عربي English Türkçe اردو فارسى
Logo
Latest News
Features

Israel-Lebanon Sea Boundary Row Obstructs Energy Development

Water border marks in the Mediterranean sea next to Rosh Hanikra, near Haifa at the Israel-Lebanon border, 06 June 2022. (EPA)
Water border marks in the Mediterranean sea next to Rosh Hanikra, near Haifa at the Israel-Lebanon border, 06 June 2022. (EPA)
TT
20
TT

Israel-Lebanon Sea Boundary Row Obstructs Energy Development

Water border marks in the Mediterranean sea next to Rosh Hanikra, near Haifa at the Israel-Lebanon border, 06 June 2022. (EPA)
Water border marks in the Mediterranean sea next to Rosh Hanikra, near Haifa at the Israel-Lebanon border, 06 June 2022. (EPA)

A dispute between Israel and Lebanon over their maritime boundary has obstructed energy exploration in the eastern Mediterranean and risks exacerbating tensions between two foes.

After months of deadlock in US-mediated talks, Beirut on Sunday warned against any activity in the disputed area, responding to the arrival of a vessel to develop a field for Israel.

Lebanon has said the field in question, Karish, is in disputed waters. Israel denies this.

Here's what you need to know about the standoff:

What’s at stake?
Gas - potentially a lot of it.

Lebanon and Israel are located in the Levant Basin, where a number of big sub-sea gas fields have been discovered since 2009. Israel already produces and exports gas.

But while Israel has moved ahead, Lebanese hopes of producing energy have been hamstrung by political paralysis.

Lebanon's one and only attempt at drilling - an exploratory well in 2020 - found gas traces but no reservoirs, according to France's Total, part of a consortium with Italy's ENI and Russia's Novatek that was awarded Lebanon's first oil and gas offshore license in 2018.

A gas find would be a major boon for Lebanon, which has been mired in financial crisis since 2019. Eventually, such a discovery could fix Lebanon's long-standing failure to produce adequate electricity for its population.

Israeli officials have previously said they hoped the negotiations would take a short time and that an agreement would strengthen both countries' economies.

But while an agreement could allow both sides to benefit, the issue could risk conflict if unresolved.

Lebanon is home to the heavily armed, Iran-backed Hezbollah, which has fought numerous wars with Israel and has previously warned Israel against drilling in the disputed zone.

What is the dispute over?
Lebanon and Israel are at odds over the boundary separating their exclusive economic zones - an offshore area that a country can claim for resource extraction.

Israel claims the boundary runs further north than Lebanon accepts, while Lebanon claims it runs further south than Israel accepts, leaving a triangle of disputed waters.

After indirect negotiations began in 2020, Lebanon expanded its claim. Israel then did the same.

Karish became part of the zone Lebanon was disputing after Beirut expanded its claim, according to Laury Haytayan, a Lebanese oil and gas expert.

Lebanon has stated that Karish was in the disputed area in a letter to the United Nations, the presidency said on Sunday.

Israel says Karish field, discovered more than a decade ago, is in its exclusive economic zone. Israeli Energy Minister Karin Elharrar said the Lebanese account was "very far from reality".

What does Hezbollah think?
Hezbollah has been a sworn enemy of Israel since it was established in 1982 by Iran's Revolutionary Guards. The group has said the talks are not a sign of peace-making and threatened action if Israel violates Lebanese rights.

But Hezbollah is more deeply involved than ever in Lebanese state affairs, and wants to see Lebanon's offshore energy resources developed. It has not stood in the way of the US-mediated indirect talks and has said it will agree to whatever the government agrees.

Is there a risk of conflict?
The last major war between Israel and Hezbollah in Lebanon was in 2006. The border area has remained largely calm since. Analysts believe both sides want to avoid another conflict.

But Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah said last year Israel was wrong if it thought it could act as it pleased before a solution was reached, and the group would "act accordingly" when it finds that Lebanese oil and gas is in danger.

Following the latest spat, Lebanon said it would invite a US envoy to resume negotiations to prevent any escalation and Israel's defense minister said the matter was a civilian issue to be resolved diplomatically.

Most Viewed

 
Features

Trump Carves Up World and International Order with It

Analysts say talks to end the war in Ukraine 'could resemble a new Yalta'. TASS/AFP
Analysts say talks to end the war in Ukraine 'could resemble a new Yalta'. TASS/AFP
TT
20
TT

Trump Carves Up World and International Order with It

Analysts say talks to end the war in Ukraine 'could resemble a new Yalta'. TASS/AFP
Analysts say talks to end the war in Ukraine 'could resemble a new Yalta'. TASS/AFP

By casting doubt on the world order, Donald Trump risks dragging the globe back into an era where great powers impose their imperial will on the weak, analysts warn.
Russia wants Ukraine, China demands Taiwan and now the US president seems to be following suit, whether by coveting Canada as the "51st US state", insisting "we've got to have" Greenland or kicking Chinese interests out of the Panama Canal.
Where the United States once defended state sovereignty and international law, Trump's disregard for his neighbors' borders and expansionist ambitions mark a return to the days when the world was carved up into spheres of influence.
As recently as Wednesday, US defense secretary Pete Hegseth floated the idea of an American military base to secure the Panama Canal, a strategic waterway controlled by the United States until 1999 which Trump's administration has vowed to "take back".
Hegseth's comments came nearly 35 years after the United States invaded to topple Panama's dictator Manuel Noriega, harking back to when successive US administrations viewed Latin America as "America's backyard".
"The Trump 2.0 administration is largely accepting the familiar great power claim to 'spheres of influence'," Professor Gregory O. Hall, of the University of Kentucky, told AFP.
Indian diplomat Jawed Ashraf warned that by "speaking openly about Greenland, Canada, Panama Canal", "the new administration may have accelerated the slide" towards a return to great power domination.
The empire strikes back
Since the end of the Cold War, the United States has posed as the custodian of an international order "based on the ideas of countries' equal sovereignty and territorial integrity", said American researcher Jeffrey Mankoff, of the Center for Strategic and International Studies.
But those principles run counter to how Russia and China see their own interests, according to the author of "Empires of Eurasia: how imperial legacies shape international security".
Both countries are "themselves products of empires and continue to function in many ways like empires", seeking to throw their weight around for reasons of prestige, power or protection, Mankoff said.
That is not to say that spheres of influence disappeared with the fall of the Soviet Union.
"Even then, the US and Western allies sought to expand their sphere of influence eastward into what was the erstwhile Soviet and then the Russian sphere of influence," Ashraf, a former adviser to Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, pointed out.
But until the return of Trump, the United States exploited its position as the "policeman of the world" to ward off imperial ambitions while pushing its own interests.
Now that Trump appears to view the cost of upholding a rules-based order challenged by its rivals and increasingly criticized in the rest of the world as too expensive, the United States is contributing to the cracks in the facade with Russia and China's help.
And as the international order weakens, the great powers "see opportunities to once again behave in an imperial way", said Mankoff.
Yalta yet again
As at Yalta in 1945, when the United States and the Soviet Union divided the post-World War II world between their respective zones of influence, Washington, Beijing and Moscow could again agree to carve up the globe anew.
"Improved ties between the United States and its great-power rivals, Russia and China, appear to be imminent," Derek Grossman, of the United States' RAND Corporation think tank, said in March.
But the haggling over who gets dominance over what and where would likely come at the expense of other countries.
"Today's major powers are seeking to negotiate a new global order primarily with each other," Monica Toft, professor of international relations at Tufts University in Massachusets wrote in the journal Foreign Affairs.
"In a scenario in which the United States, China, and Russia all agree that they have a vital interest in avoiding a nuclear war, acknowledging each other's spheres of influence can serve as a mechanism to deter escalation," Toft said.
If that were the case, "negotiations to end the war in Ukraine could resemble a new Yalta", she added.
Yet the thought of a Ukraine deemed by Trump to be in Russia's sphere is likely to send shivers down the spines of many in Europe -- not least in Ukraine itself.
"The success or failure of Ukraine to defend its sovereignty is going to have a lot of impact in terms of what the global system ends up looking like a generation from now," Mankoff said.
"So it's important for countries that have the ability and want to uphold an anti-imperial version of international order to assist Ukraine," he added -- pointing the finger at Europe.
"In Trump's world, Europeans need their own sphere of influence," said Rym Momtaz, a researcher at the Carnegie Endowment for Peace.
"For former imperial powers, Europeans seem strangely on the backfoot as nineteenth century spheres of influence come back as the organising principle of global affairs."