Cyprus, Lebanon, Syria cannot agree on maritime borders

Lebanese Minister of Public Works and Transport Michel Najjar early this month signed an amendment of a decree that would fix Lebanon’s maritime borders – unfortunately the proposed demarcations are in conflict with those of Syria and Cyprus.

It is the latest move in a series of disputes over maritime borders among Israel, Syria and Cyprus that has lasted years. Yet it is not likely to move the issue forward. Lebanon would greatly benefit by the ability to extract hydrocarbons in these areas. It would take years for Lebanon to actually see any revenue, but the country might be able to borrow on the resources, or even sell licences for exploitation.

The proposed amendment of Lebanese government Decree Number 6433 grants Lebanon the right to claim the nautical miles that had previously been ceded during the negotiations with Cyprus and Israel.

The amendment would add around 1,400 square kilometres (540 square miles) to the exclusive economic zone claimed by Lebanon in its original submission to the United Nations. It is currently awaiting the signature of Lebanese President Michel Aoun (who is seeking a full vote in the country’s caretaker parliament).

The decree would in any case only have legal validity within Lebanon. International law requires either a negotiated agreement, or a regulation by the United Nations which last ruled on this issue in 1971.

Syria, at the end of March,  also made a claim for a swathe of maritime sovereignty that includes 750 square kilometres which previously belonged to Lebanon.

This territory hosts oil and gas resources, and the government of Bashar al-Assad has signed a contract with a Russian company to begin hydrocarbon exploration.

Back in October, the US proposed to act as mediator among all the parties involved in the maritime border dispute. But none of them are currently participating in these negotiations. “No plans are made to launch the US-mediated discussions anytime soon,” a source at the Lebanese foreign ministry told the Cyprus Mail.

Complete lack of consensus

None of the parties involved is even close to agreement with the others.

Lebanese President Michel Aoun on April 7 phoned Syria’s Bashar al-Assad to discuss the demarcation of Lebanon-Syria maritime borders, according to Lebanese caretaker Foreign Minister Charbel Wehbe.

Speaking to Lebanese private MTV on Tuesday, Wehbe said Aoun confirmed in his call with Assad that Lebanon won’t accept less than it has claimed in its decree proposal.”

As for Syria, a source close to the government simply said that any agreement on the issue would have to be the result of negotiations – and Lebanon does not seem willing to negotiate.

Cyprus signed an agreement with Lebanon in 2007. The demarcation process that started was not complete because it did not find a final solution for Lebanon’s triple-point borders in the north (with Cyprus and Syria), and in the south (with Israel and Cyprus).

Lebanon which is technically at war with Israel, could not agree with Israel on the demarcation of the borders. On the other hand, Syria rejected a joint demarcation of the border in the north.

Cyprus signed an agreement with Israel in 2010. Neither Lebanon nor Syria accepted the agreement at the time. In March, Israel and Cyprus reached an understanding over gas reserves straddling their maritime border, but Lebanese claims threaten the agreement.

Israeli Energy Minister Yuval Steinitz said Lebanon’s latest move would derail the talks rather than help work towards a common solution.

“Unilateral Lebanese measures will, of course, be answered with parallel measures by Israel,” he said in a statement on April 12.

‘Cyprus has a positive role to play”

Rabih Yaghi, a Lebanese oil and gas expert who also acted as an advisor to the Lebanese parliament speaker, explains that “Lebanon has tried to individually demarcate its borders and considered that the mission was accomplished however the move had no legal value because it was a unilateral move”.

“I still believe that Cyprus has a positive role to play between the conflicting parties. It can push mediated negotiations between the three countries that would tackle the issue of the triple points. There must be an agreement by all 3 countries on these points. There is no other way of doing things and any agreement done by any two countries exclusively alone cannot be accepted by the third” Yaghi comments.

 

 

 

 

.