 On October 11, it was announced that Lebanon and Israel had reached a historic deal over offshore gas fields in the Mediterranean Sea. The dispute over these gas fields had led to a huge rise in tensions between the countries and sparked even fears of a war breaking out. The differences over this crucial source of energy had intensified as both countries were eager to exploit the resources at a time when global energy flows have been disrupted due to the Ukraine War. The United States was also a key player in the issue as it mediated between the two countries. The deal is not sealed yet as there are several stages of approval and there are forces who oppose it. What are the contours of the deal and how was it reached? Who played a role in the process? Rania Khalik of Breakthrough News explains. So Israel and Lebanon, just to give you some background, have been technically in a state of war since Israel was established, right? So there have been armistices, but never any recognition and constant wars on and off throughout that time period. And as a result, the sea as well as the land borders have remained in dispute between these two countries. And it was possible to live with this kind of like vague and undetermined status quo with UN observers indefinitely. However, it became important as gas resources were discovered throughout the Mediterranean, you know, Cyprus, Israel, Egypt, Turkey, Syria, Lebanon. Let's see this effects. The Mediterranean is rich in gas and there are disputed waters, of course, between Israel and Lebanon. So the urgency of the issue became more serious in recent years. But the negotiation over the maritime border, the negotiations have been going on and off for many years. And it's important to also note that in 2007, a very traitorous and weak and pro-American, pro-Saudi Prime Minister called Fouad Sinoura offered a pathetic Lebanese position on the maritime border, which basically surrendered everything to the Israelis. And Fred Hoff, an American State Department official back in 2010, also basically imposed on Lebanon a certain border in the sea, which was much less than it deserved. And that was the case for years. But back in 2019, this Lebanese Army officer independently was going over those documents and realized that the Lebanese position had actually been like treacherously minimalistic and that Lebanon, in fact, had the right to much, much more. And then at the same time, this Lebanese lawyer, who happens to be an expert in international law and maritime borders, also reached the same conclusion based on a recent case between Kenya and Somalia over their maritime border dispute. So as a result of all this, they were able to persuade the Lebanese establishment pretty much like all the major political parties that Lebanon, in fact, had the right to demand much more than what had basically given up back in 2007. And of course, this was very inconvenient for the people who had agreed to the original minimalist offers back then, because it made them look very stupid and incompetent or more likely it affected their financial interests, which is why they made they made those compromises. And in some cases, they also just didn't want the current Lebanese administration to get any credit for any of the achievements, because the current administration is considered one that is an alliance with his fellow. So the Lebanese Army, of course, is very weak. It can't defend its own borders. And as a result, it can be easily pushed around. It's also very dependent on Western countries, particularly the US for aid. And of course, Lebanon is in a weak position compared to Israel and America, given that it's, you know, experiencing this horrible economic collapse and it's just a much weaker and poorer country. And so the mediator before was this American and America is obviously not impartial, by the way. America has been the mediator all this time. America is not impartial. It's a guarantor of Israel, blindly supports Israel. No one can possibly question that. And the previous mediator, this guy, John DeRosher. I don't know if I'm saying his name wrong, so I apologize for that. But I'm going to say John DeRosher. He now is the charge affairs to Qatar, but he was the American mediator in the past and he showed up in the new round of negotiations. And he demanded that Lebanon accept the Israeli position, which is basically to take everything or talks were over. And so things fell apart very quickly. But then this new mediator was appointed by Biden. His name is almost Hotstein and he's Israeli American, which obviously cast out cast out upon his impartiality. And we've known for about a year now that an extraction platform on a ship was making its way towards the Israeli coast and in disputed waters that technically fall into waters at the Lebanese side had a right to claim. And this is called the Karish field. And then meanwhile, the Israelis were claiming this maximalist position that included a field that is clearly in Lebanese waters called Kana. So thanks to the fact that there's a powerful semi-state actor with its own army intent on defending Lebanese sovereignty called Hisballah, the Lebanese government was in a position to actually assert its rights by making threats, right? Threatening war in effect, threatening to prevent Israel's extraction from Karish if Kana wasn't given fully to the Lebanese side. So when there were any doubts about how determined Hisballah was, they sent drones to the Karish field to the extraction platform in order to show that they have the power to disrupt the whole thing. And after those drones were sent, this happened a couple of months ago, the American mediator relented and offered Lebanon all of Kana. So the Lebanese side has been weakened by the fact that ultimately the president was afraid to submit the maximalist position to the U.N. Part of that is because of an extreme amount of pressure from the U.S. But also because he was aware he wouldn't be able to deliver on that position and then he would end up being accused of being weak and a sellout. So we ended up keeping the original position. But again, thanks to the new equation determined by Hisballah that no extraction from Karish for Israel if there's no extraction from Kana for Lebanon. Because of that, you can't have it. We can't you don't get any gas if we don't get any gas. Lebanon was able to get all of Kana in this deal. So the Israelis had wanted to start the maritime border at a point on the land, right? This is another aspect of this. They wanted to start the border at a point on the land which would have removed some of Lebanon's sovereignty over some land territory claims and Hisballah was able to also prevent that. So they've legitimized once again the importance of their weapons, right? And this is after having similar, you know, similarly legitimized the importance of their weapons as a homeland security tool during the recent Syrian civil war. When suddenly extremists were trying to infiltrate Lebanon in the Syrian Lebanese border, and obviously they similarly legitimized their position back in 2006 during the war between Israel and Lebanon. And again, in 2000, during the liberation of southern Lebanon, so talks were greatly delayed by the incompetence of the American mediator, who according to those who were involved, you know, they complained that he was almost hot steam was like always on vacation, was very slow to show up despite the clock ticking on the Israeli extraction platform deadline. In one case, he took an entire month off in August. But more crucially, he they accused him of not accurately reflecting to each side the positions of the other side and more specifically not telling the Lebanese side what the Israeli offer was. And so this created a lot of confusion and actually almost started a conflict. But it seems he, you know, it's either that he did this out of stupidity rather than any kind of malice. Maybe that's being too generous, generous. But, you know, he also may have thought that this was like some sort of good negotiating tactic. Who knows, regardless of that, there were also internal dynamics at play that were big impediments to achieving the deal. So in Lebanon, you had the ML Party who didn't want the president, Michelle Allen, to get credit. At first, Michelle Allen's free patriotic movement or FPM Party and his own son-in-law wanted Lebanon to get the minimum rather than the maximum. And it was unclear who was going to lead the negotiations. Right. It was originally the army. Then they were removed from it because the army was demanding the maximum, which provoked the president. And then the head of the army is also this potential candidate for president. So there were all kinds of internal Lebanese political dynamics at play here. And then at the same time, there were internal Israeli dynamics, right? Israel has been going through election after election and unable to maintain a government. And so while this current Israeli administration under Yair Lapid wanted a deal to happen, they've been accused by they've been accused of weakness and of capitulating to terrorism. This is like the wording that's been used, accused of weakness and of capitulating to his bullish terrorism. They've been accused of this by the opposition led by Netanyahu. And in fact, it would be fair to say that they did in a way capitulate not the terrorism, but to the resistance that was able to secure Lebanon as much as realistically possible. You know, you can't expect to follow this like small paramilitary force to actually liberate Palestine. But at the very least, it can act as this kind of guarantor of Lebanese sovereignty as much as possible. And in this, they succeeded in doing so this was this was a victory on their part. Had it not been for his fellow, it's fair to say Israel would be exploring much further for their north and would be extracting from Lebanese territory and would obviously still be occupying Lebanese territory. And then there are those who accuse his ball of having like tacitly recognized Israel throughout this process. And there is, you know, a slight bit of truth to the fact that there is this kind of unofficial recognition that Israel indeed does exist. Not that it has a right to exist, but it exists because obviously there were negotiations with the Lebanese side, the Lebanese government to be specific, not his ball up at the Lebanese side, the Lebanese army and other officials like actually sat across from Israeli officials mediated by the UN and by the Americans. But there was not recognition of any sort of Israeli right to exist at all. But again, there was recognition that there is a fact that they exist and that there has to be some border struck with them. That's the material reality. Of course, his ball doesn't even believe in these borders at all and their validity, but it at least managed to secure for Lebanon the maximum possible position they could get in the situation. And hopefully in a couple of years, when they start extracting, there'll be some respite to the harsh economic crisis that's been affecting the country and also war will have been either, you know, delayed or postponed or actually prevented. Given that now there's this financial incentive on both sides to keep the border calm in order to pursue gas extraction, which, of course, Europe also greatly wants as an alternative to Russian gas. So you have some Western countries wanting there to be stability here now. It's but I just want to I just want to clarify, like his ball was not in any way involved in the talks. It only made clear to Lebanese and international actors that there were red lines and in that they were very successful. But it's also important to say like this isn't going to save Lebanon, right? Even if massive wealth eventually pours into Lebanon for it to help the for Lebanon to actually help its people and help the country requires radical restructuring of the Lebanese system and Lebanese economy that goes far beyond any sort of gas reserves that exist in the Mediterranean.