ince 2009, many Eastern Mediterranean countries have discovered vast natural gas fields off their coasts—an important development given the region's traditional lack of energy reserves. However, after a decade, much of the optimism surrounding these discoveries has been drowned in the murky waters of the Eastern Mediterranean—a region characterized by diplomatic clashes, low-intensity conflicts, and political instability. Instead of increasing cooperation, oil field findings provided further rationale for confrontation. Countries have involved aimed to delimit—and enlarge—their exclusive economic zones (EEZ) at the expense of their neighbors. These claims created new tensions in an area and exacerbated by longstanding geopolitical rivalries. While this has occurred across the Eastern Mediterranean, tensions between Israel and Lebanon are heating up.
Israel and Lebanon have been unable to agree on a boundary between their respective EEZs. For these two nations, sovereignty over a 330 square miles zone that is expected to be rich in gas has been particularly controversial. Given its chronic energy shortage, controlling this area would be vital for Lebanese national interests. For Israel, sovereignty over this zone is crucial to its long-term foreign policy goal of defending national borders, whether maritime or land. In June 2022, the Israeli government asked the London-based company Energean to explore the Karish field—a zone within Israel and Lebanon's contested EEZs. This choice upset the Lebanese government and Hezbollah, the Shiite terrorist group stationed on the border between the two countries. Hassan Nasrallah—Hezbollah’s secretary general—threatened to strike the area if Israel began gas extraction and, in the weeks that ensued, the group launched drones against Israeli forces—who succeeded in shooting them down.
These events almost triggered another Lebanese political crisis with unpredictable economic and political consequences. For the first time, the government expressed public intolerance toward Hezbollah activities. The foreign minister Abdallah Bou Habib criticized the group's attack on Israel, declaring that: "Any act that falls outside the framework of the state's responsibility and the diplomatic track within which negotiations are taking place is unacceptable and exposes [Lebanon] to unnecessary risks."
Tensions may yet intensify in the coming months if the parties fail to come to an agreement. This would not be the first conflict between two countries, Lebanon and Israel, that have experienced conflict before—such as the 2006 war. However, the United States—the official dispute mediator—provides some room for optimism. The U.S. Special Envoy and Coordinator for International Energy Affairs, Amos Hochstein, recently declared that there has been "very good progress." However, the agreement's specifics remain unknown and its contents have been closely guarded by negotiators—who have only made cryptic and conflicting comments in the media. For example, on September 19, Israeli Prime Minister Yair Lapid's office declared that Israel would extract gas from the Karish field with or without a deal with Lebanon—a clear contrast to the optimism expressed just days before by the Lebanese president about an imminent agreement.
A final agreement, if reached, could significantly reduce the potential for conflict between Israel and Lebanon. This outcome could benefit the countries involved and be a boost to the Biden administration, which prioritized Ukraine and the Asia-Pacific region while reducing U.S. involvement in the Middle East. This diplomatic achievement could allow the United States to revive its role as a political mediator in Middle Eastern affairs, pushing aside the Gulf monarchies' concerns about Washington’s strategy in the region and build momentum for signing a new nuclear deal with Iran.
However, if the parties involved fail to close a deal, the consequences will be felt across the region. Israel is already struggling to find political stability after the collapse of the Bennet government and new tensions with neighboring countries could impact the upcoming elections. With Lebanon facing a dramatic economic and energy crisis, finding a solution at a time of rising global gas prices is critical. Furthermore, Hezbollah could exploit this diplomatic failure to justify its destabilizing activities in the area.
The risks associated with the lack of an agreement are much higher than the benefits resulting from a clear delimitation of Lebanon and Israel's EEZs. Over the long-term, the region has been affected by deep religious and political conflicts that have created an unstable socio-political environment. Local confrontations, such as that between Lebanon and Israel, threaten to inflame the region. If tensions boil over, no one knows how other actors with interests in the area—such as Hezbollah, Hamas, or Iran—might react. Given these risks, policymakers involved in the negotiation process between Israel and Lebanon should be mindful that even solving small disputes is a fundamental step toward reaching a sustainable balance in the region.
a global affairs media network
Mediating the Israeli-Lebanese Gas Dispute
Photo by Fernando Jorge via Unsplash.
September 27, 2022
In the Eastern Mediterranean region, natural gas findings have increased tensions and been exacerbated by longstanding geopolitical rivalries. While this has occurred across the Eastern Mediterranean, tensions between Israel and Lebanon are heating up, writes Elia Preto Martini.
S
ince 2009, many Eastern Mediterranean countries have discovered vast natural gas fields off their coasts—an important development given the region's traditional lack of energy reserves. However, after a decade, much of the optimism surrounding these discoveries has been drowned in the murky waters of the Eastern Mediterranean—a region characterized by diplomatic clashes, low-intensity conflicts, and political instability. Instead of increasing cooperation, oil field findings provided further rationale for confrontation. Countries have involved aimed to delimit—and enlarge—their exclusive economic zones (EEZ) at the expense of their neighbors. These claims created new tensions in an area and exacerbated by longstanding geopolitical rivalries. While this has occurred across the Eastern Mediterranean, tensions between Israel and Lebanon are heating up.
Israel and Lebanon have been unable to agree on a boundary between their respective EEZs. For these two nations, sovereignty over a 330 square miles zone that is expected to be rich in gas has been particularly controversial. Given its chronic energy shortage, controlling this area would be vital for Lebanese national interests. For Israel, sovereignty over this zone is crucial to its long-term foreign policy goal of defending national borders, whether maritime or land. In June 2022, the Israeli government asked the London-based company Energean to explore the Karish field—a zone within Israel and Lebanon's contested EEZs. This choice upset the Lebanese government and Hezbollah, the Shiite terrorist group stationed on the border between the two countries. Hassan Nasrallah—Hezbollah’s secretary general—threatened to strike the area if Israel began gas extraction and, in the weeks that ensued, the group launched drones against Israeli forces—who succeeded in shooting them down.
These events almost triggered another Lebanese political crisis with unpredictable economic and political consequences. For the first time, the government expressed public intolerance toward Hezbollah activities. The foreign minister Abdallah Bou Habib criticized the group's attack on Israel, declaring that: "Any act that falls outside the framework of the state's responsibility and the diplomatic track within which negotiations are taking place is unacceptable and exposes [Lebanon] to unnecessary risks."
Tensions may yet intensify in the coming months if the parties fail to come to an agreement. This would not be the first conflict between two countries, Lebanon and Israel, that have experienced conflict before—such as the 2006 war. However, the United States—the official dispute mediator—provides some room for optimism. The U.S. Special Envoy and Coordinator for International Energy Affairs, Amos Hochstein, recently declared that there has been "very good progress." However, the agreement's specifics remain unknown and its contents have been closely guarded by negotiators—who have only made cryptic and conflicting comments in the media. For example, on September 19, Israeli Prime Minister Yair Lapid's office declared that Israel would extract gas from the Karish field with or without a deal with Lebanon—a clear contrast to the optimism expressed just days before by the Lebanese president about an imminent agreement.
A final agreement, if reached, could significantly reduce the potential for conflict between Israel and Lebanon. This outcome could benefit the countries involved and be a boost to the Biden administration, which prioritized Ukraine and the Asia-Pacific region while reducing U.S. involvement in the Middle East. This diplomatic achievement could allow the United States to revive its role as a political mediator in Middle Eastern affairs, pushing aside the Gulf monarchies' concerns about Washington’s strategy in the region and build momentum for signing a new nuclear deal with Iran.
However, if the parties involved fail to close a deal, the consequences will be felt across the region. Israel is already struggling to find political stability after the collapse of the Bennet government and new tensions with neighboring countries could impact the upcoming elections. With Lebanon facing a dramatic economic and energy crisis, finding a solution at a time of rising global gas prices is critical. Furthermore, Hezbollah could exploit this diplomatic failure to justify its destabilizing activities in the area.
The risks associated with the lack of an agreement are much higher than the benefits resulting from a clear delimitation of Lebanon and Israel's EEZs. Over the long-term, the region has been affected by deep religious and political conflicts that have created an unstable socio-political environment. Local confrontations, such as that between Lebanon and Israel, threaten to inflame the region. If tensions boil over, no one knows how other actors with interests in the area—such as Hezbollah, Hamas, or Iran—might react. Given these risks, policymakers involved in the negotiation process between Israel and Lebanon should be mindful that even solving small disputes is a fundamental step toward reaching a sustainable balance in the region.
