Ideas on demand

dear forum members,

allow me to introduce myself, my name is elie nammour, and I wish I can have your support to find out some ideas about how to resolve the dispute in the eastern Mediterranean opposing

Lebanon to Israel , and how we can come up with suggestions to generate an "offshore agreement" or an acceptable solution for parties involved . 

https://www.defensenews.com/global/mideast-africa/2018/02/08/how-a-disputed-oil-and-gas-field-could-be-the-last-straw-for-israel-and-lebanon/

http://aub.edu.lb.libguides.com/c.php?g=276502&p=1842644

 http://www.jpost.com/Arab-Israeli-Conflict/Israel-Lebanon-gas-woes-overshadow-Tillerson-visit-542989

Thank you

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

I would involve peaceful Scandinavian politicians. similar to what some politicians  did when they organised neutral ground meetings for other type of conflict handlings in this messy world  ;) 

Edited by Kvitebjørn
spelling mistake
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

politicians are involved already, there is a US envoy in Beirut today working on solutions, yet Scandinavians sure are an idea, especially that Norway has much know how in hydrocarbons, and there is a big Lebanese community in Sweden. But for the record Total, ENI and Novatec are already involved also for exploitation.  Thank you anyway for your idea

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think there is certainly a diplomatic resolution to be had here; however, for Israel I'm not sure it's really about the maritime border, rather they are focusing solely on Hezbollah. It seems to me that the real dispute is with Hezbollah in general. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The timing is, as always, pertinent. Israel wants its wall build on the border and it's building it in part on Lebanese territory, though it is on the Israel side of the UN-demarcated 'blue line'. This is Israel's bargaining chip over the maritime exploration. They are basically saying that there could be a repeat of the 2006 frontier war with Hezbollah if Lebanon doesn't back down. Some 1,200 Lebanese were killed then. It may be a trade-off: the wall for the maritime exploration. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The irony is that it would work well towards peace if the Israelis and the Lebanese were operating a joint offshore oil and gas block, with an international supermajor. Tons of invested money is a sure path to peace. Look at Qatar and Iran and the shared South Pars gasfield. Technically, they are bitter rivals, but this gasfield keeps them peaceful (of course, the Saudis do their best to ruin that). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree on the south Pars gas field thing , the question is if there are sufficient studies to prove that both Israeli and Lebanese blocs in vicinity and proximity are intertwined in gas ?  Beside the international supermajor need to coordinate interests of the consortium in Lebanon and the company extracting in Israel, is that possible? Technically how all this will work, any similarities in other countries maybe , on other resources, such as fish or else, baia California or black sea?  Thank you for your contribution appreciate

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem is, as you say, we don't know what oil and gas resources are actually there until exploration gets well underway. A peaceful solution will be easier once oil and gas resources are discovered in the bloc. Because if it's not, no supermajor will be able to touch it, so it will be in everyone's interest to come up with a solution. That's harder for Lebanon because of its internal political divisions, particularly those between Beri and Aoun (Christians and Hezbollah). 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Exploration is essential to determine the reality ,  therefore one can think of two different agreements , one prior to Discovery of oil and gas if any  and another post discovery. Thee prediscovery is ad interim , for example it can allow for rigs to proceed and international monitoring to take place , and whenever there is communicating resources between the two maritime blocs in vicinity, this will be assessed, meanwhile a theoretical  joint approach/exchange  can be evaluated during the talks . Post discovery the interim deals will materialize and mature , where migration into reality will announce economic final deals and this will lead to political probably . As for internal Lebanese divisions, I think it is more linked to the consociation mantra, more than confessions. In fact any government is not tolerated if not within the logic of consociation, which is a total non sense, not to mention accountability . This is about political maturity not only to manage state affairs , such as the fiscal budget, but also to manage sovereign resources  on behalf of the national population and in tandem with international neighbors in joint or in demarcation  maritime /land border space . This needs time to evolve if we tackle the resources/ politics linkage, I would think in presence of this gray zone pre discovery,  and to transform it into opportunity, of a trade off that consists of full non aggression pact for 5 years renewable , in exchange for certified exploration by supermajors subject to semestral report validation  . A pact that will be updated and upgraded  once the amount and location of  discoveries are in place . Basically non aggression and ceiling for military activities/asssets will be observed , not ideal but acceptable.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 2/21/2018 at 4:08 AM, eliek said:

dear forum members,

allow me to introduce myself, my name is elie nammour, and I wish I can have your support to find out some ideas about how to resolve the dispute in the eastern Mediterranean opposing

Lebanon to Israel , and how we can come up with suggestions to generate an "offshore agreement" or an acceptable solution for parties involved . 

https://www.defensenews.com/global/mideast-africa/2018/02/08/how-a-disputed-oil-and-gas-field-could-be-the-last-straw-for-israel-and-lebanon/

http://aub.edu.lb.libguides.com/c.php?g=276502&p=1842644

 http://www.jpost.com/Arab-Israeli-Conflict/Israel-Lebanon-gas-woes-overshadow-Tillerson-visit-542989

Thank you

Clear offshore borders determined by international commissions would be the best solution... 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

you mean like the Brits so brilliantly carved up things in the Middle East?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am afraid that international commission will not be accepted , examples abound in disputes, Caspian sea, Kenya/Somalia , Australia/France , or in joint ventures Nigeria and the archipelago of Sao Tome and Principe teamed up to produce oil. etc... 

Yet in the Levant where gas can ensure an alternative to European and energy security this is different,

I think only one intermediary can go between Israel and Lebanon and that is the US .

Possible outcomes can be either Lebanon to exploit while reporting on advances , in exchange for granting a pact of non aggression to Israel , or a wide conflict . Unfortunately the latter case has better chances.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In normal times, yes, the US would have the best bet of mediating this; however, presently the US does not even have a real State Department or a clear foreign policy. I wouldn't expect any rational diplomacy coming out of Washington under this administration. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As Turkey is securing an area of the Syrian shores , which will position it in a future leverage, interests between Russia, Turkey and Iran do not converge easily, and this can be a source for a difficult summit planned for April.

As for the US mediation, between Israel and Lebanon , it is expected it will under perform for many reasons.

Different topics are gathering and these are US/North Korean likely talks, UN condemnation of Iranian attitude in Yemen ( export of missiles),  unabated Ghouta offensive albeit the UNSCR set the stage for a 30 days ceasefire, Lebanese general elections, alternative energy investments, Saudi reforms and Oil production caps, Russia losing the initiative in European and Syrian theaters, and Chinese constitutional amendment .

Conclusion : expect a wide conflict, which timing is of importance.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites