Connect with us

RSS

The War in Gaza and the Implications for Energy in the Eastern Mediterranean

Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett with Cypriot President Nicos Anastasiades and Greek Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis in Jerusalem on Dec. 7, 2021. Photo: Amos Ben-Gershom / Government Press Office

The war with Hamas in Gaza, and the clashes in the north against Hezbollah, are inevitably affecting both the regional and global energy markets. Uncertainty is not good for economic markets, especially the energy sector. There have not yet been significant increases in oil prices, and natural gas prices have risen only marginally — but no major new deals are being made because the global energy market is waiting and watching, or showing “cautious nervousness.” This is mainly because there are still high quantities of gas available in the market. Europe has managed to overcome the lack of gas from Russia with supply from other sources (mainly liquified gas from the US and elsewhere), and European emergency stores are almost completely full.

Few have yet compared the current energy situation in the Middle East to the oil embargo surrounding the Yom Kippur War in 1973. A couple of weeks ago, the Iranian Minister of Energy called for a similar boycott at the gathering of the Islamic Conference in Saudi Arabia, but as expected, his call went unanswered.

With that said, the situation in the Eastern Mediterranean is complex. The Israeli Ministry of Energy’s October 9 instruction to Chevron to temporarily halt gas production in the Tamar field did not materially affect the local energy market. Chevron announced that it was able to compensate for the lack of gas from Tamar with other fields, both for the Israeli market and for the export markets in Egypt and Jordan. However, the situation could become more difficult as the fighting continues, especially if it escalates to include additional arenas.

It is important to keep an eye on this, especially with regard to the possible consequences for Egypt. Egypt is facing a shortage of natural gas for the local market that has led to power outages from time to time. Moreover, its dire economic situation necessitates the flow of gas from Israel — both for the domestic market and no less importantly for export in order to bring foreign currency into the depleted Egyptian treasury. Present estimations indicate a sharp decrease of gas export to Egypt of around 70%(!). This could have serious internal and regional political consequences. The angry reaction of President Sisi to what was interpreted as an Israeli attempt to evacuate Palestinians from the Gaza Strip into Sinai reflected his concern about both Egypt’s poor economic position and the strategic implications of the Gaza problem being pushed into Egypt’s front yard. A few days ago, fuel prices in Egypt increased by about 15%, but the government said it will not raise the price of basic products. Egypt’s worsening economic situation should be of considerable concern to the region and beyond.

An equally interesting arena is Lebanon. The drilling by the Total company in Block 9 did not yield positive results. Although no official announcement was made by the Lebanese Ministry of Energy, reports indicate that no gas was found. This is a fairly common result in the energy sector, as gas often fails to be found with the first drilling. But in view of Lebanon’s current economic and political circumstances, this is not good news. Reports indicate that the Lebanese government is trying to convince the relevant companies to drill in Block 8 to preserve “energy momentum”. In the present circumstances, with clashes between Hezbollah and Israel taking place, the energy angle is naturally being sidelined, but it will be very important later.

In the Cypriot arena, Chevron submitted an up-to-date action plan to the government regarding the Aphrodite gas field, including its intention to export the gas to Egypt. The government responded with reservations. The dispute has not yet been settled, though it probably will be in the next couple of months. The Israeli angle concerning this field is not clear (there is a dispute regarding the Israeli portion of this field), but when Chevron decides to proceed with Aphrodite, a means will likely be found to settle this angle as well.

In addition, the Italian company ENI is expected to drill in another field with positive potential in Cypriot waters at the beginning of next year.

There is uncertainty regarding the Turkish position on Cypriot energy potential. It should be expected that if Chevron takes practical steps in the Aphrodite field, Ankara will respond. Although the atmosphere between Turkey and Greece is improving, this is mainly on the bilateral level between those two countries. Cyprus is another matter. Intriguingly, however, the Turkish Foreign Minister made a statement in which he suggested finding a way to share the gas between Greek-Cypriots and Turkish-Cypriots even in the absence of a comprehensive solution to the Cyprus problem. Is this a serious idea? Will it be possible to motivate all the parties to take such a creative and pragmatic step? Time will tell, but clearly the Israeli-Lebanese maritime agreement has spurred some creativity about other conflicts in the region.

For the time being, the war in Gaza has not created too many waves in either the regional energy sector or the global one. However, the uncertainty will increase as the crisis continues, especially against the background of the ground operation in the Gaza Strip. Escalation in the Lebanese arena would further exacerbate the situation. It is important to stress that although there is no apparent shortage of natural gas in the world market, and although it is to be expected that Saudi Arabia and its Gulf partners will adopt a responsible policy in this regard concerning oil, ongoing instability could have a negative effect on the energy sector. Obviously, Washington is aware of this and is paying close attention. Israel needs to do the same because of the strategic implications for the region.

Interestingly enough, the Cypriot Energy Minister stated on November 8 that the war might provide an impetus to plans for a pipeline conveying offshore natural gas to Cyprus for processing and shipping to foreign markets. He added that energy cooperation between Israel and Turkey might have fallen by the wayside given Turkey’s increasingly harsh criticism of Israeli actions in Gaza. While it is too early to assess the implications of the war for Israel’s plans for another export option for its natural gas, lessons should be taken the day after.

Ambassador (ret.) Michael Harari joined the Israeli Foreign Ministry and served more than 30 years in a range of diplomatic roles in Israel and abroad, including (among others) in Cairo, London and Nicosia. His final position abroad was as Israeli Ambassador to Cyprus (2010-2015). Today he serves as a consultant in the fields of strategy, policy and energy and lectures in the Political Science Department at the Jezreel Valley College. A version of this article was originally published by The BESA Center.

The post The War in Gaza and the Implications for Energy in the Eastern Mediterranean first appeared on Algemeiner.com.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

You must be logged in to post a comment Login

Leave a Reply

RSS

McGill cancels talk with former Hamas insider turned Israel advocate, citing fears of violence

McGill University has canceled an on-campus event planned by Jewish students—and temporarily halted bookings for all extracurricular activities—following threats of violence along with a death threat, as outlined in a […]

The post McGill cancels talk with former Hamas insider turned Israel advocate, citing fears of violence appeared first on The Canadian Jewish News.

Continue Reading

RSS

US Lawmakers Introduce Bipartisan Bill to Strip Funding From Universities That Boycott Israel

US Rep. Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ) at a press conference in Bergenfield, New Jersey, US on June 5, 2023. Photo: Kyle Mazza/NurPhoto via Reuters Connect

US Reps. Virginia Foxx (R-NC) and Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ) on Tuesday introduced bipartisan legislation to cut off federal funding from universities that engage in boycotts of Israel.

The legislation, titled “The Protect Economic Freedom Act,” would render universities that participate in the boycott, divestment, and sanctions (BDS) movement against Israel ineligible for federal funding under Title IV of the Higher Education Act, prohibiting them from receiving federal student aid. The bill would also mandate that colleges and universities submit evidence that they are not participating in commercial boycotts against the Jewish state. 

“Enough is enough. Appeasing the antisemitic mobs on college campuses threatens the safety of Jewish students and faculty and it undermines the relationship between the US and one of our strongest allies. If an institution is going to capitulate to the BDS movement, there will be consequences — starting with the Protect Economic Freedom Act,” Foxx, chairwoman of the House Committee on Education and the Workforce, said in a statement. 

Gottheimer added that the legislation is necessary to thwart the surging tide of antisemitism on college campuses. Although the lawmaker noted that students are allowed to engage in free expression regarding the ongoing war in Gaza, he argued that blanket boycotts against Israel endanger the lives of Jewish students and community members. 

“The goal of the antisemitic BDS movement is to annihilate the democratic State of Israel, America’s critical ally in the global fight against terror. While students and faculty are free to speak their minds and disagree on policy issues, we cannot allow antisemitism to run rampant and risk the safety and security of Jewish students, staff, faculty, and guests on college campuses,” Gottheimer said in a statement. “The new bipartisan Protect Economic Freedom Act will give the Department of Education a critical new tool to combat the antisemitic BDS movement on college campuses. Now more than ever, we must take the necessary steps to protect our Jewish community.”

The legislation instructs the US Department of Education to keep a record of universities that refuse to confirm their non-participation in anti-Israel boycotts. The list of universities in non-compliance with the legislation would be made publicly available. 

In the year following the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas’s massacre acrosssouthern Israel, universities across the country have found themselves embroiled in controversies regarding campus antisemitism. In the immediate aftermath of the terrorist attacks in Israel, hordes of students and faculty orchestrated protests and demonstrations condemning the Jewish state. Student groups at elite universities such as Harvard and Columbia issued statements blaming Israel for the attacks and expressing support for Hamas. 

Several high-profile universities have also shown a significant level of tolerance for anti-Jewish sentiment festering on their campuses. Northwestern University, for example, capitulated to demands of anti-Israel activists to remove Sabra Hummus from campus dining halls because of its connections to Israel. At Stanford University, Jewish students have reported being forced to condemn Israel before being allowed to enter campus parties. Students at the University of Pennsylvania and Brown University launched unsuccessful attempts to convince the university to divest endowment funds from companies tied to Israel.

The post US Lawmakers Introduce Bipartisan Bill to Strip Funding From Universities That Boycott Israel first appeared on Algemeiner.com.

Continue Reading

RSS

Harvard Chaplains Omit Antisemitism From Statement on Antisemitic Incident

Demonstrators take part in an “Emergency Rally: Stand With Palestinians Under Siege in Gaza,” amid the ongoing conflict between Israel and Hamas, at Harvard University in Cambridge, Massachusetts, US, Oct. 14, 2023. Photo: REUTERS/Brian Snyder

Harvard University’s Office of the Chaplain and Religious and Spiritual Life is being criticized by a rising Jewish civil rights activist for omitting any mention of antisemitism from a statement addressing antisemitic behavior.

The sharp words followed the office’s response to a hateful demonstration on campus in which pro-Hamas students stood outside Harvard Hillel and called for it to banned from campus. Such a demand is not new, as it began earlier this semester at the direction of the National Students for Justice in Palestine (NSJP) organization, which coordinates the lion’s share of anti-Zionist activity on college campuses.

As seen in footage of the demonstration, the students chanted “Zionists aren’t welcome here!” and held signs which accused the organization — the largest campus organization for Jewish students in the world — of embracing “war criminals” and genocide.

Addressing the behavior, Harvard Chaplains issued a statement, which is now being pointed to as a symbol of higher education’s indifference to the unique hatred of antisemitism, as well as its permutation as anti-Zionism.

“We have noticed a trend of expression in which entire groups of students are told they ‘are not welcome here’ because of their religious, cultural, ethnic, or political commitments and identities, or are targeted through acts of vandalism,” the office said, seemingly circumventing the matter at hand. “We find this trend disturbing and anathema to the dialogue and connection across lines of difference that must be a central value and practice of a pluralistic institution of higher learning.”

It continued, “Student groups who are singled out in this way experience such language and acts of vandalism as a painful attack that undermines the acceptance and flourishing of religious diversity here at Harvard. Let us all endeavor to care for one another in these divisive times.”

Recent Harvard graduate Shabbos Kestenbaum, who addressed the Republican National Convention in August to discuss the ways which progressive bias in higher education fosters anti-Zionism and anti-Western ideologies, described the statement as a moral failure in a post on X/Twitter on Tuesday.

“Disappointing,” he said. “After Harvard Jews were told by masked students ‘Zionists aren’t welcome here’ outside of the Hillel, the Chaplain Office finally released a statement that did not include the words Jew, Zionism, Israel, or antisemitism. A total abdication of religious responsibility.”

Kestenbaum noted in a later statement that Harvard’s chief diversity and inclusion officer, Sherri Ann Charleston, has so far declined to speak on the issue at all. He charged that when Charleston “isn’t plagiarizing, she and DEI normalize antisemitism,” referring to evidence, first reported by the Washington Free Beacon, that Charleston is a serial plagiarist who climbed the hierarchy of the higher education establishment by pilfering other people’s  scholarship.

Harvard University president Alan Garber — installed after former president Claudine Gay resigned following revelations that she is also a serial plagiarist — has, experts have said, been inconsistent in managing the campus’ unrest.

During summer, The Harvard Crimson reported that Harvard downgraded “disciplinary sanctions” it levied against several pro-Hamas protesters it suspended for illegally occupying Harvard Yard for nearly five weeks, a reversal of policy which defied the university’s previous statements regarding the matter. Unrepentant, the students, members of the group Harvard Out of Occupied Palestine (HOOP), celebrated the revocation of the punishments on social media and promised to disrupt the campus again.

Earlier this semester, however, Garber appeared to denounce a pro-Hamas student group which marked the anniversary of Hamas’s Oct. 7 attacks on Israel by praising the brutal invasion as an act of revolutionary justice that should be repeated until the Jewish state is destroyed, despite having earlier announced a new “institutional neutrality” policy which ostensibly prohibits the university from weighing in on contentious political issues. While Garber ultimately has said more than Gay when the same group praised the Oct. 7 massacre last academic year, his administration’s handling of campus antisemitism has been ambiguous, according to observers — and described even by students who benefited from its being so as “caving in.”

The university’s perceived failure to address antisemitism has had legal consequences.

Earlier this month, a lawsuit accusing it of ignoring antisemitism was cleared to proceed to discovery, a phase of the case which may unearth damaging revelations about how college officials discussed and crafted policy responses to anti-Jewish hatred before and after Hamas’s massacre across southern Israel last Oct. 7.

The case, filed by the Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law, centers on several incidents involving Harvard Kennedy School professor Marshall Ganz during the 2022-2023 academic year.

Ganz allegedly refused to accept a group project submitted by Israeli students for his course, titled “Organizing: People, Power, Change,” because they described Israel as a “liberal Jewish democracy.” He castigated the students over their premise, the Brandeis Center says, accusing them of “white supremacy” and denying them the chance to defend themselves. Later, Ganz allegedly forced the Israeli students to attend “a class exercise on Palestinian solidarity” and the taking of a class photograph in which their classmates and teaching fellows “wore ‘keffiyehs’ as a symbol of Palestinian support.”

During an investigation of the incidents, which Harvard delegated to a third party firm, Ganz admitted that he believed “that the students’ description of Israel as a Jewish democracy … was similar to ‘talking about a white supremacist state.’” The firm went on to determine that Ganz “denigrated” the Israeli students and fostered “a hostile learning environment,” conclusions which Harvard accepted but never acted on.

Follow Dion J. Pierre @DionJPierre.

The post Harvard Chaplains Omit Antisemitism From Statement on Antisemitic Incident first appeared on Algemeiner.com.

Continue Reading

Copyright © 2017 - 2023 Jewish Post & News