Settling Maritime Dispute May Have Averted War with Hezbollah, Ignited another Between the ‘Israelis’

By Al-Ahed News

In an opinion piece entitled “Lebanon Gas ‘Deal’ May Have Averted War,” Yossi Verter wrote for Haaretz that the Zionist entity’s prime minister made a mistake when he admitted earlier that the Knesset wouldn't vote on the document about Lebanon’s maritime boundaries delimitation because he feared he didn't have a majority.

After having boycotted the Knesset for more than a year, and in the waning days of the 24th Knesset, the demand has risen to bring the ‘agreement’ for arranging the marine boundary between the ‘Israeli’ occupation entity and Lebanon for parliamentary ratification, “because it’s before an election.”

It is worthy and desirable that every diplomatic ‘agreement,’ be it “historic,” “important,” “tremendous” or “a surrender” be brought for ratification in the Knesset, be it before an election, after an election or in the middle of a term in office. At ‘Israeli’ Prime Minister Yair Lapid’s Office, they are concerned that a Knesset majority will not be obtained.

The gamble that Lapid would have taken with the ‘agreement’ if it did not win a majority is unforgivable. The ‘Israeli’ government would have looked like a failure, irresponsible and hasty. Above all, the chances that a war would break out with the Lebanese resistance group, Hezbollah, would have soared heavenward. That would have been almost inevitable, given the intelligence briefs shown to the heads of the security establishment and the cabinet ministers.

“For a long time now,” one of the ministers told me, “There hasn’t been such ‘agreement’... Even those among us who didn’t like the additional concessions that Lapid made; even those who believe it would have been possible to achieve a somewhat better ‘deal,’ did not even think of voting against it, after hearing the assessments and seeing the intelligence materials.”

In his decision not to bring the ‘agreement’ for a vote in the Knesset, whatever the outcome, Lapid fulfilled the most important obligation expected of him: He prevented a war, with high probability.

The author went on to highlight that Hezbollah Secretary General His Eminence Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah is the last person to be taken lightly.

On Wednesday evening, at the press conference with ‘Israeli’ War Minister Benny Gantz and Energy Minister Karine Elharrar, Lapid erred when he said, “We are not bringing the ‘agreement’ to the Knesset due to the opposition’s wanton behavior.” This is an invalid justification, even if it is a correct description. At the cabinet meeting that preceded the press conference, other ministers also said similar things.

Lapid nodded but at the press conference, after sleepless nights, and with the hoarseness that attacked him, the truth slipped out of him. The urgency he attributed to reaching an ‘agreement’ with Lebanon was not initially accepted with the agreement of all his advisers.

After abstaining in the ‘security cabinet’ and voting no in the cabinet, Habayit Hayehudi chairwoman and Interior Minister Ayelet Shaked posted an explanation. I read it, and read it again, and ended up more confused. A clarification conversation didn’t help either. Three times, at least, she stresses in her post that the ‘agreement’ should have been reached in a different way.

What is the different way? Here too Shaked isn’t sure of herself. She confuses essence – “surrender to Nasrallah’s threat,” which according to her led to the signing of the ‘agreement,’ and procedure – not bringing it for ratification by the Knesset.

If we go along with her, according to Verter, the moment Hezbollah hitched a ride on the indirect negotiations [which began back in May 2020] and launched attack drones at the Karish rig, ‘Israel’ should have quit the game.

“Lapid didn’t have to climb this tree,” Shaked told the author. “It was possible to have conducted it in a different way.”

Immediately after Lapid’s and Gantz’s statements at the Prime Minister’s Office, the ‘Israeli’ TV channels broadcast a brief statement by Netanyahu. Jittery and furious that he wasn't the one who signed the ‘agreement,’ he repeated the catchy false slogans that he coined: “A disgraceful surrender ‘agreement’” and “Lapid has given Nasrallah our territorial waters! Our sovereign territory! Our gas!”

There's also “Lebanon got 100 percent, ‘Israel’ got zero,” but actually that one belongs to David Friedman, Donald Trump's ambassador to the occupied territories and a favorite of the Yesha Council of settlers. He's a far-rightist and annexationist who in his safe American home isn’t hesitating to stoke war here.

Netanyahu also refreshed his arsenal of lies with the following hit: “Lapid and Gantz are letting Iran drill for gas right off our shores. They’re bringing Iran next to our northern border.”