1. By agreeing to the proposal of the American mediator, both sides took advantage of a window of opportunity that may close to them within a few weeks. The Lebanese president, who was entrusted with managing the talks, will retire in two weeks at the end of his six-year term. Michel Aon is an authoritative figure. Former army commander, a great man of the world, a good grandfather with receipts. It is not known who will be replaced, but it is clear that it will be difficult to step into his shoes.
Standing next to him are two: Speaker of the Parliament Nabi Berri and Prime Minister Najib Makati. Berri is a veteran politician, a Shia, who represents the camp in Lebanese politics that is not identified with Hezbollah. In Arabic, the title Rais is also affixed to the Prime Minister, and even to the Speaker of the Parliament. Therefore, All three of them are referred to as “the presidents”. In recent years, this trio has suffered bouts of contempt and lack of appreciation from the public. This week brought a great achievement.
To which the mediator must be added. Beirut and Jerusalem won and a world power will conduct the talks between them. The weight of the broker is very important. also to his personality. Biden’s emissary, Amos Hochstein, is not an ordinary diplomat, but an adviser on energy matters. International expert on issues on the seam between oil and gas and regional politics. In these conversations, Hochstein was revealed as a stubborn and sophisticated guy.
Even Hassan Nasrallah, imagine, was convinced of his honesty and stopped treating him after a clarification call he received from President Aon. Picture it: a Jew, with a past of service in the IDF, comes and goes in Lebanon on a mission of national importance. The last element on the list is the state of relative calm. Gaza is not on fire, the situation on the Lebanese border is relatively calm, and there is no intifada in the West Bank. Actually, there is, and how. But No one calls her that, and those of us who think so, do so in private rooms.
2. Member of the Lebanese Parliament Paula Yacoubian claimed the other day that the “Shark” rig lies in Lebanon’s economic waters, and therefore it should have been insisted on demanding it. In Israel too, complaints are heard against the government about defeat. There are even those who are sure that Nasrallah is satisfied. Nasrallah is indeed satisfied, but not for these reasons. The agreement strengthens the Lebanese government over the Iranians. Nasrallah is satisfied, because the exercise he did turned out well. As someone who was excluded from the conversations, he forced himself on them by force. He didn’t want war, but threatened it without taking any risks, and here his political bet was successful. He was prevented from entering the door, so he broke through the window.
This week, after the agreement was accepted, the leader of Hezbollah refused to bless the agreement. why? Because you know, Nasrallah said, maybe tomorrow someone will change their mind. And besides, how will he be respected and appreciated, if he does not distinguish himself from the others. Not to mention the bass, the audience of his fans who drink his words with thirst. Now everyone is safe, or at least he will be able to claim that the agreement was reached with his help, when his entire contribution to the agreement was that he walked around between the subjects and the givers and horrified the Lebanese public with threats of war.
3. Someone said this week that even Netanyahu, if he had been prime minister, would have said yes to this agreement. It is a mystery why the phrase “Mr. Security” was affixed to the opposition leader. He did not initiate major operations, hated the loss of human life and stayed away from security adventures. Perhaps he was called that for the right reasons. Because he was cautious. The agreement with Lebanon is cautious. At its heart are two clauses central. Both are territorial. The area where Lebanon intends to produce gas invades one third of Israel’s economic waters. The mediator Hochstein asked Israel, on behalf of the Lebanese government, to grant this share to the Lebanese. Israel thought and said yes.
In return, it was agreed that Israel would receive 17% of the profits of the producing company. Israel cannot extract the gas from there by itself. The field is mostly located in the territory of Lebanon. It’s either the Lebanese or nothing. Israel has an interest in the Lebanese finding gas. As Nasrallah said this week, this is Lebanon’s greatest achievement, especially in the face of these days of bankruptcy. In the war in Syria, we saw what is happening in a collapsing country. Lebanon, if it collapses, will be a danger to all its neighbors. Besides, not everything in life is security. You can express generosity towards neighbors. Not only Hezbollah lives in Lebanon, but also people.
The second issue concerned the border line. The IDF’s maritime arm already marked its border line in the sea many years ago. A chain of buoys extends from the head of the Nakra to the west, about three miles into the sea. The Lebanese claimed that the line of buoys stretched in their maritime space, and that the real border was to the south of it. Hochstein suggested that each will get his own. The line of buoys was defined as a given situation, which Lebanon is suitable to accept, and a second boundary line was determined next to it, which represents Lebanon’s claims. Everyone will live in peace with the line that is not to their liking. The official, international border has not been decided, but surprisingly, no one cares .
It is doubtful whether Netanyahu attacks the agreement because he wants to thwart it. It is more likely that he finds in him an arena of struggle, and in the moment of truth his support for him will be revealed. During an election period, the potential of a protest that can be built in such a confrontation arena is great. In the agreement with Lebanon there is security, flying money, Hezbollah, and also the sweet taste of the political achievement. A perfect struggle card for election days.
4. Everyone knows that Lebanon needs every dollar, and that Israel is in an era of political crisis. In practice, in both cases the situation is more acute than that. Lebanon is not an economy in a state of insolvency only, but a desperate case of the breakdown of law and order. The residents of Beirut and the big cities have long since given up regular electricity and have learned to live with mounds of garbage in the streets. A cholera outbreak was also discovered there this week. Crime has risen sharply, and the legal system, which is already weak, is finding it difficult to withstand the proliferation of armed robberies and other property crimes.
One of the serious dramas taking place there these days concerns the security of the banks. Ordinary citizens, who have deposits in the bank, break into the branch and demand their money at gunpoint. As we know, we are in 2022, and the hostages of today are not the hostages of the past. Nowadays everything is filmed and immediately uploaded to the web. The heads of the banks are racking their brains over what to do.
Israel is indeed a stable democracy, its economy is robust and it is a state of law and order, but its security situation these days is precarious. This week, Nasrallah uttered the explicit phrase, and for his well-known reasons, claimed that an intifada was taking place in the West Bank. A day before, Ziad Nakhala, the commander of the Islamic Jihad, said this. Unwittingly, the two expressed the quiet whispers of Israel’s security elite. The IDF lost a male and female fighter this week. These were not isolated incidents. Shooting attacks are a daily occurrence. On Sunday, an explosive device was also discovered near Atniel. Some of the attacks are filmed in real time by the Palestinians. These days may turn out to be the beginning of a new guerrilla outbreak. Preliminary, accurate but partly, but ominous.
5. Many ask if the agreement may be the beginning of peace between Israel and Lebanon. These talks are an achievement of the sane camp in Beirut, meaning those who do not belong to Hezbollah. And despite this, the chance of progressing with them is low. As long as Hezbollah continues to rule in the Kippa, it will prevent any expression of peace with Israel. Lebanon, as much as it depends on it, refuses to see it as a bilateral arrangement. and refuses to have her signature affixed to the same document alongside the Israeli signature. Therefore, both sides will sign parallel commitments, and entrust them to the Americans and the UN.
What will the baby be called? Hasan Nasrallah wondered this week, thought for a moment and chose the phrase “the girls”. The Lebanese envoy for the talks, Elias Bou-Saeb, emphasized that this is not an agreement. Nevertheless, on Monday this week, this story summoned a few rare hours of good will. The two governments published statements of principle on their agreements. Both expressed satisfaction, and used the word “historic” to describe the moment. No less than that, both joined hands, from afar, against mutual opposition at home. When was the last time Beirut and Jerusalem agreed on the same idea? Maybe on May 17, 1983. So it ended in tears.