Connect with us

RSS

Will the Energy Sector Help Prevent a War Between Israel and Hezbollah?

Lebanon’s Hezbollah leader Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah addresses his supporters through a screen during a rally commemorating the annual Hezbollah Martyrs’ Day, in Beirut’s southern suburbs. Photo: Reuters/Aziz Taher

The maritime border agreement signed by Israel and Lebanon in October 2022 constituted a significant development in the relationship between the two countries. The potential for natural gas exploration in Lebanon’s waters, against the background of the economic and political crisis in that country, was seen at the time as a tempting incentive to persuade Hezbollah to agree to the pact. The underlying assumption of the agreement was that it represented a meaningful step that could help ease the strained relations between Israel and Hezbollah, and possibly serve as a basis for future agreements on energy and economic collaboration.

That assumption is now facing a significant test following the events of October 7. While it appears that Hamas’ attack caught Hezbollah by surprise, the organization rallied to assist “its Palestinian brothers” out of a commitment to “the unity of the arenas.” With that said, Hezbollah is conducting itself in the conflict quite deliberately, maintaining a set of “rules of the game” that are accepted by both itself and Israel. In the background, the United States is making clear that it opposes widespread escalation.

As part of Washington’s efforts to prevent escalation on the northern front, intensive clandestine contacts have taken place in recent weeks between Israel and Lebanon/ Hezbollah regarding points of contention related to the land border between the two countries, as well as energy issues. For the purpose of these negotiations, the Americans have deployed Special Envoy for Energy Affairs Amos Hochstein, who helped mediate the original border deal signed in October 2022.

A January 6 article by Ibrahim al-Amin, editor of Hezbollah-affiliated newspaper Al-Akhbar, noted that Hochstein is implicitly connected to the residents of Beirut in Lebanon regarding the renewal of drilling by the French company Total in Lebanese economic waters and the current negotiations with Israel. According to the report, Hochstein acknowledged that “the suspension of energy activities stems from political motives” and indicated that Total plans to carry out additional drilling in Block 9 (following earlier drilling that was unsuccessful), as well as in Blocks 8 and 10, hinting that drilling will not proceed as long as the conflict continues. Other reports suggest that American assistance for the recovery of the Lebanese energy sector is being presented as a condition for calming the winds of war against Israel.

The American assumption that the Lebanese energy sector can be leveraged to moderate Hezbollah is based on the fact that Lebanon’s energy crisis, which served as the backdrop for the signing of the agreement in 2022, has only worsened since then. Lebanon’s Electricité du Liban (EDL) is now only able to provide an average of about four hours of electricity per day to the residents of Beirut, and there is no capability to improve this any time soon.

General demand for electricity in Lebanon stands at about 3,500 megawatts, but its power plants, which rely entirely on oil, can only reach approximately 1,800 megawatts. In recent years, Lebanon tried to purchase electricity from Turkey using special ships equipped with generators anchored in the port of Beirut. But those efforts were abandoned due to accumulating debts and security issues. Last year, an attempt was made to purchase electricity from Jordan that would use natural gas from Israel, but the agreement faced difficulties due to American sanctions on Syria (through which the electricity grid passes from Jordan to Lebanon). Even if this deal were to materialize, the grid connections would only serve about 10% of Lebanon’s electricity demand. As a result of this state of affairs, most Lebanese residents who can afford it rely on private generators powered by solar energy in their yards and basements. Around 50,000 households have solar panels on their roofs (approximately 4% of the 1.3 million households in Lebanon).

Despite the high hopes the Lebanese government is pinning on gas exploration in its waters, the security of Lebanon’s energy supply is not expected to improve over the next few years. That is because Lebanon’s energy sector relies entirely on oil imports, including for electricity generation, transportation, heating, and industry. Even if Lebanon were to discover gas in its waters this year, the country has neither gas infrastructure nor power stations capable of using gas.

Furthermore, while the first drilling by Total in October 2023 did not yield positive results, a gas find on the next drilling would not help Lebanon’s energy crisis in the short term. It would take five to seven years from a gas discovery for Lebanon to begin to benefit from export revenues or the local use of the gas, because infrastructure would have to be built from scratch.

Until that time, Lebanon will remain dependent on the importation of crude oil from Syria and Iraq. Due to its massive debts, Lebanon is almost incapable of paying for the oil. Instead, it provides various services to Iraqi citizens, such as medical services. The crude oil Lebanon receives is sent to refineries in Greece, Turkey, and Russia, and in return, Lebanon receives solar and gasoline for the operation of power stations and transportation at reduced costs and fees. Attempts to obtain cheaper fuel from Iran through the sea have been blocked by the United States.

The serious state of Lebanon’s energy sector requires the country to pursue dramatic initiatives in terms of infrastructure and connectivity. However, such initiatives cannot be advanced without major external assistance, and the United States plays a pivotal role in this regard. For example, the time it will take to establish an export infrastructure for gas from Lebanon could be significantly shortened if Lebanon were to collaborate with Israel and transfer the gas through shared export facilities, possibly to be established by the American company Chevron. Simultaneously, Lebanon could try to make additional electricity connections to Syria and Jordan, but this would only be possible with the consent of the United States (due to sanctions on Syria) and Israel’s agreement to supply additional gas to power stations in Jordan for electricity production.

Last year, the Lebanese Ministry of Energy and Water published a plan to install significant renewable energy capacity in the next five years, including 680 megawatts of solar energy, 742 megawatts of wind energy, and 394 megawatts of hydroelectric energy. However, these ambitious plans cannot be implemented without direct assistance from countries like the United States and France, because Lebanese companies lack the expertise to undertake projects of such magnitude.

An interesting perspective was provided last month in Doha at a quadrilateral meeting of energy ministers from Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, and Syria. The meeting focused on the possibility of activating the Arab Gas Pipeline to supply gas from Egypt to Lebanon. Since Israel also passes gas through this pipeline to Jordan and Egypt, the implication is that Israeli gas could reach Lebanon. As mentioned, this idea was raised about a year ago to assist Lebanon in coping with the severe crisis in its electricity market and to prevent Iranian involvement.

While the move garnered support from the most relevant players, including Egypt and Israel, it ultimately did not materialize due to American sanctions on the Assad regime. The gas pipeline passes through Syria on its way to Lebanon, as do the power lines from Jordan, and the United States was not willing to be flexible in its policy towards the Syrian regime despite having offered assistance to the Lebanese. During the meeting, the Syrians claimed to have fixed pipeline issues to enable the transportation of gas, though it was clear that Damascus was seeking to convey a political message rather than express a genuine commitment to implement this solution. Regardless, this development highlights the severity of the crisis in Lebanon’s energy sector, which is manifested in prolonged and consistent power outages severe enough to promote a willingness by the country to explore unconventional solutions.

Despite the importance of energy potential for Lebanon, it is not considered a game-changer for Hezbollah in the current negotiation process. However, it provides a framework for negotiations as they are currently unfolding, with successful American mediation that has gained the trust of all parties, including Hezbollah. The latter seeks, within its overall considerations, and with due deference to its patron Tehran’s considerations regarding the Gaza conflict, to clarify to the Lebanese public that it is adopting a responsible position. It is, in fact, the player most capable of improving the economic situation in Lebanon.

In this regard, the maritime agreement, which allows exploration in the field of energy for Lebanon, is perceived (though it has not yet had any tangible success) as a positive step in the overall attempt to salvage the Lebanese economy. One should not overlook the regional context of gas discoveries in the Eastern Mediterranean over the past decade. Lebanon might eventually integrate into this regional framework for the export of gas to Turkey and Europe.

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.

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

The post Will the Energy Sector Help Prevent a War Between Israel and Hezbollah? first appeared on Algemeiner.com.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

You must be logged in to post a comment Login

Leave a Reply

RSS

Police Neglect is a Pogrom’s Essential Ingredient

Israeli football supporters and Dutch youth clash near Amsterdam Central station, in Amsterdam, Netherlands, November 8, 2024, in this still image obtained from a social media video. Photo: X/iAnnet/via REUTERS

JNS.orgIn Amsterdam, in the heart of Europe, on Nov. 7, Israeli football fans were hunted, beaten and terrorized by gangs. Was this a pogrom? According to conventional wisdom, it takes two to make a riot and three to make a pogrom. A pogrom requires three parties: instigators, victims and the public instrument of law and order that either neglects or condones the violence.

The instigators, in this case, were the Arab-Dutch gangs who went on a “Jew hunt.” The victims were clearly the Jewish supporters of Maccabi Tel Aviv. And the third ingredient?

The Dutch police made 62 arrests before and after the riot but none during the assaults.

The Anti-Defamation League has said, “Given the extent of the rampage and violence, the number of detentions to date is alarming[ly] low.”

A month before this incident, there were alarming media reports that local police officers were refusing to safeguard Jewish and Israeli sites across the country.

We have been here before.

There is a long colonial tradition of the authorities ignoring mob attacks on Jews in Arab countries. The British army stood outside the gates of Baghdad but failed to quell the Farhud massacre of Iraqi Jews on June 1-2, 1941. It was only when the rioters began threatening Muslim quarters that the troops were ordered to intervene. By then, 179 Jews had already been murdered; women had been raped, babies mutilated, and extensive looting and destruction of property had taken place.

In the Libyan riots of 1945, during which more than 130 Jews died, the Jews held the British authorities partially responsible for the riots: they did not intervene directly in the pogrom until the third day of violence. In 1948, troops, including soldiers of the Jewish Brigade, were ordered to their barracks by the British administration in Libya while a second pogrom raged, and 14 Jews were killed. More deaths were prevented only because some Jews had been trained in self-defense.

The French colonialists, too, had an ignominious habit of failing to protect the Jews. When a riot broke out in Constantine, Algeria, in 1934, killing 25 Jews, unarmed police could not prevent the initial incident from spreading. The civil and military authorities in the city hall underestimated the dangers. The mayor, his deputy and the prefect were all on vacation, and none were recalled to deal with the situation. The secretary-general of the Algerian government even forbade the troops under the leadership of the military commander for Constantine to use bullets. The army took three hours to arrive.

In the Amsterdam case, victim-blaming has already begun. The Maccabi fans had “provoked” the riots when they burnt a Palestinian flag and “destroyed” a taxi. Nevertheless, there is strong evidence that the Amsterdam riot was preplanned and premeditated. This, too, is an essential ingredient of the classic pogrom. In 1941, Jewish homes were daubed with a red hamsa on the eve of the Farhud riot. In the run-up to the 1948 pogrom in the Moroccan city of Oujda, inscriptions with skulls and crossbones appeared, declaring “Death to the Jews!” and that the community leader “Obadia will be hanged, and the rest will follow!”

In Mandatory Palestine, on April 4, 1920, at the peak of the Nebi Musa festival, anonymous Arabic-language notices began circulating in Jerusalem that said, “The government is with us, [the British Gen. Edmund] Allenby is with us, kill the Jews; there is no punishment for killing Jews.” Over four days, thousands of Arabs ran through the Jerusalem streets, throwing stones at Jews, destroying Torah scrolls, setting a yeshiva and several houses on fire, breaking into buildings and looting, with little intervention from the British authorities until the very end.

In Aden, the British-trained forces of law and order took an active part in the killing during the 1947 riots in which nearly 90 Jews were murdered. In 1929, knowing that a pogrom was about to happen, the Arab-dominated police force in Hebron made sure that Jews were not able to defend themselves, and 67 Jews were killed.

In the case of the violent riots targeting the Maccabi Tel Aviv fans in Amsterdam, were the police incompetent or did they fail to act by design?

The attitude of those police officers who refused to do their duty because defending Jewish sites and people would present them and their consciences with a moral dilemma is as close as it gets to condoning the violence.

On the night of Nov. 7, the Dutch police neglected to control events. More frightening, the risk of contagion across Europe is high. Jews have not felt more threatened since World War II, and less confident, in the event of trouble, that the forces of law and order will be ready to protect them.

The post Police Neglect is a Pogrom’s Essential Ingredient first appeared on Algemeiner.com.

Continue Reading

RSS

Under US Pressure to Expel Hamas, Qatar Keeps Double-Dealing

Qatar’s Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al Thani makes statements to the media with US Secretary of State Antony Blinken, in Doha, Qatar, Oct. 13, 2023. Photo: Jacquelyn Martin/Pool via REUTERS

JNS.orgThe United States is pressuring Qatar to expel Hamas leaders from its territory due to the terrorist organization’s refusal to consider even a short ceasefire and new suggestions for a hostage release deal with Israel.

According to international media reports, Qatar is under American comply with an ultimatum to expel the senior Palestinian terrorists.

While Qatar has confirmed that it is stalling its mediation efforts in the indirect hostages-for-terrorists exchange talks between Israel and Hamas, it has not confirmed that it is ousting Hamas members.

Jonathan Schanzer, senior vice president for research at the Washington-based Foundation for Defense of Democracies, said, “This is pressure from Senate Republicans, amplified by Trump’s electoral victory. The Biden team appears to be trying to take credit for something that was spurred by others.

“The regime in Doha is trying to simultaneously confirm and deny the news. This is consistent with Qatar’s double-dealing. The goal right now should be to squeeze the regime to jettison Hamas,” he added.

While it is “unclear how Trump’s arrival will change any of this,” Schanzer assessed, the fear of a shift in American policy “is undeniably pushing Doha to make these moves and announcements.”

Meanwhile, “the Qataris are going to continue to buy up assets in the United States, regardless of who is president. This is their way of gaining leverage over our leaders in politics and business,” said Schanzer. “I believe that the next administration needs to conduct a careful and thorough review of these sovereign investments. The amount of money that Qatar has invested in this country is staggering. But it has not yet been made clear why it has invested so much—especially in sectors like education that do not yield a financial return.”

The Biden administration’s ‘last card’

Brandon Friedman, director of research at Tel Aviv University’s Moshe Dayan Center for Middle Eastern and African Studies, told JNS that US pressure on Qatar is the Biden administration’s “last card to play. How effective it will be depends on how Hamas—and Qatar—perceive the Trump administration. My guess is that the Qataris suspect the Trump administration will ask them to expel Hamas, so there is no harm in playing this card now and preemptively dealing with a potential source of tension with the new administration.”

According to Friedman, “The Qataris use their relations with various Islamist and jihadi groups as foreign policy tools to advance and protect their interests. Even if they expel Hamas, they will continue to host factions of the Muslim Brotherhood and let Al Jazeera be used to promote the Brotherhood’s ideology. It is also unclear whether the US asked Qatar to end its role as financial backer and conduit for Hamas’s extensive regional network of businesses and charities, which funded its terror infrastructure.”

(Hamas began as the Palestinian branch of the Muslim Brotherhood.)

Qatar, Friedman said, “was traumatized by the Saudi-led June 2017 blockade that lasted until the end of the Trump presidency. The blockade was imposed shortly after Trump’s visit to the Saudi kingdom. The Qataris are likely to make every effort to earn the good favor of the Trump administration.”

Asked to address the American military’s ongoing use of Qatar’s Al Udeid Airbase, which Doha spent a very large some of money to build and develop, Freidman said, “I don’t view the US as dependent on Al Udeid. I see it as a source of leverage for the US in dealing with Qatar. It is a symbol of US protection.

“If the US withdrew from Al Udeid, Qatar would feel unprotected. In fact, one might argue it is not a coincidence that the US quietly renewed its lease of Al Udeid for another 10 years after the Qataris brokered the November [2023] deal for the hostages. It was almost as if it was a reward for good behavior or a service provided.”

Addressing Doha’s global investments, Friedman said that “Qatar can use its immense wealth to purchase US arms, which would likely be viewed favorably by Trump. It can also invest its energy wealth in the US economy, which is one of the ways Saudi Arabia won favor with the first Trump administration. It is worth noting that Qatar has been substantially increasing its activities in both of these areas—US weapons purchases [$1 billion in 2022] and investments in the US economy over the past five to 10 years.”

‘No longer serves its purpose’

On Nov. 9, Reuters reported that Qatar is stalling its Gaza ceasefire mediation. Doha informed Hamas and Israel it will “stall its efforts to mediate a Gaza ceasefire and hostage release deal until they show ‘willingness and seriousness’ to resume talks,” the news agency stated on Saturday, citing the Qatari Foreign Ministry.

“The Gulf country has been working alongside the United States and Egypt for months on fruitless talks between the warring sides in Gaza,” said the report.

“The Qatari ministry also said press reports on the future of the Hamas political office in Doha were inaccurate without specifying how,” it added. On Friday, Reuters cited a US official as confirming that Washington asked Doha to expel Hamas, and that the Qataris had “passed this message on to Hamas.”

Reuters also cited an unnamed official briefed on the matter as stating on Saturday that “Qatar had concluded that with its mediation efforts paused, Hamas’ political office there ‘no longer serves its purpose.’”

Hamas has denied being told to leave the Gulf state, which has hosted it since 2012.

The post Under US Pressure to Expel Hamas, Qatar Keeps Double-Dealing first appeared on Algemeiner.com.

Continue Reading

RSS

Who Is Testing Us?

“Abraham and Isaac,” oil on canvas, Anthony van Dyck, circa 1617. Photo: National Gallery Prague via Wikimedia Commons.

JNS.orgOn Shabbat, we will read the Torah portion Vayera and the poignant drama of the akeidah, the binding of Isaac, which is the 10th, and most difficult, test of faith that our father Abraham had to face in life. Would he be prepared to sacrifice his beloved son Yitzchak, Isaac, on the altar of God, especially since he waited so many years for this son to be born to his wife, our matriarch, Sarah?

Why is this famous act of near-martyrdom so special? What makes Abraham and Isaac so unique? Haven’t there been many millions of Jewish martyrs throughout our long and torturous history? Only one generation ago, 6 million martyrs, including more than 1 million innocent children, were killed. And one year ago, 1,200 of our finest—young and old—were martyred by Hamas.

So why, I ask, is the near martyrdom of Abraham and Isaac so special?

There are many famous answers to this question, but I would like to share with you an unconventional answer that I believe speaks to us today and has a very relevant and personal message to us all.

This section in the Torah begins with these words: “And it came to pass after these things, and God tested Abraham.”

That’s it. I just gave you the answer. Did you get it? No? You missed it? OK, let me repeat it. “And God tested Abraham.” Did you hear the emphasis this time? God himself was testing Abraham.

What is my point? Tragically, we Jews are all too accustomed to martyrdom. We are used to giving up our lives and our children’s lives when we are threatened and attacked by our enemies, by antisemites and by the vicious villains of history. We understand that life is a battle between good and evil. In this epic confrontation, we have all too often given our very lives for our faith, for our principles, and for God so that the forces of light would vanquish the forces of darkness and evil.

So for Abraham to be called upon to give his life, or his son’s life, in a battle against, say, the mighty King Nimrod would be understandable. But here, Abraham was not being tested by Nimrod or Hitler or Hamas. Here, Abraham is facing off against God. God Himself was testing Abraham!

That the antisemite wants to take your child’s life is a reality we are, sadly, all too familiar with. But God? God is threatening my child’s life? This, we cannot come to terms with so easily.

But Abraham said nothing. Not a word. He got up early the next morning and went on this mission with total faith in God. He did not demand any answers to the many questions he could have asked.

The unique test of Abraham was whether he would become disillusioned by the clear contradiction in God’s own words.

“Hey God! One minute, you tell me you are giving me a crown prince and that he will be my heir and the next link in the founding fathers of the Jewish people, and the next minute, you’re telling me to sacrifice him? And he hasn’t yet married or fathered any children. I don’t get it, God.”

Abraham could have said that, but he didn’t. He never wavered. Not for a moment. And that is part of his immortality. That is why his sacrifice remains unique, even after millions and millions of heroic acts of Jewish martyrdom throughout the generations.

God was testing Abraham. Not the antisemite. Not Hamas. God. And Abraham passed the test with flying colors.

Disillusionment is a very big test in life, especially if it comes from an unexpected source—like God.

We are often faced with tests of disillusionment, and not only for the big events, like the Holocaust or Oct. 7.

I can understand why my competitor is hurting my sales. He wants to. But why is God allowing this to happen to my business? I’ve been good. I come to shul. I give tzedakah. Didn’t God promise in the Bible that if we are good to Him, He would be good to us? Why is He killing my whole business?

That is a big test. Will we allow ourselves to wallow in disillusion?

Furthermore, the word “Elokim doesn’t only mean God, it can also mean the godly. The godly, too, can sometimes cause us to be tested.

Like the rabbi! The rabbi is supposed to be a man of God. “Well, he didn’t say good morning to me or Shabbat Shalom or wish me a chag sameach. He didn’t visit me when I was in hospital or when I had the flu.” If the rabbi did not live up to one’s expectations of a spiritual leader—to the high standards people expect of a man of God—then one can become disillusioned. Many people worldwide have left synagogues because they became disillusioned with their man of God, their rabbi.

That, too, is a test.

And then there is the most common test of all. I must have heard this one at least a thousand times!

“Rabbi, I know a guy who goes to shul 10 times a day. He prays, he shukels (shakes) up a storm, and he makes it like he is the holiest guy in town. And when it comes to business, he is a rip-off artist! A gonif (thief)! If he represents religion, I don’t want to have anything to do with it!”

You know what? Personally, I can understand people having that reaction when they see such blatant cases of shameful hypocrisy. The so-called “godly” people may be testing us again.

But to tell you the truth, I’m tired of all those old stories about religious rip-off artists. Let’s assume you are right, and that fellow is indeed a pious swindler. Good in shul and terrible at work. So what? What does that have to do with you? Just because someone else failed his tests in life, why should you fail yours?

Whether we become disillusioned by the so-called “godly” among us, who behave unethically, may well be a test of our own faith.

Every one of us has a direct relationship with God. Jews don’t need intermediaries. If so and so is a crook, that’s his problem, not mine. And if Mr. X is a hypocrite, is God not God? Is Torah, not Torah? Is Judaism, not Judaism?

Why should someone else’s behavior weaken my relationship with God? Does that release me from my obligations and responsibilities?

A Jew’s connection to God is holy, inviolate and non-negotiable, irrespective of the behavior of others, even the “godly” among us. The seeming inconsistencies in the behavior of a rabbi, chazzan, rebbetzin, gabbai or some crook who happens to dress “religious” are entirely irrelevant.

Let me end with a story. At the end of World War II, after the U.S. Army liberated the Mauthausen concentration camp, Rabbi Eliezer Silver, a well-known leader of the American rabbinate, went to help the survivors. He arranged a prayer service with all the inmates where they said Kaddish for their fallen family members and thanked God for their survival. The rabbi noticed one survivor turned his back on the prayers and wouldn’t participate, so he went over to him and invited him to join them. The man told the rabbi why he wasn’t going to pray.

“In our camp, one Jew had managed to sneak a siddur into the camp. Whenever it was safe, Jews would get in line for a chance to hold the siddur in their hands and offer a prayer. At first, I respected him greatly for that noble act of courage and sacrifice. But then I saw that the fellow with the siddur was charging for it! He would take a quarter of the people’s daily food rations as payment for his siddur. How despicable! It was then that I lost my faith and decided never to pray again. How could a Jew do such a thing?!”

The wise rabbi put his arm around the survivor and said: “So, let me ask you a question. Why do you look only at the one shameful Jew who charged his poor brothers for his siddur? Why do you not look at the dozens of holy Jews who were prepared to give up a quarter of their meager rations and risk their lives just for a moment of prayer with the siddur? Why don’t you look at them and be inspired by them?”

The survivor acknowledged that the rabbi had a point. To his credit, he turned around and joined the rabbi in the prayers. That survivor was none other than the famous Nazi hunter Simon Wiesenthal.

Whether our fellow Jews, even supposedly “godly” Jews, behave correctly or not, let’s make sure we still do the right thing.

The post Who Is Testing Us? first appeared on Algemeiner.com.

Continue Reading

Copyright © 2017 - 2023 Jewish Post & News