The prolonged and increasingly menacing dispute over eastern Mediterranean oil and gas reserves is not going to start a war between Israel and Lebanon. The stakes are far higher than that.
Many have somewhat predictably come to the opposite conclusion; that the two long-time enemies, each of whom continually talk a good fight, will eventually come to blows for fossil fuel because the continued potential for war makes it inevitable. Under normal circumstances, that would be difficult to argue with. But these are far from normal circumstances.
The dispute dates back to 2007, when Lebanon and Cyprus agreed to a preliminary maritime border. Then, two years later, a consortium of U.S. and Israeli companies discovered the Tamar gas field 90 kilometers off the coast of Haifa. In early 2010, the Leviathan gas field was discovered. According to the U.S. Geological Survey, the eastern Mediterranean basin could hold up to 1.7 billion barrels of oil and 34.5 trillion cubic meters of gas which, if it sounds like a lot, that's because it is. We are talking serious potential future revenue here.
Israel has, due to U.S. commercial support, gotten a significant jump-start on Lebanon, including setting up a series of exploration blocks scattered throughout a 9,600 square kilometer section of seabed. Lebanon moved in October to submit a unilateral proposal for the boundary of its Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), but this was after Israel had been studying the viability of extracting deep-sea riches for a number of years.
Israel went to the United Nations in July with its version of a maritime boundary. The principal point of contention is an 854 sq km slither that both Lebanon and Israel lay claim to. If that sounds a rather meager strip of territory, that's because it is.
The governments of Israel and Lebanon are rarely short of sources of disagreement. The atrocities visited on much of Lebanon during the 1978 and 1982 invasions, as well as the devastating 2006 War, in addition to the hundreds of Israeli lives lost in all conflicts, do not make for much common ground.
In the course of history, have wars started over financial or energy prerogatives? Sure. But have alliances been hastily arranged for the same mutual benefit? Absolutely. Both Lebanon and Israel would do well, temporarily, to put their intractable differences aside and grasp the historic opportunity to change the face of their countries for the better. Of course, this is probably not going to happen.
Lebanon has always relied on energy imports. It's a dirty country, environmentally speaking, with coal and oil-fired power stations burning up the fossil fuels that get delivered. The thing is, these are insufficient. There is, as evidenced by roving blackouts which range from three hours a day in the city to 10 or more hours a day in remote areas, not enough electricity to go around. The only recently formed government is currently on the brink of collapse due to debate swirling over -- you guessed it -- an energy bill.
Israel has a similar reliance on external energy, but it can no longer rely on imports in the traditional sense, given the situation in Egypt post Hosni Mubarak. Attacks on the principal gas pipeline from Egypt to southern Israel demonstrate that, in the face of a rapidly changing region, Israel cannot afford to take Middle Eastern energy imports as a given.
So the benefit of reaching an agreement over a shared maritime border is huge. That doesn't mean it'll happen.
From the Lebanese perspective, every single millimeter of what it claims is its own sovereign territory appropriated by Israel brings back memories of aforementioned invasions. Israel still occupies pockets of what is Lebanese land, in northern Ghajar and the Shebaa Farms region. Not only does this keep Lebanon rightfully antipathetic towards Israel, it continues (in the minds of many) to legitimize the existence of a resistance movement, Hezbollah.
In recent Cabinets, the Lebanese Foreign Ministry has been the preserve of Shiite politicians who, given their participation in a parliamentary bloc driven by Hezbollah, continue to refuse to countenance any sort of compromise when Israel is involved.
Israel, as history has shown, is not averse to illegally laying claim to what it doesn't own and, even if this time proves different to previous instances, its government rarely misses an opportunity to wind up Lebanon.
Western diplomats say that the U.N., which already monitors one 'border' between the warring states, is ready to step in and mediate the demarcation of a maritime boundary. It has the capability, in the form of its Maritime Task Force, to avoid confrontation along a given line, even if that means the slither of disputed territory goes untapped for the time being.
Both Israel and Lebanon badly need the revenue anything approaching an agreement over maritime borders would bring. It is to their mutual detriment that they so far they haven't even been able to agree to disagree.
Follow Patrick Galey on Twitter: www.twitter.com/patrickgaley
Michael Brenner: Obama on Moving Sands
Israel-Lebanon Oil Dispute Must Be Stopped Short of War: View ...
Israel-Lebanon Oil Dispute Must Be Stopped Short of War | Peak Oil ...
Oil and gas discoveries produce potential Israel-Lebanon flash ...
Lebanon-Israel Tensions Rise over Offshore Oil and Gas - TIME
Ali Shehab
---------------------------------
Israeli and British reports, since 2002, show fears of Hezbollah getting man-portable air-defense systems (MANPADS) missiles, that is a shoulder-launched weapon, through Syria which has, according to the 2008 estimates, more than four thousand qualitative rocket model “ IGLA 9K 388” officially known as the “IGLA S” or “SA 18” the name that is most frequently used in the media.
So what are the capabilities of this weapon? And what are the reasons behind the Israeli concern of it?
Recently, an intersection between different western and Israeli reports took place considering “IGLA S” missiles as one of the refringens weapons for balancing the definitely existing deterrence within Hezbollah’s arsenal, who is training his elements, for some time due to British reports, on an air defense systems in Syria and Iran, yet also a press report that was issued in Albania over 2 years ago, tackled the arms deal under which Hezbollah got launchers “SI 16” with 30 missiles and launchers “SI 18” ( IGLA S) with 100 missiles for $13 million from one of the former socialist countries.
To continue reading the article,plz visit: http://ashehab.blogspot.com/2011/09/igla-blinding-israels-in-sky.html
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business-old/mining-energy/oil-shale-reserves-can-turn-israel-into-major-world-producer/story-e6frg9ef-1226025327281
No it doesn't. That's former SYRIAN territory. The UN agrees with this. However, A full peace treaty would be an excellent price for Shebaa Farms. Selling Shebaa Farms for that price would be an exellent bargain.
Both Israel and Lebanon badly need the revenue anything approaching an agreement over maritime borders would bring. It is to their mutual detriment that they so far they haven't even been able to agree to disagree.
According to Haaretz, Israel has thousands of millionaires, so why is it still a welfare state?
Israel can easily stand on it's own two feet. Time to cut the charity, and help the victims of
Hurricane Irene at home, which is supposed to cost tax payers billions.
http://www.haaretz.com/jewish-world/with-more-than-10-000-millionaires-why-is-israel-still-a-charity-case-1.380466
The only question that Galey should be asking is if the area in question in on Israeli territory. I have looked at a map of the area in question and it appears to be on Israeli territory.
I am not asking you to take my word for it... It appears to fall within Israeli territory (and certainly not within Lebanon).
Sorry blaming Israel for the problems in Lebanon doesn't cut it anymore.
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4115005,00.html
http://www.imemc.org/article/61893
Israeli soldiers attack another non violent protest:
http://www.imemc.org/article/61894
attacking israeli soldiers and police and than filming only what is right for you, and shows "suffering palestinians" against "monsterous soldiers".
we all know it. gebbels invented it....
this is the truth-
palestinians attack israeli soldiers on palestinian demonstration: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rcesoLRYFVs
more information about pallywood here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MbmGv3LgDSA
Conquering went out with the East India company. Here are the unpleasant facts for Israel: The Geneva Conventions and other international tractates recognise that land a) conquered in the course of a war; and b) the disposition of which is unresolved through subsequent peace treaties is "occupied" and subject to international laws of war and international humanitarian law. This includes special protection of individuals in those territories, limitations on the use of land in those territories, and access by international relief agencies, NONE OF WHICH are presently complied with by Israel - which by unanimous decision in UN resolution 242 it is currently violating international law.
Without the backing of the US, ISrael would be just as isolated as North Korea, and for just as good reasons. The US for its own part in supporting Israels lawbreaking makes a mockery of its attempts to enforce international law against, FOR EXAMPLE Iran.
" Israel expects to resume talks with the Palestinians on the development of two natural- gas fields off the Gaza coast with an eye toward opening them within a year and a half.
Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and Quartet special envoy Tony Blair announced the potential resumption of project negotiations on Friday, when they met in Jerusalem.
“It’s important for us to develop additional [natural gas] resources, but it’s also important for the Palestinians,” said Netanyahu.
“There’s a Palestinian Authority gas field adjacent to an Israeli gas field [off the Gaza coast.] We need to develop both simultaneously. This is something that the Palestinian Authority has expressed interest in.
“I think we’re going to begin discussions and negotiations to facilitate both, where the revenues from the Palestinian field go to the Palestinian Authority, and the revenues from the Israeli field go to the Israeli government,” said Netanyahu.
“I think this is good for stability, good for prosperity and good for peace,” he said.
Blair added that the gas from the Palestinian field, known as Gaza Marine 1, would be sent to Gaza, including to the power plant there."
And if the Lebanese want to give up a potential share of the gas for their supposed emotional attachment a little Syrian cow field then, well fine. Good for Israel.
"Greek Cyprus does not represent the entire island and it cannot strike deals that concern the interests of the whole island," an unnamed Turkish diplomatic source told the Turkish English-language newspaper Hurriyet Daily News. "That's an attitude we have often shared with our Lebanese friends and I think they will take this into consideration."
Fixed it.
The fact is, however, that neither the United States, the United Kingdom, nor the United Nations, nor anyone, other than Turkey ever took effective action to prevent it.
Peace is better than war, no?
He also fails to note that the US, without speaking at all with Israel about their stance, endorsed Lebanon's claim. Frederic Hof, who was responsible for Syria and Lebanon under George Mitchell, made the call.
Israel now is left with having to go to the UN, an organization which consistently has voted against them regardless of any facts in the cases, to mediate the dispute. It's a small sliver of territory, but one which could be worth billions of dollars in resources.
We all know how this one will turn out.
http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/news/u-s-backs-lebanon-on-maritime-border-dispute-with-israel-1.372377
http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2011/07/12/washingtons-stance-on-maritime-border-makes-israel-lebanon-war-more-likely/
YEs, when they've broken international law, which THEY HAVE CONSISTENTLY DONE.
IS Israel still occupying territory it was specifically directed to leave? YES
IS Israel treating residents of that occupied territory according to their own laws and not subjecting them to Israeli law (military law at that) NO!
IS Israel forcibly transferring people? YES
IS Israel housing detainees and prisoners in Israeli territory, instead of in the occupied territory? YES.
IS Israel using collective punishment against the population of the occupied territory? YES.
IS Israel treating minors like adults and trying them in military courts? YES.
These are all instances of breaking the law for which Israel is voted against in the UN. Want to change the tune? STOP BREAKING THE DAMN LAW.
The rest of your list is wrong as well.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j7Mupoo1At8
I have came to a conclusion , that the best solution for the area problem is for lebanon , israel ,jordan and maybe the beduin of sinai to form a federation where each minority gets to rule itself .
As it is, it makes your opening statement questionable.
(Note, Iran's second and third largest trading partners are oil-rich, and despite the best efforts of the US to stiffle the Iranian economy, its non-oil exports are growing at a double digit rate)
And obvious, iran gives hezbollah FAR more money for weapons than for infrastructure. Weapons for an enemy that has no interest in anything in lebanon except avoiding terror attacks from lebanese territory. And an enemy that will wreck huge amounts of lebanese infrastructure in any war that hezbollah starts. Given those facts, it's quite clear that iran couldn't give two farts about a financially stable lebanon. They just want a war against israel. A war that has no strategic value for iran, and a war they only want because of their religious extremism.