition traitors, but instead we call it a hazard.

"Even as Syrian troops are leaving Lebanon, the opposition says that the influence must stop," he adds. "This is a vain argument and nothing but lame excuses to avoid dialogue. It is extremely dangerous."

Malik Habib, a strong supporter of the opposition, says that with a Syrian pullout, Hezbollah will be forced to the bargaining table to deal with its countrymen. "They thrived on the Tehran-Damascus axis, which provided them with strategic depth," he says of the group. "And they are concerned that this anti-Syria movement will weaken them. So imagine much of this as muscle flexing as they announced to the world on Tuesday, 'Nothing can work without us.'"

"It's a signal that they will have clout in the emerging Lebanon," he continues. "But I think they can be brought into the fold [of post-Syrian Lebanese politics] and defanged without firing a shot. They are certainly smart enough to not risk the gains they have made as a legitimate voice of the Lebanese Shiite, so there are face-saving ways out for everyone. Start by coordinating their forces with the Lebanese Army; declare them the great victors of the south [against Israel], etc. Hezbollah is more careful on the ground and more ambivalent about these developments than any of their patrons."

After listening to the rhetoric coming from both sides, Hamzeh, the AUB expert on Hezbollah, is less sanguine. "It is alarming," he says. "At least in the demonstrations, despite both sides basing their actions on the common factor of Lebanon. It seems there is a deadlock and the chance of dialogue does not seem to be working."

Despite the opposition's apparent position that Resolution 1559 can be implemented and fair elections held without putting Hezbollah's role as a resistance group under total scrutiny, Hezbollah and its leader, Sayeed Hassan Nasrallah, do not trust the opposition's intentions. "In a speech during [the Shiite holiday] Ashoura last Saturday, Nasrallah sounded like he wanted to wait and see," Hamzeh says. "But after seeing the amount of effort the opposition put into courting the international community, of which many members are sworn enemies of Hezbollah, he decided to push back."

Despite his concern about the rhetoric, Hamzeh is not worried about imminent violence. "I do not see disarming them by force, because force would be countered by force," he says. "There is a starting point even if the mistrust is great. They could [both] accept that if you want to implement 1559, then it should be up to the opposition or new government to sit down and discuss with the group whether the armed component of the resistance is still needed. It's the paradox of Lebanese politics. There is so much mutual mistrust by the different factions of each other that they can barely talk. Yet, the international community cannot guarantee [or intervene] because of those issues. Lebanon has to do this itself."

Recent Stories