In the midst of all
the somber reports coming from Lebanon over the past few years, there is
suddenly a chance for some good news that could alter the country’s current
downward trajectory. Both Israel and Lebanon have sent signals that after years
of intermittent indirect talks to define their maritime borders, a US-mediated
offer could get the seal of approval from the two neighboring countries.
اضافة اعلان
On Monday, Lebanese President Michel Aoun tweeted
that negotiations to demarcate the southern maritime borders have reached the
“final stages”, and were conducted in a way that guarantees the nation’s right
to explore for oil and gas.
Aoun — an ally of Hezbollah at a bitterly divided
political stage — whose term is about to end, would not have made such a
positive tweet without checking with his key supporters first.
On the other side of the disputed border, Israeli
officials have hinted that a recent compromise proposal by US mediator Amos
Hochstein regarding the exact route of the border in the Mediterranean Sea may
be acceptable to Israel even though, according to them, it leans more toward
the Lebanese side.
According to Haaretz, the compromise proposal
focuses on Line 23, an intermediate line between the Lebanese demand regarding
the location of the border (farther south) and the Israeli demand (farther
north), albeit closer to the Lebanese demand. A decade ago, Lebanon had
accepted Line 23 as its maritime border with Israel.
Lebanon had since insisted that its southern
maritime boundary include line 29. Israel’s Karish field straddles Line 29 and
is within a few miles from Lebanon’s Qana field.
The maritime dispute has been going on for decades,
but the discovery a few years ago of large quantities of natural gas in the
Eastern Mediterranean waters has renewed claims of sovereignty over disputed
boundaries.
Israel had announced that drilling would commence in
Karish this month, only to receive direct threats from Hezbollah’s leader
Hassan Nasrallah, the most recent of which was last week. But while repeating
his threats, Nasrallah appeared to be giving his blessing to an anticipated
agreement. In his words, “Lebanon has a historic opportunity before it that
won’t be repeated. It’s our own chance to produce oil and natural gas to deal
with the economic crisis and our lives.”
He later said that Israel will not start drilling in
September but prepare pipelines.
But whether there is oil and gas or not, a deal with Israel could lead to a political breakthrough that Lebanon badly needs. It could reopen talks with international financiers and even pave the way for a compromise among Lebanon’s power brokers.
Ironically, the fact that the two off-shore fields
are within striking distance of each other may work to assure mutual keenness
to preserve stability. If Lebanon and Israel accept the amended Line 23 offer,
both will have much interest in preserving the tense peace along their border.
That alone is an achievement, especially for the economically crippled Lebanon.
The change in position, by both Israel and Lebanon,
is based on political and economic expediency. The US would have walked away if
Lebanon had insisted on sticking to the Line 29 claim. That would have hurt
both sides.
Israel may not be able to exploit the Karish field
for the time being, although it can continue exploiting other fields further
south. In Lebanon’s case, a US withdrawal from the talks would leave it with
nothing.
Aoun and Nasrallah need to deliver good news to an
increasingly frustrated Lebanese people. Since the May election, caretaker
Prime Minister Najib Miqati has been unable to form a new government and pass a
state budget. Lebanon’s economic troubles are mounting, its currency is in
freefall and essential services are breaking down.
A maritime agreement may revive talks with the IMF
and the World Bank for a financial bailout. It may even persuade Hezbollah to
allow a new government to form ahead of crucial presidential elections.
Of course Lebanon’s path toward finding, drilling,
pumping and selling offshore oil and gas is long and risky. On Monday, the
Lebanese government said it was interested in taking an over 20 percent share
in a consortium after a Russian company, Novatek, said it was withdrawing.
Reuters reported that in 2020, the consortium, led by Italian and French
companies, announced that it had completed exploratory drilling in Lebanon’s
offshore Bloc 4, off the coast of Beirut, and said it had not found a commercially
viable amount of hydrocarbons.
So far, and unlike the Karish field, there are no
proven hydrocarbon reserves in the Qana field either, according to experts.
Initial surveys suggest that the field has “high prospectivity”, but one cannot
be sure without conducting exploratory drills — something that has not been
done so far.
But whether there is oil and gas or not, a deal with
Israel could lead to a political breakthrough that Lebanon badly needs. It
could reopen talks with international financiers and even pave the way for a
compromise among Lebanon’s power brokers.
A maritime deal would also achieve border stability
between the two countries, sending the message that, for now, Israel is the
least of Lebanon’s problems.
Osama Al Sharif is a journalist and political commentator based in Amman.
Read more Opinion and Analysis
Jordan News
.jpg)
.jpg)
