The agreement between Israel and Lebanon constitutes a very significant development for each of the two countries and their relationship, and even regionally and internationally. The American mediator, Amos Hochstein, was good at defining the agreement for both parties and clarified that “he was proud to serve as a mediator in a historic agreement that gives Israel security and stability, and Lebanon the opportunity, prosperity and hope it deserves.” In this way, you summed up in a few words the importance of the agreement for each of the parties.
The agreement between Israel and Lebanon is a very significant development for each of the two countries and their relationship, and even regionally and internationally
The next day it is appropriate to look at the expected steps, mainly in order to avoid a crisis of expectations on both sides of the border.
Lebanese culture
As far as Lebanon is concerned, in the immediate time frame, It should be expected that the agreement will make it possible to complete the gas supply discussed in recent months, from Egypt through Jordan and Syria to Lebanon. As I recall, this move was not completed due to the fact that Washington did not give adequate guarantees to the parties concerned (Egypt and Jordan) that this agreement does not violate the existing sanctions on the Assad regime in Syria.
Presumably, the US delayed in providing the appropriate guarantees, also as a means of pressuring Lebanon to complete the agreement with Israel. This will not solve Lebanon’s energy problems, but it will alleviate the serious crisis currently prevailing in the country in relation to electricity supply.
The agreement with Israel does indeed send a positive message for Lebanon, but it does not provide an immediate answer to its economic woes. It will be interesting to follow how the Lebanese government (and there is the question of when the issue of electing the next president will be resolved) will conduct itself with the IMF and the World Bank, and with their demands for reforms before approving vital loans to Lebanon. Significant reforms will oblige the ruling elite to political-economic measures, which it must be assumed is not enthusiastic about taking them. A central role will be for the general public, as well as the international community, to examine to what extent they will stand up for the requested reforms, in the face of a corrupt and unpopular ruling elite.
Apparently, the USA delayed in providing the guarantees, also as a means of pressuring Lebanon to complete the agreement with Israel. This will not solve Lebanon’s energy problems, but it will alleviate the serious crisis in the electricity supply
in the near-medium term, Lebanon will seek to take advantage of the agreement to join the energy market. The French energy company TOTAL committed in the agreement to immediately start drilling in the Cana field in order to test the energy potential lying in the depths of the sea. It is essential to mention the other partnerships in this field: the Italian company ENI and the Lebanese government. The latter regained the share held by the Russian company NOVOTEK (estimated at 20 percent), and according to various reports the Qatari gas company is interested in entering the Lebanese market and acquiring this share.
It is extremely important in these initial stages to align expectations on the part of the Lebanese government (and French society as well). After all, it is a potential for gas and oil, but it must be found.
It can be assumed that following the agreement with Israel, Lebanon will seek to speed up energy activities in all of its economic waters. Lebanon has indeed completed the first round of tenders, but this has so far yielded only one drilling, which has not produced any proven reserves. It is to be expected that Lebanon will seek to promote the second round of tenders, which has been postponed several times, and build on the positive atmosphere that the agreement with Israel projects. Either way, it is a long process, albeit one with more promising potential given a more stable political climate.
In the Israeli view
As far as Israel is concerned, Israel is in a completely different situation. It has already learned how to harness the gas discoveries in its economic waters for significant and important policy-strategic changes, as well as in the economic-energy level. The agreement will remove the question marks that have been hanging over the development of the Harish field – not necessarily in relation to its being in Israel’s economic waters, but in the face of an explosive potential of instability or escalation.
The agreement will remove the question marks that hovered over the development of the Shark field – not necessarily in relation to its being in Israel’s economic waters, but in the face of an explosive potential of instability or escalation
The question of the reserves that will be found in the Lebanese Kana gas field (which is shared by both countries) depends, as mentioned, on the drilling that will be carried out by the French company. Although future revenues for Israel should not be underestimated, this is not a significant economic element that will change the national situation from Israel’s point of view. Its political importance, which concerns the manner of implementation of the agreement with Lebanon, increases immeasurably.
An interesting, and even important, angle concerns the Israeli-Cypriot dispute over the joint Aphrodite-Yashi gas field. The questioning regarding the lack of success of the two countries in reaching an agreed mechanism regarding the resolution of a fairly common dispute in the global energy market remains, and is even sharpening. A dispute that precisely in its Lebanese angle found a solution (although it is still recommended to wait for its implementation). This is an important and relevant angle, precisely in view of the growing attractiveness of the Eastern Mediterranean for Europe (following the war in Ukraine). As you know, Europe played a significant and important role, especially from Washington’s point of view, also regarding the Israeli-Lebanese agreement.
in the regional arena
As far as the regional arena is concerned, the agreement between Israel and Lebanon constitutes a sort of regional calming siren due to the escalation potential that lay in the failure of the American mediation. The potential for Lebanon to join the regional energy system is complicated and complex, and a healthy amount of skepticism will not hurt. Lebanon will have to make difficult decisions (for it) in the face of the impressive regional array that was built in recent years in the face of (and thanks to) the energy discoveries in recent years.
In terms of the regional arena, the agreement between Israel and Lebanon constitutes a kind of regional calming siren due to the escalation potential that was inherent in the failure of the American mediation
There is still an open invitation for it to join the Regional Gas Forum (EMGF), but this is because it is a framework in which Israel is also a member. A first step for her could be joining as an observer. In any case, it is likely that the positive results of the expected drilling in its economic waters will force Lebanon to take a constructive and beneficial path.
the international arena
The great importance of the Israeli-Lebanese agreement for the international arena, and the US in particular, relates to two key aspects: neutralizing the potential for escalation in the region; and a positive message regarding the formation of a Western energy front against Russia, even if the prospects for energy realization look quite a few years ahead. Memorandum of Understanding The triangle – between Israel, Egypt and the European Union – signed last June in Cairo, illustrated the importance and attractiveness of the Eastern Mediterranean for Europe. The Lebanese-Israeli agreement fits well into this.
In conclusion
It would be fair, and even realistic, to exercise great caution in the face of the positive potential arising from the agreement between Israel and Lebanon. The agreement settles the question of the maritime border between them, however Our main test is in the applicationand in the manner in which both parties, and in fact mainly the USA, which bears a responsibility that cannot be overstated, will face differences of opinion and difficulties, which will obviously arise between them.
The great importance of the Israeli-Lebanese agreement for the international arena, and the US in particular, concerns two key aspects: neutralizing potential escalation in the region; and a positive message regarding the formation of a Western energy front against Russia
On the other hand, these were difficult decisions that are not self-evident, that both countries/leaderships were able to accept. This is especially evident in the Lebanese arena, which has many players who have generally proven that they are unable to overcome their differences of opinion and interests, and needed an unprecedented political-economic crisis to bridge the gaps between them.
To that extent, Israel knew how to recognize the moment of fitness and make complex decisions, and in difficult political circumstances (election eve), which (still) produce unrest and clarity in the internal arena. The preference for the diplomatic path, and the identification of the unique meeting of interests between her and Lebanon, give her many meritorious points.
The United States has again demonstrated its great vitality in the region, precisely at a time when it is perceived (rightly or wrongly) as reducing the degree of attention to this region. This is not the place to analyze at length the insights and lessons that can be learned from the American mediation surrounding the agreement. However, one thing is important to emphasize : The characteristic required of a mediator is mainly effectiveness and not necessarily objectivity.