US envoy for energy security affairs, Amos Hochstein, who captivated everyone’s attention with his recent visit to Beirut, attended as a tourist reciting love poems at the Rock of Raouché, accompanied by his country's ambassador, Dorothy Shea. He then proceeded in a military helicopter to the Baalbek Castle, "amidst strict security measures taken by the army."
Two tourist stops separated by two official stops, in Ain el-Tineh and the Grand Serail. The envoy then contented himself by saying that “the meeting with Speaker of the Parliament, Nabih Berri, was excellent and constructive.”
However, we did not know his reaction to what he heard from the Speaker about the "necessity to stop Israeli violations of UN Resolution 1701."
Information suggests that the visit of the US envoy was scheduled for the 29th of the current month, coinciding with the arrival of the oil and gas exploration ship in Block 9, to accompany the logistical work at the drilling platform for oil exploration in Lebanese waters near the southern borders.
The French accelerated the process and brought forward the arrival date of the ship to the 16th of the current month. The French did not want to share the privilege given to them with the Americans and wanted to monopolize the historic scene of starting oil exploration in Lebanon through the French company "TotalEnergies." A step with dimensions and justifications for the French, who have been striving since the explosion of the port three years ago to care for Lebanon and secure their economic interests in it during its presidential elections. Hochstein did not change his schedule, so he decided to keep his visit on the same date.
Another narrative says that he arrived in Lebanon to attend a celebration organized by oil companies to mark the start of exploration. Government sources indicate that he held a broad discussion with Caretaker Prime Minister, Najib Mikati, covering various topics, but he focused on the possible avenues for ensuring calm and stability along the borders and the possibility of reaching an agreement on disputed points along the borders between Lebanon and Israel.
It is noted that "Hochstein did not bring anything new or talk about a specific proposal; he spoke about general matters," as evidenced by his commitment to silence during his visits to the heads of both the parliament and the government. The former commented on the visit, while the latter found nothing to say and remained silent.
Hochstein, who successfully handled the maritime demarcation issue and delivered it to the shores of agreement, and was elevated to the position of Presidential Advisor to President Joe Biden, aspires to achieve the same success with the land borders issue that is now in his hands.
However, such a step, given the current situation in Lebanon and the upcoming presidential elections, will be difficult to advance, and practical steps regarding it will be challenging to achieve. Despite this, the Americans aim to conclude the dispute over the southern borders once and for all to ensure security and stability for Israel, which has started benefiting from its oil resources after nine years of work and prior to the demarcation agreement with Lebanon.
The latest discussions revolved around the seven points of contention on the borders, with Lebanon considering its borders to have been established since 1926, and the ongoing process is more about reaffirming them than redrawing them. On the other hand, the Israeli side, supported by the Americans, seeks to adopt the Blue Line as the final border, a notion rejected by Lebanon.
However, accompanying political sources do not believe that the visit is without substance, even though the discussions are in their early stages. They are convinced that the US envoy brought a proposal regarding the establishment of the Blue Line as the main border between Lebanon and Israel.
He aims to complete the land demarcation process after the maritime one, assuming that the circumstances are favorable, as it's possible to exert pressure on Israel to agree to definitively close the demarcation file, diffusing tension and concern along the borders. However, Lebanon, among the seven disputed points, considers point B1 the most important as it marks the convergence of land and sea, an area Israel controls and uses for tourist resorts.
Lebanon believes that the answer to these points lies with the Israeli side, which is expected to withdraw from them, as well as from the remaining occupied territories in the Shebaa Farms and Kfarshouba hills. It's unlikely that Israel will respond positively and withdraw from the areas it occupies or concede the mentioned point.
The issue is not an easy one, and its circumstances are complex for both Lebanon and Israel. If Lebanon agrees to the maritime demarcation to benefit from its oil resources and protect them, then the land borders are already determined by the internationally recognized 1926 borders, which should be reaffirmed rather than changing the Blue Line, which represents the withdrawal line or the line of conflict, into internationally recognized borders. Furthermore, Lebanon refuses to approach the issue of Shebaa Farms and Kfarshouba hills as related to the Syrian-Israeli conflict under the pretext of postponing the decision.
An additional hurdle concerns the stance of Hezbollah and Iran towards demarcation. Hezbollah, which facilitated the maritime demarcation and lifted its veto on it, might not see any benefit in a land demarcation that doesn't recognize internationally documented Lebanese borders, especially if any Israeli withdrawal raises questions about the future of its weaponry, bringing up a complex regional and local issue once again.