Much more than gas or money: the agreement with Lebanon is first of all unprecedented from a political-security point of view
For Israel, the income from gas in any case will not change reality.
On the other hand, the agreement does anchor the critical security requirement and can create stability.
In addition, he imposes a loss on Hezbollah, which feeds off the tensions with it.
The current agreement is far from a peace agreement, but it certainly has the initial aroma of normalization
Barak Ravid
12/10/2022
Wednesday, October 12, 2022, 10:19 am Updated: 11:10 am
Share on Facebook
Share on WhatsApp
Share on Twitter
Share by email
Share in general
Comments
Comments
In the video: Defense Minister Benny Gantz on an agreement with Lebanon (Nicole Leskabi, Ministry of Defense)
The agreement with Lebanon on the maritime border is not just an economic agreement on the distribution of gas profits.
It is also, and even much more than that, an unprecedented political-security agreement entered into by Israel and Lebanon.
To read the full agreement
why is it important:
• Both in Israel, both in Lebanon and in the United States, the agreement is defined as "historic".
This is not an unfounded claim.
• This is the first time since the establishment of the state that Lebanon enters into a binding international agreement framework with Israel that ends a political-economic conflict between the countries.
• In the past, security agreements were reached between the two countries, such as after the "Grapes of Wrath" operation in the 1990s before the withdrawal from Lebanon, or Resolution 1701 of the Security Council that ended the Second Lebanon War.
But these focused on temporary ceasefires rather than ending the conflict.
Lebanon is entering into a binding international agreement framework with Israel for the first time.
The President of Lebanon accepts the draft agreement (Photo: Reuters)
In the news center:
• The agreement explicitly states that it constitutes "the end of the maritime dispute between the countries in a permanent and fair manner".
• The agreement also anchors Israel's main security demand - the preservation of the five-kilometer line of buoys that Israel unilaterally placed in the sea in the Rosh Hankara region after the withdrawal from Lebanon in 2000
. The coast in northern Israel.
• The agreement recognizes the expected line as a "status quo line" that can be challenged under only one condition - only if negotiations begin between Israel and Lebanon on the land border.
• Beyond the fact that such negotiations are not on the horizon, even if one day it takes place that Israel and Lebanon entered into an even more significant political process.
• The agreement is also economic because it divides the potential gas profits in the Sidon-Kana reservoir in the disputed area.
• The claim of critics of the agreement that Lebanon received 100 percent and Israel zero is false.
According to the agreement, Israel will receive at least 17 percent of the pool's total profit.
• According to the estimates of the Ministry of Energy, the total profits in the reservoir are expected to be three billion dollars.
Of these, Israel will receive 500 million dollars.
For the failed Lebanese economy, this is a very significant amount, but for the Israeli economy, it is a small sum of money.
• The critics of the agreement also claim that Israel could have received at best 40 percent of the profits.
This is an addition of only half a billion dollars to what Israel will receive now.
Unlike Lebanon, this is not a sum of money that will change reality for Israel.
More in Walla!
The High Court rejected a petition to grant an interim order to approve the agreement with Lebanon
To the full article
Potential to create security stability.
IDF force on the Lebanese border (photo: IDF spokesperson)
The big picture:
• In light of Hezbollah's threats in recent months to start a war if Lebanon's rights are not preserved, the agreement prevents a military escalation on the northern border in the short term and removes an explosive center of tension from the table.
• Even in the long term, the agreement has the potential to create security stability on both sides of the border because for the first time it will leave a tangible loss price for Lebanon in the form of a gas rig that will supply oxygen to the collapsing Lebanese energy economy.
• Hezbollah Secretary General Hassan Nasrallah is not the winner of this agreement. The opposite is true. Hezbollah is fed by the tensions with Israel and the confrontation with it. The reason for its existence is opposition to Israel and it opposes any agreement with it
. The Lebanese government because it realized that it gained a lot of legitimacy in the Lebanese public opinion, where its position has weakened in recent years.
• The signing of the agreement actually strengthens the state of Lebanon, its government and the opponents of Hezbollah.
Although there remain quite a few points of tension along the border between Israel and Lebanon, the agreement further reduces Hezbollah's legitimacy to launch a unilateral military move against Israel.
The loser from the agreement - Hezbollah.
Nasrallah makes a speech (photo: official website, Al Maner)
What next:
• The agreement with Lebanon is not part of the Abraham agreements, but it was influenced by the atmosphere created in the region after signing them.
• Lebanon agreed to direct negotiations with Israel mediated by the United States at the end of the Trump era after the Abraham Accords. The United Arab Emirates, Bahrain and Morocco have in
recent weeks given public political support to the Lebanese government to move forward with an agreement with Israel.
The current agreement is far from a peace agreement, but it certainly has the initial aroma of normalization.
news
opinions and interpretations
Tags
Lebanon
Israel
agreement