Connect with us

RSS

Debunking the Gaza Oil Myth

Terrorists in Gaza using humanitarian aid bags to prop up rockets. Photo: Screenshot

The claim that Israel’s military actions in Gaza are motivated by a desire to seize Palestinian oil and gas resources has gained traction since October 2023. Reports and op-eds have been published by Al Jazeera,  TRT World, and the Middle East Eye, with headlines such as “Israel’s Genocidal War on Gaza Is Also About Oil and Gas.” Various environmental NGOs have followed their lead, claiming that “this genocide is about oil.” These claims were further echoed by prominent anti-Israeli social media influencers such as Richard Medhurst and Jake Shields, who claimed that “massive amounts of oil have been discovered off of Gaza. After the genocide is completed, it will be rightfully Israel’s oil.” Even the poetry editor of the New York Times Magazine claimed that Israel’s war in Gaza was about “the deadly profit of oil interests” in her November 2023 resignation letter from the paper.

None of these claims has any basis in fact. Gaza does not have any known oil reserves. There are also no known assessments regarding potential oil in Gaza that is waiting to be explored. What Gaza does have is a small, undeveloped offshore natural gas field named “Gaza Marine.” The field was discovered in 2000, but was deemed too small to be commercially viable at the time. The field is estimated to contain only 30 BCM of natural gas, which is a small fraction of the more than 1,000 BCM of natural gas contained in Israel’s own territorial waters (in the Tamar, Leviathan, and Karish/Tanin fields). The idea that Israel would go to war over such a marginal gas field is absurd.

The primary source behind this disinformation campaign about Gaza’s alleged oil reserves is a UN body. Specifically, most of the accusations against Israel can be traced to a 2019 report by the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) entitled “The Economic Costs of the Israeli Occupation for the Palestinian People: The Unrealized Oil and Natural Gas Potential.” The report, written by Atif Kubursi, Professor Emeritus of Economics at McMaster University in Canada, states that “the Occupied Palestinian Territory lies above sizeable reservoirs of oil and natural gas wealth,” to the tune of “tens, if not hundreds, of billions of dollars.” It also claims that there are $524 billion worth of energy reserves in the Levant Basin, a bounty that could be shared among the different parties in the region if not for Israel’s “occupation of the Palestinian people.”

Critics of Israel have latched onto the $524 billion figure from the UNCTAD report to argue that Israel’s war in Gaza is driven by a desire to seize its energy assets. However, the report did not attribute these resources to Gaza or the West Bank but to the entire Levant Basin, which includes Israel, Egypt, Lebanon, Syria, and Cyprus. The report estimates that Palestinians have lost approximately $2.57 billion in potential revenue from Gaza Marine due to their inability to develop the field. This revenue could, however, be recouped once the field is developed. Egypt was poised to develop the field and share the revenue with the Palestinian Authority, with the approval of the Israeli government, if not for the current war.

In addition, the report points to the Meged oil field – located primarily within Area C of the West Bank – as another possible source of revenue for Palestinians. However, the report deliberately inflates the significance of the field by relying on outdated figures. The report estimates that the field might contain 1.5 billion barrels of oil and have a potential market value of $71 billion, but these figures are based on unsourced PR claims (rather than available geological evidence) that were released prior to commercial production. These assessments have been proven incorrect following repeated attempts to develop the field. Between 2011 and 2016, the field produced only 1 million barrels and shut down due to technical difficulties and dwindling output. The fact that the field has already been proven economically nonviable was ignored in the report, which continued to cite the debunked assessments.

Even under optimal conditions, the Meged field would not produce enough oil to be a central motivator for Israeli military action in the West Bank. This becomes especially clear when considering that a large part of the field is in Israeli territory, so Israel would not have to occupy Area C to access it and produce from it.

The misleading interpretation of the 2019 UNCTAD report could have been dismissed as an innocent mistake, had UNCTAD itself not deliberately presented the findings in such a way. On its website and subsequent press releases, UNCTAD advertised its report with the headline “The unrealized potential of Palestinian oil and gas reserves.” It continued this misrepresentation with the subhead, “Oil and natural gas resources in the occupied Palestinian territory could generate hundreds of billions of dollars for development.” Again, the report does not attribute these numbers to the Palestinian Territories but to the entire Levant Basin, a fact that cannot be inferred from the headline. Moreover, the UNCTAD press release repeats the claim that “Geologists and resource economists have confirmed that the occupied Palestinian territory lies above sizeable reservoirs of oil and natural gas,” a bald assertion that is not substantiated in the report.

The UNCTAD report has also been criticized for inflating additional figures and relying on dubious conspiracy blogs as its sources of data, raising serious doubts about the credibility and intentions of its author. The political newsletter “Twilight of Greed” took a deep dive into the report and discovered false and deliberately misleading arguments. For example, the report frequently cites the works of Michel Chossudovsky, who is known for spreading antisemitic conspiracy theories about how the Jews were behind the 9/11 attacks and who was accused by the US State Department in 2020 of being a proxy for a Russian disinformation campaign. Despite this, the report cites Chossudovsky 11 times, making him the single most-cited author in the entire report. It even prints his false assertion that the Gaza Marine field is secretly connected to Israeli underwater infrastructure and is slowly being depleted.

It is appalling that an official UN body would approve of such a report and then continue to publicize it with false claims about its content. One of the most troublesome aspects of the narrative is how quickly it has spread on social media, bolstered by a broader anti-Israeli and anti-imperialist sentiment. Despite efforts by experts to debunk these myths, they have become entrenched in the discourse surrounding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. These claims have been difficult to counter due to the viral nature of social media misinformation. By the time experts began addressing the flaws in the narrative, the theory had gained millions of adherents online.

The ongoing conflict between Israel and Gaza is driven by far more complex political, historical, and security concerns than the control of natural gas or oil. Israel’s current and previous wars in Gaza have focused primarily on security threats posed by Hamas and other militant groups, as well as broader territorial and political disputes. The Gaza Marine and Meged fields, while valuable in an economic sense, are not significant enough to drive military action. The spread of the Gaza oil myth reflects the dangers of relying on dubious sources and conspiracy theories to explain complex geopolitical conflicts. These dangers are only worsened when an official UN body knowingly pushes these theories to center stage, permitting reckless ideologues to launder their viewpoints and providing them with unwarranted credibility.

Dr. Elai Rettig is an assistant professor in the Department of Political Studies and a senior research fellow at the Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies at Bar-Ilan University. He specializes in energy geopolitics and national security. 

Lee Wilcox is a California-based writer and editor for the American political and historical newsletter “Twilight of Greed.” He currently studies US History at the University of California, Davis.

A version of this article was originally published by The BESA Center.

The post Debunking the Gaza Oil Myth first appeared on Algemeiner.com.

Continue Reading

RSS

US Sens. Tom Cotton, Lindsey Graham Unveil New Resolution Demanding Iran ‘Dismantle’ Nuclear Program

US Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AK) speaks during a Senate Intelligence Committee hearing on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC, March 11, 2024. Photo: REUTERS/Julia Nikhinson

US Republican Sens. Tom Cotton (AK) and Lindsey Graham (SC) on Thursday unveiled a new resolution demanding Iran completely “dismantle” its nuclear program.

The resolution was introduced as the Trump administration continued to engage in talks with Iran to negotiate a deal to curb the latter’s nuclear activity, which Western countries believe is ultimately geared to build nuclear weapons. Iran has claimed its nuclear program is for civilian energy purposes.

“Iran cannot get a nuclear weapon; that’s off the table,” Graham said during a press conference on Thursday.

The resolution calls on the White House to pursue the “complete dismantlement” of Iran’s nuclear enrichment program, cautioning that Tehran would use a nuclear warhead to “carry out one of the most extreme religious ideas on the planet” — a reference to the Islamist ideology of Iran’s rulers.

The senators called on their colleagues in Congress to support the resolution.  

Graham warned that if Iran, a predominately Shi’ite country under its current theocratic system, ever acquired a nuclear weapon, then the Sunni Arab countries of the Middle East would then attempt to obtain one themselves, sparking “a nuclear arms race in the Middle East.” Graham also cautioned that Iran would use a nuclear weapon as an “insurance policy” and a tool to destroy its enemies, including Israel. The senator demanded that Iran completely scrap its nuclear program, arguing that anything short of “complete dismantlement” would be “non-negotiable.”

“The ayatollah [Iran’s supreme leader, Ali Khamenei,] and his henchmen are virtual religious Nazis,” Graham said. “They openly talk about destroying the state of Israel. They write it on the side of their missiles, and I believe them.”

Graham claimed that Iran has likely enriched enough uranium to produce at least six nuclear weapons. 

The South Carolina senator predicted that Iran would also use nuclear bombs to “take over” Muslim holy sites and push the United States out of the Middle East. 

“A nuclear Iran makes for a far more dangerous world,” Cotton said. 

Cotton argued that Iran would use the security provided by a nuclear weapon to aggressively advance its terrorism campaigns throughout the globe. The senator cited several terror attacks tied to Iran, including the assassination attempt against US President Donald Trump last year. Cotton also cited Iran’s continued operation of proxies such as Hezbollah, Hamas, and the Houthis — all internationally designated terrorist organizations backed by Tehran.

The Arkansas senator added that an Iranian nuclear weapon would present “an existential threat to our good friend Israel,” which Iran’s leaders regularly threaten to destroy.

Israel has been among the most vocal proponents of dismantling Iran’s nuclear program, with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu arguing that the US should pursue a “Libyan option” to eliminate the possibility of Tehran acquiring a nuclear weapon by overseeing the destruction of Iran’s nuclear installations and the dismantling of equipment.

Both Graham and Cotton stated that they would be supportive of Iran obtaining a true civilian nuclear energy program. However, the senators argued that allowing Iran to enrich uranium or maintain centrifuges itself would inevitably lead to Tehran building a nuclear weapon.

As the US continues to negotiate a potential nuclear deal with Iran, the Trump administration has drawn criticism from some traditional allies who fear the White House could make too many concessions to Tehran. Critics have argued that elements of Trump’s negotiations with Iran mirror parts of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) — the 2015 deal which placed temporary restrictions on ‘nuclear program in exchange for the lifting of major international sanctions.

The 2015 deal, which the Obama administration negotiated with Iran and other world powers, allowed Iran to enrich significant quantities of uranium to low levels of purity and stockpile them. It did not directly address the regime’s ballistic missile program but included an eight-year restriction on Iranian nuclear-capable ballistic missile activities. Trump withdrew the US from the accord during his first presidential term in 2018, arguing it was too weak and would undermine American interests.

The White House has also received scrutiny from other Republicans in Congress. In a comment posted on X/Twitter, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX), for example, lamented, “Anyone urging Trump to enter into another Obama Iran deal is giving the president terrible advice.” Urging the White House to reverse course, Cruz added that Trump “is entirely correct when he says Iran will NEVER be allowed to have nukes. His team should be 100% unified behind that.”

Trump has threatened military strikes, additional sanctions, and tariffs if an agreement is not reached to curb Iran’s nuclear activities. However, when asked by a reporter on Wednesday whether his administration would allow Iran to maintain an enrichment program as long as it doesn’t enrich uranium to weapons-grade levels, Trump said his team had not decided. “We haven’t made that decision yet,” Trump said in the White House. “We will, but we haven’t made that decision.”

Western countries believe Iran’s nuclear program is ultimately meant to build nuclear weapons. However, Iran has claimed that its program is for civilian energy purposes.

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the UN’s nuclear watchdog, reported last year that Iran had greatly accelerated uranium enrichment to close to weapons grade at some of its nuclear facilities.

The UK, France, and Germany said in a statement at the time that there is no “credible civilian justification” for Iran’s recent nuclear activity, arguing it “gives Iran the capability to rapidly produce sufficient fissile material for multiple nuclear weapons.”

The post US Sens. Tom Cotton, Lindsey Graham Unveil New Resolution Demanding Iran ‘Dismantle’ Nuclear Program first appeared on Algemeiner.com.

Continue Reading

RSS

Prevost Surprises as First US Pope, Takes Name Leo XIV

Newly elected Pope Leo XIV, Cardinal Robert Prevost of the United States appears on the balcony of St. Peter’s Basilica, at the Vatican, May 8, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Guglielmo Mangiapane

Cardinal Robert Prevost, a long-time missionary in Latin America, was elected as the surprise choice to be the new leader of the Catholic Church on Thursday, becoming the first US pope and taking the name Leo XIV.

Pope Leo appeared on the central balcony of St. Peter’s Basilica after white smoke billowed from a chimney atop the Sistine Chapel, signifying the 133 cardinal electors had chosen him as a successor to Francis, who died last month.

“Peace be with you all,” he told the cheering crowd, speaking in fluent Italian. He also spoke in Spanish during his brief address but did not say anything in English.

Prevost, 69 and originally from Chicago, has spent most of his career as a missionary in Peru and has dual Peruvian nationality. He became a cardinal only in 2023. He has given few media interviews and is known to have a shy personality.

President Donald Trump swiftly congratulated him on becoming the first US pope. “What excitement, and what a Great Honor for our Country. I look forward to meeting Pope Leo XIV. It will be a very meaningful moment!”

However, the new pope has a history of criticizing Trump and Vice President JD Vance’s policies, according to posts on the X account of Robert Prevost.

Massimo Faggioli, an Italian academic who has followed the papacy closely, suggested the tenor of the Trump presidency might have influenced the cardinals to choose a pope from the US, who could directly rebut the president.

“The international upheaval of the rhetoric of the Trump presidency, paradoxically, made possible the impossible,” said Faggioli, a professor at Villanova University in the US.

“Trump has broken many taboos, the conclave now has done the same — in a very different key.”

PRAISE FROM PERU

The appointment was welcomed by the Peruvian president Dina Boluarte.

“His closeness to those most in need left an indelible mark on the hearts of Peru,” her office said in a post on X.

Prevost becomes the 267th Catholic pope following the death of Francis, who was the first from Latin America and who ruled for 12 years.

Francis had widely sought to open the staid institution up to the modern world, enacting a range of reforms and allowing debate on divisive issues such as women’s ordination and better inclusion of LGBT Catholics.

Leo thanked Francis in his speech and repeated his predecessor’s call for a Church that is engaged with the modern world and “is always looking for peace, charity and being close to people, especially those who are suffering.”

He had not been seen as a frontrunner and there was a brief moment of uncertainty when his name was announced to the packed St. Peter’s Square, before people started to clap and cheer.

Unlike Francis, who spurned much of the trappings of the papacy from the day he was elected in 2013, Prevost wore a traditional red papal garment over his white cassock as he first appeared as Leo XIV.

SNAP, a US-based advocacy group for victims of clerical sex abuse, expressed “grave concern” about his election, renewing accusations that Prevost failed to take action against suspected predatory priests in the past in Chicago and in Peru.

“You can end the abuse crisis — the only question is, will you?” it said in a statement addressed to the new pope.

In an interview with the Vatican News website in 2023, Prevost said the Church must be transparent and honest in dealing with abuse allegations.

CHICAGO CELEBRATES

A crowd of clergy and staff members at Chicago’s Catholic Theological Union erupted in a joyful cheer as Pope Leo walked out onto the Vatican balcony, some four decades after he graduated from the South Side school.

It was an “explosion of excitement and cheers that went up in the room … many of us were just simply incredulous and just couldn’t even find words to express our delight, our pride,” said Sister Barbara Reid, president of the theology school.

Pope Leo graduated from the school in 1982 with a master’s degree. Reid called Leo intellectually brilliant, saying he has an extraordinarily compassionate heart.

“It’s an unusual blend that makes him a leader who can think critically, but listens to the cries of the poorest, and always has in mind those who are most needy,” she said.

THE NAME LEO

The last pope to take the name Leo led the Church from 1878-1903. Leo XIII was known for his devoted focus to social justice issues, and is often credited with laying the foundation for modern Catholic social teaching.

Prevost has attracted interest from his peers because of his quiet style and support for Francis, especially his commitment to social justice issues.

Prevost served as a bishop in Chiclayo, in northwestern Peru, from 2015 to 2023.

Francis brought him to Rome that year to head the Vatican office in charge of choosing which priests should serve as Catholic bishops across the globe, meaning he has had a hand in selecting many of the world’s bishops.

The post Prevost Surprises as First US Pope, Takes Name Leo XIV first appeared on Algemeiner.com.

Continue Reading

RSS

Israel Warns of ‘Severe Consequences’ for Houthis, Vows to Defend Itself After US Cuts Deal With Terror Group

Smoke rises in the sky following US-led airstrikes in Sanaa, Yemen, Feb. 25, 2024. Photo: REUTERS/Adel Al Khader

Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz on Thursday warned that the Houthis would “suffer severe consequences” if the Yemeni terrorist group continued to attack Israel, emphasizing the Jewish state’s capability to defend itself following US President Donald Trump’s unexpected deal with the Iran-backed rebel militia.

“Israel must be capable of defending itself against any threat or enemy,” Katz wrote in a post on X. “This has been the case throughout many challenges in the past and will remain true in the future.”

“I also warn the Iranian leaders who finance, arm, and operate the Houthi terrorist organization: the balance of power has shifted, and the Axis of Evil has collapsed,” the top Israeli defense official added. “What we did to Hezbollah in Beirut, to Hamas in Gaza, to Assad in Damascus, and to the Houthis in Yemen, we will also do to you in Tehran.”

Katz continued, “We will not allow anyone to harm Israel; and those who do will suffer severe consequences.”

On Sunday, the Houthis, an internationally designated terrorist group, declared they would impose a “comprehensive” aerial blockade on Israel, targeting the country’s airports in retaliation for the Israeli military’s expanded operations in Gaza.

Claiming solidarity with Palestinians in the war-torn enclave, the Iran-backed group took responsibility for a missile strike near Israel’s Ben Gurion Airport, marking the latest in a series of attacks.

While Israel’s missile defense systems have intercepted most strikes from Yemen, Sunday’s missile was the first in a series launched since March to bypass the country’s defense capabilities, following a drone strike on Tel Aviv last year.

Alongside Hezbollah and Hamas, Houthi rebels are a key part of Iran’s so-called “Axis of Resistance” against Israel and the United States.

On Wednesday, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu vowed to retaliate against the Yemeni terrorist group, reaffirming that the Jewish state will defend itself against any threat.

“Israel will defend itself by itself,” Netanyahu said in a video posted on social media. “If others join us — our American friends — all the better. If they don’t, we will still defend ourselves on our own.”

In response to the Houthis’ latest attack, Israeli forces launched major strikes on the Yemeni port of Hodeidah and the international airport in Yemen’s capital Sanaa, both facilities crucial to the Iran-backed terrorist group’s ability to operate.

The strikes came as Houthi officials revealed that their agreement with Washington to cease targeting US maritime activity in the Red Sea did not include any commitment to stop attacking Israel or ships linked to the Jewish state.

Since the Israel-Hamas war began in October 2023, the Houthis — whose slogan is “death to America, death to Israel, curse the Jews, and victory to Islam” — have targeted over 100 merchant vessels in the Red Sea with missiles and drones, causing a massive disruption of global trade.

During an Oval Office appearance on Tuesday, Trump announced that the US would halt airstrikes on the Yemeni terrorist group after it agreed to stop attacking American ships — an agreement that ended weeks of escalating tensions with the Iran-backed group and, according to US and Israeli officials, was made without prior notice to Jerusalem.

Since launching its current operation in Yemen, known as Operation Rough Rider, on March 15, the US military says it has struck over 1,000 targets, killing hundreds of Houthi fighters and numerous group leaders.

After Trump announced the deal with the Iran-backed terrorist group, Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Esmaeil Baghaei praised “the end of the US aggression” on Yemen and thanked Oman for its efforts in mediating the ceasefire agreement.

The post Israel Warns of ‘Severe Consequences’ for Houthis, Vows to Defend Itself After US Cuts Deal With Terror Group first appeared on Algemeiner.com.

Continue Reading

Copyright © 2017 - 2023 Jewish Post & News