SUCCOT

 “This week we are celebrating Succot. Urban based Israelis often invest in a prefabricated fold-away-after-use Succah sold in various home improvement stores. Here at Ein Harod planks and palm fronds are distributed to all Succah builders. I usually compromise by covering the sides of our patio with palm fronds and hanging a few decorations prepared by our grandchildren. I know it isn’t a bona fide kosher Succah, nevertheless it meets family approval.” I’m quoting from a piece I posted in 2009. Now I can relax, the family no longer requires my help. I hasten to add that there is a very large succah on the lawn by the dining room where the main Sukkot celebration takes place.

We have an additional reason to celebrate: Yesterday the Israeli Security Cabinet voted in favour of the U.S.-brokered maritime border deal with Lebanon, the first of several procedural hurdles before the agreement is formally adopted.

The snap vote by Israeli Prime Minister Yair Lapid’s senior ministers came a day after he announced that Israel agreed to the terms of the landmark deal between the two countries.

I won’t repeat the details I outlined in previous posts, suffice to say that the Prime Minister’s Office said the Security Cabinet voted unanimously in favour of ratifying the agreement, with one minister abstaining, thus obtaining the required majority for a vote by the full Cabinet.

Nevertheless, the deal still faces numerous obstacles, including legal and political challenges in Israel.

Almost simultaneously Israel’s High Court dismissed a petition to freeze the deal. The petitioners reasoned that the deal’s approval would be made just weeks before Israel goes to its fifth parliamentary elections in just under four years on Nov. 1.

The final cabinet vote on the agreement with Lebanon will be in two weeks, as the government confirmed in a statement to the High Court on Wednesday, responding to a challenge to the procedure.

The text of the US-mediated agreement between Israel and Lebanon, describing a "permanent and equitable resolution regarding its maritime dispute,"  was ‘disclosed’ on Wednesday, as Israeli cabinet ministers were set to discuss and vote on it.

The agreement comes in the form of letter exchanges between the US and Lebanon and the US and Israel, as well as letters from Lebanon and Israel to the UN, depositing the maritime boundary agreement, including coordinates. The parties agreed not to submit further charts or coordinates to the UN.

According to one news report Lebanon refuses to recognise Israel, and adamantly refuses to sign an agreement directly with the Jewish State. This also impacts the wording of the agreement, such that Lebanon is recognising the extent of its own economic waters, not where Israel's begin.

At the same time, the agreement states that representatives of Israel and Lebanon plan to meet at Naquora, on the border between the countries, to finalise the agreement "in the near future."

The agreement specifically states that the "status quo" in terms of the lack of a recognised land border between Israel and Lebanon, remains the same, including territorial waters near the shore "including along and as defined by the current buoy line."

The agreement addresses the fact that there is an unknown quantity of natural gas in the Kana Field, which extends from Lebanese waters, across the disputed area - which will become Lebanon's - and into Israel’s demarcation line.

Lebanon must license "one or more reputable, international corporations that are not subject to international sanctions...and that are not Israeli or Lebanese corporations" to develop Kana. TotalEnergies, which is a French company, meets those requirements

Exploration of the reservoir can begin after the agreement enters into force, and Israel will not object to "reasonable and necessary activities," including drilling immediately south of the maritime boundary line, as long as Israel is notified in advance.

"Israel will be remunerated by the Block 9 Operator [TotalEnergies] for its rights to any potential deposits in the Prospect [Kana] and to that end, Israel and the Block 9 Operator will sign a financial agreement prior to [its....final investment decision," the agreement states.

That wording, which does not get into specifics of how the remuneration will be calculated, is, apparently, a compromise between Israel's agreement to receive royalties from Total for its income from the gas field, while Lebanon demanded that Israel get a payout upfront.

In addition, "Lebanon is not responsible for, or party to, any arrangement between the Block 9 Operator and Israel."

If other natural resources are found in the disputed area and one party exploiting it would deplete the other party's deposit of that resource, the US will mediate "with a view to reaching an understanding on the allocation of rights."

Any dispute on the interpretation or implementation of the agreement is to be facilitated by the US.

Not included in the leaked text is the guarantee letter that an Israeli source involved in the talks said Jerusalem was to receive from Washington that, in addition to committing to the aforementioned details, would say that the US will ascertain that Lebanon’s income from the reservoir will not reach Hezbollah in accordance with US sanctions.

The agreement does not address any kind of enforcement mechanism or assurances in light of Lebanon’s extreme government instability or that Hezbollah, the Iran-backed terrorist group that is part of the Lebanese government, will not sabotage the deal.

In fact, when asked if Lebanon gave any guarantees that Hezbollah will not render the deal irrelevant, a senior US official said on Tuesday night that "US mediation did not include discussions with Hezbollah.  This is with the sovereign leadership of Lebanon...and I have every assurance that the government of Lebanon intends to keep its end of this agreement, as I have on the Israeli side."

Notwithstanding that, i24NEWS – AFP quoted from   a televised speech given by Hassan Nasrallah on Tuesday evening in which he stated that Hezbollah would back the maritime border agreement with Israel if it is officially approved by the Lebanese government. 

Admittedly, there appear to be a number of ‘loopholes’ in the agreement, however, the negotiators were right in approving the deal.

Predictably, Opposition Leader Benjamin Netanyahu called the deal a "historic surrender" to "all of Hezbollah's demands."  In response, The Times of Israel said a US official lambasted critics of the deal saying ‘They did not reach a better one’

‘When those so-called better terms for either side were on the table, they ended up not reaching an agreement,’ the unnamed official said. ‘Previous pieces of paper are just that’

In a biting criticism of Netanyahu’s intransigent attitude, journalist  Ben Caspit, Al-Monitor wrote,” Nasrallah might reluctantly step back from the threats he has been making against Israel once he realises that the deal is done and that his fellow Lebanese would never forgive him for depriving them of a potential economic gas bonanza.

Not so Netanyahu of 2022, who is living up fully to the mystical Jewish moniker of an "angel of destruction" that former Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir used to describe him back in 1999. Nowadays, the ousted premier and current opposition leader is doing all in his power to sabotage the Israel-Lebanon agreement, spreading shameful distortions of the facts.

Either way, the race will end Nov. 1 when two crucial events take place. Lebanese President Michel Aoun, who under Lebanon’s constitution is the only office holder authorised to sign such a deal, ends his term, so far without a successor, and Israelis go to the polls to choose their leader. In accordance with Israel’s electoral system, even once the results are in, it could take weeks to put together a new government.

Meanwhile, the legal interpretations of a transitional government’s power to sign such a landmark agreement with a country with which Israel is technically at war are unclear. Attorney General Gali Baharav-Miara, who is also the government’s top legal counsel, has yet to pronounce on the matter, and the Supreme Court will also have to rule on several petitions arguing against the validity of a provisional government’s signature.

What's more, the government is required by law to present the deal to the Knesset two weeks before approving it, a proviso adding to the uniquely Israeli bureaucratic and constitutional obstacles facing the agreement. As always, Israel’s foreign policy goals are being undermined by its domestic politics.

Nasrallah is the linchpin of the war that Netanyahu is waging  against the agreement, arguing over and over that Lapid has given in to all of Lebanon’s demands and surrendered to Hezbollah. His claims are patently absurd. In a recent interview, US Ambassador to Israel Tom Nides described them as “ridiculous,” adding, “In fact, former prime minister Netanyahu also supported a very similar deal a few years ago.”

The current agreement has only been made possible by a rare convergence of circumstances, with Lebanon financially broke, forcing its remaining leaders to understand that it is now or never. If they turn down the compromise, Lebanon will have to suffer through years of international arbitration to resolve its dispute with Israel, rather than launching the long-awaited drilling of its offshore kana gas reservoir. 

Israel is in the same boat. If it turns down the deal, it would face years of arbitration and would risk attacks on its Karish gas field adjacent to the border with Lebanon rather than starting immediate production there. Energean, the company operating the rig, is conducting its final testing of the pipelines to Israel’s coast, and is said to be ready to pump its gas riches into Israel’s coffers in November. Without an agreement, the dispute will drag on, constantly teetering on the verge of war.

Nasrallah's behaviour in this affair is understandable. He is gritting his teeth at the possibility that the Lebanese government, of which he is a partner, is about to reach an agreement with his sworn enemy. This agreement also includes recognition of the "buoy line," which Israel unilaterally marked years ago as a security border along 5 kilometres (3 miles) from its coastline. Nasrallah is digesting these developments slowly and with difficulty, but is not believed to prefer war.

The same cannot be said of Netanyahu. The once responsible leader did not dare violate the Oslo Accord with the Palestinians signed by his predecessors when he first assumed office in 1996, despite his abhorrence of that deal. These days, he is behaving like a bull in a China shop while the pragmatists in his Likud party look on helplessly.

“It is unbelievable,” a senior Likud party source told Al-Monitor on condition of anonymity. “He is throwing out the baby with the bath water and not thinking of the day after.” The source countered Netanyahu’s arguments saying that under the compromise agreement, in a worst-case scenario, Israel would cede to Lebanon $1 billion in gas revenues in many years’ time. “In return, we are getting a strategic balance with Hezbollah, security stability for the entire basin and the immediate launch of the Karish operations. Has the man no shame?”

The answer, so it seems, is “no.”

The current round of voting, like the previous four rounds Israel has undergone over the past 3½ years, once again appears critical, dramatic, decisive and terminal. From Netanyahu’s perspective, this description is probably precise. According to polls, he is very near his goal of 61 Knesset seats (out of 120) that would allow him to institute reforms changing the face of the country, to fatally wound Israeli democracy and side-line  its liberal values. Judging by his recent statements against the agreement, he is willing to go as far as it takes to achieve that goal.

A new Israeli Channel 12 TV poll shows a plurality of Israelis support the new maritime agreement with Lebanon.

The survey of 500 people, with a margin of error of 4.4%, found that 40 percent support the deal, while 29% oppose it. Meanwhile, 31% said they don’t know.

TV Channel 12 once again surveyed voting intentions and finds Benjamin Netanyahu’s right-religious bloc remains short of a majority with a projected 59 seats in the next Knesset.

A second poll for Kan 11 TV gives Netanyahu’s bloc 60 seats.

Clearly the full impact of the gas deal has yet  to be felt. My guess is that the conclusion of the deal gives Lapid a distinct advantage in the forthcoming Knesset elections. Netanyahu is well aware of this and will do everything he can to prevent the deal’s full ratification.

 

Have a good weekend.

 

Beni,                                                   13^th of October, 2022.