Source: Dawn.com
3 August 2011, BEIRUT: A dispute between Lebanon and Israel over their maritime boundary has heated up and sparked fears of conflict as both countries move to assert sovereignty over an area potentially rich in gas.
Tension rose last month after Israel’s cabinet approved a map of the country’s proposed maritime borders with Lebanon and submitted it to the United Nations, which has been asked to mediate.
The map conflicts with one submitted by Lebanon to the UN last year and that gives Israel less territory.
The Lebanese say their map is in line with an armistice accord drawn up in 1949 and not contested by Israel.
They also challenge Israel’s assertion that an accord signed in 2007 between Cyprus and Lebanon sets the same boundaries as those agreed between the Jewish state and Cyprus in 2010.
Neither side for now appears willing to budge on the issue, especially given the discovery of important energy reserves near the disputed area which could generate billions of dollars.
Energy Minister Gebran Bassil told AFP that Lebanon’s new cabinet, in which the militant group Hezbollah plays a key role, was rushing to approve a decree setting out the country’s Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ).
An EEZ is a sea zone that gives a state the right to explore its maritime resources.
“Israel cannot arbitrarily flout international law and aggress Lebanon by creating a zone of conflict in our waters,” Bassil said.
“It’s not simply a question of them tracing a line and stating what’s theirs.” Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah, whose party fought a devastating war with Israel in 2006, also waded into the dispute last week warning the Jewish state against any attempt to plunder Lebanon’s offshore gas and oil reserves.
The United Nations and diplomats are urging both sides to exercise restraint and to resolve the matter at the negotiating table. The disputed zone consists of about 854 square kilometres (330 square miles).
“It is common to the point of routine for neighbouring countries to have … overlapping claims,” a senior State Department official said, asking not to be named.
“There are many mechanisms available to both countries to resolve this problem peacefully,” he said. “These mechanisms range all the way from direct negotiations to binding arbitration.”
He and other diplomats interviewed by AFP said that even though the rhetoric over the border was heating up, it was in no one’s interest to start a conflict given the economic interests at stake.
They also pointed out that companies involved in gas exploitation will shun the area should the dispute escalate.
For the complete article, please see Dawn.com.
In an increasingly urbanised world, global resilience cannot be achieved without cities. Separating a local from a national or international sustainability issue is increasingly difficult – be it climate change, migration, or economic development.
Climate diplomacy needs to release itself from the shackles of ‘systemic’ politics in order to achieve a climate agenda that is driven by human security interests, including equity and justice, and strengthen climate change initiatives at local, national and regional levels, in order to bridge the gap caused by the slow pace of progress at the international level.
Leaving No One Behind is the mantra of the 2019 UN-Water campaign. Foreign policy agendas of countries should apply the principle and integrate the voices of the most marginalised into the decision-making process, argues Dhanasree Jayaram.
With climate change increasingly being seen as a security issue, we ask what role the United Nations Security Council could and should play. To answer this question, we are joined on the Climate Diplomacy Podcast by UN expert and Chatham House Associate Fellow Oli Brown. In this podcast, Oli explains some of the challenges that the UN Security Council has had in tackling climate change and outlines the prospects for action in the future.