After a decade of negotiations Lebanon and Israel have finally signed their maritime demarcation deal. Historically, the two countries have been at odds with each other, most notably when Israel invaded Lebanon during the 1982 civil war and the latest 2006 war on Lebanon. There is always tension at the borders and a fear of escalation.
The first article in the Lebanese constitution describes the country’s borders which stretch from the north and east with Syria, to the south with Israel, and include the Mediterranean to the west. Yet, Lebanon’s borders with Syria and Israel have neither been resolved on the ground nor legalized.
Why the Unclear borders?
It is important to note that Lebanon’s border with Israel is demarcated along three different historical lines: the 1922 line, the 1949 ‘Green Line’ which is part of the Truce agreement between Israel and its neighbors following the 1948 Arab-Israel war, and the 2000 ‘Blue Line’ that was determined by the UN as a result of the withdrawal of Israel’s forces from south Lebanon. But, after the 1967 Arab-Israel war the Israeli foreign minister back then, Abba Eban, decided that his country will not necessarily accept any of the conditions presented by the Truce agreement, and also would not comply with the UN Security Council Resolution 425, which left Lebanon with unclear borders, an area of stolen land in the shape of the mountainous Chebaa farms region, and violated sovereignty.
Maritime Borders
The shared Mediterranean borders between Lebanon and Israel seem to contain lucrative gas deposits and disputes over this valuable resource arose between the two countries. In fact, 20 years ago, Lebanon started maritime demarcation efforts as a step towards benefiting from its riches in the Mediterranean. The contested waters contain the Karish gas field and the Qana prospects. Israel claims the boundary runs north at ‘line 1’ giving it the right to operate in Karish, but Lebanon pushes the borders to the south at ‘line 23’, and between them there is an overlapping and disputed area of 860 square kilometers, and in 2012 the US proposed a midway solution called ‘the half line’ but it wasn’t accepted, that’s why during all this time all negotiations stumbled.
In 2020, the demarcation file returned to the fore with American mediation and Lebanon this time entering the negotiations with a higher ceiling with a new line ‘line 29’ that gives it more space, this new line obstructed negotiations again. In the latest US proposal, both countries agreed to share the Qana field, with Lebanon having the right to exploit it, while the Karish field will remain in Israeli territory.
Lebanon and Israel signed the official agreement demarcating the borders on Thursday, following US mediator Amos Hochstein’s visit to Baabda’s presidential palace. President Michel Aoun appointed an official delegation to deliver a copy of the agreement signed by the Lebanese state to the UN headquarter in Naqoura. Elias Bou Saab, the deputy speaker of the parliament and who was supervising the demarcation process described the agreement as a historic achievement. Israel’s Prime Minister Yair Lapid was also positive considering the agreement a political achievement for Israel, saying “This is a historic achievement that will strengthen Israel’s security, inject billions into Israel’s economy, and ensure the stability of our northern border” also stating that not every day an enemy state signs a deal with Israel in front of the international community, sending a signal that Lebanon indirectly recognized Israel as a state. Hezbollah responded and said that the deal doesn’t reflect any normalization attempts and that this will not change Lebanon’s position towards Israel.
The deal showed that two rival enemies are able to cooperate when there is a common interest. However, this deal wouldn’t be possible without the American mediation and its pressure on the two countries to compromise and accept what’s offered.
On the brighter side
The agreement may place the Mediterranean as an energy hub supplying Europe with gas as a replacement to the Russian one, will reduce the tension between Lebanon and Israel, and it might help Lebanon to start a reform plan to benefit from the oil and gas revenue and consequently have the possibility of a deal with the IMF, thus, it may be Lebanon’s rescue card. Moreover, it may bring some sort of stability to the region.
Implications
The process for Lebanon is long and complex; experts have to prove that there are significant reserves in the Qana field, the production process has to be identified as well, and we will have to see if the French company Total is committed to working in oil discovery, and to which market the Lebanese will be selling. All of this needs a lot of time, proper management, a clear plan, and vision which the Lebanese lack on all levels. Besides, who will ensure that the money generated from the oil and gas will benefit the Lebanese people and that it won’t fall into the hands of the corrupted government? This deal might be a one step towards easing the pressure on a failed state, but surely there is a very long way to go.
