Few would disagree with Tony Blair’s assessment that what is happening in Lebanon is a catastrophe. Few do not, like him, “deeply regret” the deaths of innocent civilians — in Lebanon as in Israel. He called yesterday for an “immediate cessation of hostilities”. Virtually everyone in the world wants that. But, unlike the Prime Minister, not everyone has added the vital phrase “on both sides”. For, as he insisted in his press conference with Nouri al-Maliki, the visiting Iraqi Prime Minister, without a plan to stop the killings on both sides, there will not be a ceasefire. And whatever is done in the short term will not work unless it is allied to a long-term plan.

Devising a workable plan is now the urgent priority. Condoleezza Rice made a surprise visit to Beirut yesterday to reassure Fouad Siniora, the embattled Lebanese Prime Minister, that a framework for a ceasefire had already been discussed. The crucial details must be worked out tomorrow in Rome, where the US Secretary of State meets European and Arab foreign ministers. The four pro-Western Arab countries, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan and Lebanon, will press her to do what Mr Blair said yesterday was essential in the long term: address the underlying reasons that brought about this crisis. Her concern will be more immediate: how to end the hostilities in a way that leads to the full and permanent disarming of Hezbollah. And to do that, the militant Shia group must be brought into the equation.

America, understandably, will not deal directly with Hezbollah. Most Sunni Arab governments also have little truck with a group they regard as a long-term threat to themselves, intent on sabotaging any settlement with Israel and using its militancy to increase Iran’s influence. Yesterday Dr Rice met a senior Lebanese Shia politician, who has acted as a link between Hezbollah and the almost powerless Lebanese Government. He is unlikely to do more than pass on messages. And Hezbollah, basking in the new adulation of the Arab masses, is hardly likely to listen to any proposal to give up the weapons that have provoked Israel into the confrontation for which it has long been itching.

One country, however, could be persuasive: Syria. Damascus has made clear that it is seeking a role in a settlement, and is ready to “facilitate communication” with Hezbollah, although insisting that it could not speak for the group. There is clearly a powerful faction in the Syrian capital concerned about the rise of Islamic extremism; a faction that could be of assistance in the present crisis. Dr Rice needs an intermediary, even if the message must go first through Cairo or Riyadh.

The Syrians, of course, see opportunities for themselves in all this. They hope that in any fallout they can push their claim for the return of the Golan Heights. More immediately, they are seeking a renewed role in Lebanon and a way out of the international isolation that followed the assassination of Rafik Hariri. Syria must atone for its past in Lebanon, but the country now has a remarkable opportunity to come in from the cold.