The political crisis in Lebanon has raised many questions about the intentions of Hezbollah and the Free Patriotic Movement with regard to the government.

While Hezbollah continues to insist that it does not seek the resignation of Prime Minister Tammam Salam, the party has done virtually everything to bring about such an outcome, most recently announcing it would participate with the Aounists in street demonstrations.On the face of it, at the center of the Aounists’ difficulties with Salam is voting in the Cabinet. The Aounists insist that in the absence of a Maronite president all decisions be taken unanimously, allowing Christian ministers to veto what they don’t like. According to their argument, the Christian ministers collectively replace the president while the presidency is vacant. Salam, in contrast, has been passing decrees by majority vote, prompting the Aounist ministers, and with them Hezbollah ministers, to withdraw from the Cabinet session on Tuesday.

What makes the Aounist position so absurd is that it is the Change and Reform bloc in parliament that has obstructed the election of a president since last May. The reason is simple: Michel Aoun is trying to use the steady breakdown in the state as leverage to force the other political groups in Lebanon to elect him as president. Aoun has displayed astonishing gall, but his followers will applaud any and all his contradictions.

But more important is what is behind all this. A number of commentators have recently linked the growing demonstrations surrounding the trash crisis with the purported intention of Hezbollah and Michel Aoun to collapse the post-Taif constitutional system and replace it with one they prefer.

The trash crisis is a scandal of major proportions, and the gentlest thing one can say about the politicians behind it is that they seek a redistribution of the profits from the lucrative trash-collection sector to finance their patronage networks. At a time when Lebanese politicians no longer benefit from the Arab funding they received for many years, and with Lebanon’s economy in a deep rut, reducing their ability to plunder state revenues, they have had to look for new sources of regular income. Trash collection is such a source, so the politicians tried to elbow their way into the market by creating a major crisis.

But the government’s decision to negate its awarding of trash collection contracts on Monday may have delayed or derailed this plan. As an astute friend put it, the government showed there is now a “federalism of trash collection” in Lebanon, as there was one in the cellular market. Everyone would get a slice.

Hezbollah and Aoun grafted their political agendas onto this sordid backdrop. What they seek remains a matter of conjecture. There has been much talk of Hezbollah’s desire to change the post-Taif constitution to better absorb a victory of Bashar Assad’s mainly Sunni rivals in Syria. Such a triumph would empower Lebanon’s Sunnis and make it far more difficult for Hezbollah to retain its weapons or act in a way that protects its stakes, and Iran’s, in Lebanon. That is why the party aims to overhaul sectarian shares in the constitution to give Shiites and Christians a structural majority over Sunnis in the state.

Precisely why Aoun would go along with this remains unclear. If sectarian shares are changed, Christians may lose the most – from a half-share in parliament and the government to a third if a system is put in place giving Sunnis, Shiites and Maronites a third of representation (with the other communities receiving smaller shares in this general framework).

If this is indeed Hezbollah’s intention, then what was Aoun promised? More decentralization? Federalism? One can speculate endlessly. But there is a convincing argument that the notion of replacing the post-Taif constitution is being falsely presented. Hezbollah and Aoun to do not want to simply call for such a modification, because if the Sunnis reject this project, as they are bound to do, it will effectively be stopped in its tracks.

So the real intention of Hezbollah and Aoun is to do something else. Two options come to mind. The first is simply to ensure Michel Aoun’s election to the presidency. In exchange for this, Aoun, from his position as president, would be better able, with the backing of a majority in parliament and the government, to push for constitutional amendments favoring both the Shiite and Maronite communities. There are those in the Future Movement who understand these dynamics today, and who have openly told their colleagues that “Taif is dead.”

Perhaps, but a second equally persuasive scenario should also be considered. If Salam is compelled to resign, we could find ourselves in situation similar to May 2008, when Lebanon was also on the edge of the abyss. This would require Arab mediation to find a solution. The solution could be a broader Arab-sanctioned deal that leads to a rewriting of key aspects of the constitution and brings Aoun in as president.

Whichever it is, the current situation far surpasses trash collection. In the days ahead we are likely to see a concerted effort to make life all but impossible for Tammam Salam.