عربي English Türkçe اردو فارسى
Logo
Latest News
Features

British Company Concerned over its Oil ‘Rights’ in Northeastern Syria

A US armored vehicle drives past an oilfield in the countryside of al-Qahtaniyah town in Syria's northeastern Hasakeh province near the Turkish border, on Aug. 4, 2020. (AFP)
A US armored vehicle drives past an oilfield in the countryside of al-Qahtaniyah town in Syria's northeastern Hasakeh province near the Turkish border, on Aug. 4, 2020. (AFP)
TT
TT

British Company Concerned over its Oil ‘Rights’ in Northeastern Syria

A US armored vehicle drives past an oilfield in the countryside of al-Qahtaniyah town in Syria's northeastern Hasakeh province near the Turkish border, on Aug. 4, 2020. (AFP)
A US armored vehicle drives past an oilfield in the countryside of al-Qahtaniyah town in Syria's northeastern Hasakeh province near the Turkish border, on Aug. 4, 2020. (AFP)

British company Gulfsands Petroleum has distanced itself from the partnership agreement between the United States’ Delta Crescent Energy company and the Kurdish autonomous administration east of the Euphrates River in northeastern Syria.

Officials from the firm told Asharq Al-Awsat that they will “defend the company’s rights” to invest in oil in Block 26, which is located east of the Euphrates and believed to produce 20,000 barrels of oil per day.

Gulfsands had signed a deal with the Syrian government in 2003 to invest and develop Block 26. According to the agreement, two-thirds of production will go to the government after calculating costs. Since 2011, the block came under the control of the Kurdish People’s Protection Units (YPG) and later the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) due to the ongoing Syrian conflict and the American and European sanctions against the Damascus regime.

Officials from Gulfsands told Asharq Al-Awsat that more than 26 million barrels of oil have been produced from Block 26 in four years. The production was unlicensed and it is unknown who received the oil or the extent of the damage that has been inflicted on the field.

Gulfsands has invested more than 350 million dollars in Block 26, which experts estimate is worth billions of dollars.

American investment
Prior to the eruption of the conflict in 2011, Syria used to produce some 360,000 barrels of oil per day. Production has since dropped to around 60,000. Some 90 percent of its oilfields and half of its gas fields are controlled by the SDF, which is backed by the US-led anti-ISIS coalition.

In Aril, Delta Crescent Energy struck a deal with the autonomous administration to obtained a license from the US Treasury to operate in northeastern Syria seeing as the war-torn country’s oil sector is under American and European sanctions.

Delta Crescent Energy was established in the US state of Delaware in February 2019. Its partners include former US ambassador to Denmark James Cain, James Reese, a former officer in the Army’s elite Delta Force, and John Dorrier Jr., a former executive at GulfSands Petroleum, reported Politico in August.

In July, Republican Senator Lindsey Graham, who is close to President Donald Trump, declared before Congress that SDF chief Mazloum Abdi had informed him of the signing of an oil investment agreement with an American company. US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said the administration supports the deal and said it is intended to “modernize” the oilfields. “The deal took a little longer ... than we had hoped, and now we’re in implementation,” he said.

The deal was, however, widely criticized by Damascus, Moscow, Tehran and Ankara. They slammed it as “political recognition of the Kurdish administration” and violation of the Astana agreement reached between Russia, Iran and Turkey. Washington defended the deal, saying: “Syrian oil is for the Syrian people and we remain committed to the unity and territorial integrity of Syria. The United States government does not own, control, or manage the oil resources in Syria. The populations in areas liberated from ISIS make their own decisions on local governance.”

Protecting oil
“The goal is to get the production back up to where it was before the civil war and sanctions,” said Ambassador Cain according to Politico.

“I think this company’s going to improve the viability of the northern oil fields to make them more productive,” Graham said. “Conceptually it makes sense that we should, instead of just writing checks, help people help themselves.”

In October 2019, Graham played a role in persuading Trump to keep American forces deployed east of the Euphrates River after he had announced that he wanted to pull back the troop to the border with Turkey. Trump later confirmed that a small number of forces will remain in oil-rich areas, stressing that the US has “secured and protected” the oil. Indeed, some 500 soldiers remain east of the Euphrates and they have been supplied with better military gear to protect the oilfields.

Many questions have been asked about the role the American military and administration are playing in the new oil deal. Pentagon spokesperson Jessica McNulty noted that the Department of Defense “does not have an affiliation with any private companies in regard to the oilfields in northeast Syria.” However, she added that US forces in the region are “securing critical petroleum infrastructure in northeast Syria to deny ISIS access to critical resources and revenue,” reported Politico. McNulty also noted that the oil resources "currently provide some of the funding necessary for the SDF to conduct operations" against ISIS.

Sovereign rights
The deal between the American company and autonomous administration calls for the establishment of at least two makeshift oil refineries in the region east of the Euphrates that can produce 20,000 barrels of oil per day. The production will meet some of the local demand.

Other sources, however, weighed the possibility that the deal could allow operators to expand their work and invest in other oilfields. This would raise concerns among other oil companies, including Gulfsands.

Officials at the firm said they were “surprised” with the deal that was struck between Delta Crescent Energy and the Kurdish administration. One official said Gulfsands continues to investigate the details of the agreement and was determined to “protect” its rights. Moreover, he said that the firm was not involved in politics, but hopes that peace and stability will be restored in Syria.

Gulfsands remains committed to its project in Syria and is determined to protect its rights in line with international laws, he added. The company has signed a binding agreement with a sovereign state and it expects that its rights be recognized, hoping that it will resume its work when conditions permit it.

On the other end of the divide, Kurdish officials defended their deal with Washington, saying it had political undertones seeing as it was signed directly between an American company and the autonomous administration without having to obtain the Syrian government’s approval.

“The political significance of the deal is important and is tantamount of recognition” of the autonomous authority, he explained. Furthermore, it eases concerns that the US may suddenly pull out its troops from the region east of the Euphrates.

Most Viewed

 
 
Features

UN Resolution 1701 at the Heart of the Israel-Hezbollah Ceasefire

An empty United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) observation tower on the Israel-Lebanon border, near the southern Lebanese city of Al-Khiam, as seen from northern Israel, 26 November 2024, amid cross-border hostilities between Hezbollah and Israel. (EPA)
An empty United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) observation tower on the Israel-Lebanon border, near the southern Lebanese city of Al-Khiam, as seen from northern Israel, 26 November 2024, amid cross-border hostilities between Hezbollah and Israel. (EPA)
TT
TT

UN Resolution 1701 at the Heart of the Israel-Hezbollah Ceasefire

An empty United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) observation tower on the Israel-Lebanon border, near the southern Lebanese city of Al-Khiam, as seen from northern Israel, 26 November 2024, amid cross-border hostilities between Hezbollah and Israel. (EPA)
An empty United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) observation tower on the Israel-Lebanon border, near the southern Lebanese city of Al-Khiam, as seen from northern Israel, 26 November 2024, amid cross-border hostilities between Hezbollah and Israel. (EPA)

In 2006, after a bruising monthlong war between Israel and Lebanon’s Hezbollah armed group, the United Nations Security Council unanimously voted for a resolution to end the conflict and pave the way for lasting security along the border.

But while relative calm stood for nearly two decades, Resolution 1701’s terms were never fully enforced.

Now, figuring out how to finally enforce it is key to a US-brokered deal that brought a ceasefire Wednesday.

In late September, after nearly a year of low-level clashes, the conflict between Israel and Hezbollah spiraled into all-out war and an Israeli ground invasion. As Israeli jets pound deep inside Lebanon and Hezbollah fires rockets deeper into northern Israel, UN and diplomatic officials again turned to the 2006 resolution in a bid to end the conflict.

Years of deeply divided politics and regionwide geopolitical hostilities have halted substantial progress on its implementation, yet the international community believes Resolution 1701 is still the brightest prospect for long-term stability between Israel and Lebanon.

Almost two decades after the last war between Israel and Hezbollah, the United States led shuttle diplomacy efforts between Lebanon and Israel to agree on a ceasefire proposal that renewed commitment to the resolution, this time with an implementation plan to try to reinvigorate the document.

What is UNSC Resolution 1701? In 2000, Israel withdrew its forces from most of southern Lebanon along a UN-demarcated “Blue Line” that separated the two countries and the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights in Syria. UN Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) peacekeepers increased their presence along the line of withdrawal.

Resolution 1701 was supposed to complete Israel’s withdrawal from southern Lebanon and ensure Hezbollah would move north of the Litani River, keeping the area exclusively under the Lebanese military and UN peacekeepers.

Up to 15,000 UN peacekeepers would help to maintain calm, return displaced Lebanese and secure the area alongside the Lebanese military.

The goal was long-term security, with land borders eventually demarcated to resolve territorial disputes.

The resolution also reaffirmed previous ones that call for the disarmament of all armed groups in Lebanon — Hezbollah among them.

“It was made for a certain situation and context,” Elias Hanna, a retired Lebanese army general, told The Associated Press. “But as time goes on, the essence of the resolution begins to hollow.”

Has Resolution 1701 been implemented? For years, Lebanon and Israel blamed each other for countless violations along the tense frontier. Israel said Hezbollah’s elite Radwan Force and growing arsenal remained, and accused the group of using a local environmental organization to spy on troops.

Lebanon complained about Israeli military jets and naval ships entering Lebanese territory even when there was no active conflict.

“You had a role of the UNIFIL that slowly eroded like any other peacekeeping with time that has no clear mandate,” said Joseph Bahout, the director of the Issam Fares Institute for Public Policy at the American University of Beirut. “They don’t have permission to inspect the area without coordinating with the Lebanese army.”

UNIFIL for years has urged Israel to withdraw from some territory north of the frontier, but to no avail. In the ongoing war, the peacekeeping mission has accused Israel, as well as Hezbollah, of obstructing and harming its forces and infrastructure.

Hezbollah’s power, meanwhile, has grown, both in its arsenal and as a political influence in the Lebanese state.

The Iran-backed group was essential in keeping Syrian President Bashar Assad in power when armed opposition groups tried to topple him, and it supports Iran-backed groups in Iraq and Yemen. It has an estimated 150,000 rockets and missiles, including precision-guided missiles pointed at Israel, and has introduced drones into its arsenal.

Hanna says Hezbollah “is something never seen before as a non-state actor” with political and military influence.

How do mediators hope to implement 1701 almost two decades later? Israel's security Cabinet approved the ceasefire agreement late Tuesday, according to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's office. The ceasefire began at 4 am local time Wednesday.

Efforts led by the US and France for the ceasefire between Israel and Hezbollah underscored that they still view the resolution as key. For almost a year, Washington has promoted various versions of a deal that would gradually lead to its full implementation.

International mediators hope that by boosting financial support for the Lebanese army — which was not a party in the Israel-Hezbollah war — Lebanon can deploy some 6,000 additional troops south of the Litani River to help enforce the resolution. Under the deal, an international monitoring committee headed by the United States would oversee implementation to ensure that Hezbollah and Israel’s withdrawals take place.

It is not entirely clear how the committee would work or how potential violations would be reported and dealt with.

The circumstances now are far more complicated than in 2006. Some are still skeptical of the resolution's viability given that the political realities and balance of power both regionally and within Lebanon have dramatically changed since then.

“You’re tying 1701 with a hundred things,” Bahout said. “A resolution is the reflection of a balance of power and political context.”

Now with the ceasefire in place, the hope is that Israel and Lebanon can begin negotiations to demarcate their land border and settle disputes over several points along the Blue Line for long-term security after decades of conflict and tension.