Even if Sa'ad Hariri manages to form a government after Eid Al Fitr, epochal challenges await Lebanon, a country held hostage to regional and international political vagaries that hardly concern its suspicious population. Syria and Saudi Arabia, Iran and France, countless powers that deploy troops to serve with the United Nations Interim Forces in South Lebanon, the US, Russia, and many others miraculously display disproportionate levels of interest towards the small Mediterranean state.

Outside interference is so prominent that most Lebanese actually believe that the entire world truly cares about them. Though that is hardly the case, and to satisfy this dependence phenomenon, many are willing to sell their souls to the highest bidder - happy in the illusion that they matter.

The history of the past few decades illustrates that irrespective of religious affiliation or socio-political station, local actors will gladly place regional interests ahead of the country's intrinsic needs, which are similar to those in many developing countries - strengthen existing institutions, encourage foreign investments, create wealth, educate citizens, and unleash creativity.

Yet, and except for hard-working non-governmental organisations and a few maverick citizens who rely on themselves to introduce meaningful changes, no Lebanese politician or government official devotes time, nor does he display the inclination to work on sorely needed nation-building requirements.

Most are busy tooting horns, conducting interminable meetings that redefine boredom, reacting to what an opponent may have said, or chiming support to what an ally neglected to clarify. Frequent press conferences occupy the elite who receive a cortege of ambassadors in their respective homes in a carefully orchestrated parade that is the envy of global logisticians.

Comical communiqués presumably clarify what someone meant to say but did not have the time during hastily arranged presentations. The sum total of these performances makes Barnum and Bailey, one of the world's most colourful circuses, look amateurish.

Beirut is now confronted with a classic struggle for power that reminds one of the movie The Godfather, where leading families competed for turf, and were all ruined in the process. The latest ruminations have the Free Patriotic Movement leader Michel Aoun insisting that his son-in-law, Communications Minister Gebran Bassil keep his post, though the latter lost his parliament seat three months ago.

Aoun is also adamant that President Michel Sulaiman should not have a say in the key interior ministry portfolio, perhaps to prevent the highly capable incumbent, Ziad Baroud, from applying the laws of the land.

Of course, Aoun's demands are not limited to nepotism, but are part of a larger agenda to oust the president of the republic from office. That objective failed on several occasions, most recently in June this year, when Aounists could not garner a clear majority in parliament.

Even the good general's erstwhile allies within Hezbollah sought to distance themselves from his stormy and often vulgar outbursts that border on the disastrous. A key error this last week was the one committed by otherwise skilful Shiite clerics and laypersons who fell on to Aoun's dangerous rhetorical orbit.

The party regretted the spat that emerged between the Shiite leader Mohammad Hussain Fadlallah and Maronite Cardinal Nasrallah Boutros Sfeir, which reawakened dormant concerns, ranging from outright division of the country to the adoption of a confederal system of government.

In a state where religious figures play prominent political roles, one should not be surprised when spiritual leaders adopt expedient formulas, even of the dubious variety. At every nasty turn, the Lebanese threaten to make core changes in their system of government, forgetting that it took a bloody civil war to produce the 1989 Ta'if Accords - which have not been fully implemented - and the intervention of the Qatari ruler to elect a president in 2008.

Unless the real objective is regime change, Beirut will persist as a parliamentary democracy, the only such paradigm in the Arab world. Those who may be contemplating a complete revamp of this form of government ought to announce what the alternative would be. For it seems that the obstructionism practiced in Beirut is no longer over a Cabinet formation, or a portfolio to a favourite son, but to simply overturn election results or even usher in regime change.

What is often overlooked is that no one today has a monopoly over any part of Lebanon's glories for the simple reason that the few that deserved such an epithet were achieved by previous generations.

Rather than selling their country to the highest bidder, the Lebanese ought to think of renting it out, because their actions - or lack of responsible decisions to look after the interests of the population - seem to ensure that the republic as it exists today will not survive unless the silliness stops.

Why should the Lebanese continue to finance the existence of a country when officials feel at ease to bargain or propose dramatic altercations to the system of government?

In any country, citizens establish greatness by producing great leaders who, in turn, instill real patriotism as one is made to appreciate the soil that nurtures him and that will become his eternal resting place. When people elevate mediocre officials as their representatives, they embark on a slippery slope, which impoverishes them and guarantees catastrophes. When will Lebanese leaders end their ongoing auction?

Dr. Joseph A. Kechichian is a commentator and author of several books on Gulf affairs.This article first appeared at Gulf News.