“Israel” Continues Its Provocations: We Will Drill Five Wells alongside the Lebanese Border

Translated by staff, Al-Akhbar Newspaper

“Israel” continues its pressure on Lebanon to make it give up the new boundary line and return to the old boundary line in order to resume the “indirect” negotiations, after limiting the maritime “dispute” to its initial area.

After the American company Halliburton announced in mid-September that it had won the bidding of oil and gas excavation in Karish field that is partially located in the area of the new Lebanese boundary line – which was announced before the cessation of the maritime negotiations rounds – “Israel” restarted talks yesterday, through its media, regarding details in the bidding related to the excavation and drilling operations, saying that such operations will begin soon, despite the Lebanese stance.

According to “Israel” Defense website, which, ironically, is specialized in security and military affairs, “Israeli” Prime Minister Naftali Bennet is not waiting for Lebanese Prime Minister Najib Mikati to start gas excavation in Karish field, pointing out that the drilling operations are to start in the northern part of the field, where the Lebanese boundary line is, specifically in block nine [according to the old line].

The website said, in a clear provocative message, that the deal with the American company provides for drilling three to five wells to the north of the field, which is within the exclusive economic zone of Lebanon, according to Lebanese definition.

The website added that according to Intelligence Online, the deal between Halliburton and “Israel” was led by the head of the company’s business in Dubai Ziad Khadra, and another head in the company, Ahmad Kinawi, who lived in Dubai for four years. This poses more than a question about the role played by the Emirates on the side of the enemy against Lebanon.

What is the role of the Emirates in the “Israel”-Halliburton deal?

It’s expected that “Israel” will take advantage of the announced step to the maximum, to build on the Lebanese reaction its subsequent steps, whether by withdrawing or moving forward in moves that won’t be limited unless they are deterred. Nevertheless, “Israel” aims, in the current stage after the Lebanese Cabinet formation, at urging Lebanon to return to the negotiation rounds first, and moving back the Lebanese demands limit to square one, i.e. to the disputed area according to the old maritime borderline [of 860 km²], which is the borderline that had been agreed upon with the American side within a previously planned direction between the two sides to be a point of settlement with Lebanon.

Accordingly, “Israel” accepts that the solution be a compromise, which means that the two sides concede to reach a solution that won’t be imposed on any of them, even if the enemy’s acceptance of the negotiation has been imposed on it because of the deterring balance of power with Lebanon and the inability of “Israel” to take over the disputed region; otherwise it wouldn’t have resorted to negotiations and settlements.

However, “Israel” is unable to accept any settlement that implies concession by both sides, based on what Lebanon has [2290 Km²]. Any solution of settlement will grant Lebanon what it had been asking for, and what it is now asking for, with taking parts of some fields that had been specified by "Israel". The enemy had distributed the excavation licenses in such fields on its companies along with American and Greek companies, after making sure that these fields contain tremendous deposits of natural gas.

How will Lebanon respond to the provocative “Israeli” action? Will it have a stance different from the previous one, or will it be enough for it to ask the US embassy about the meaning of the new “Israeli” announcement?