Finally, the mask slipped from the face of Hassan Nasrallah

The Secretary-General of Hezbollah Hassan Nasrallah stood proud following the maritime demarcation and gas extraction agreement concluded between Lebanon and the Zionist entity, describing it as a historic victory that is added to his previous victories in 2000 and 2006!

Paradoxically, the Zionist entity also considers the agreement a victory, so Hassan Nasrallah shares joy and happiness with what he claims to be his enemy, which he threatened, in a speech delivered four months ago on 9 June saying: “We announce before the Lebanese people that the resistance is militarily and financially able to prevent the enemy from extracting oil and gas from the Karish field, and all its measures will not protect this floating platform. The resistance has the physical, military, security, technological, logistical and human capability to prevent the enemy from extracting oil and gas from the Karish field, yes we have this capability.”

The agreement, which has been signed by the President of Lebanon and the Prime Minister of the Zionist entity, Yair Lapid, completely grants the Zionist entity the Karish gas field, which the entity has already extracted gas from, while Lebanon gets two-thirds of the Qana gas field, and one third remains for the Zionist entity.

Lapid considered the deal a “political achievement” since it is a recognition of the state of Israel by an enemy state through a written agreement before the international community. He also considered it an economic achievement since Israel took over the Karish field as well as 17 per cent of the profits generated by the Qana-Sidon field, and that the Zionist entity benefits from this agreement at the security, economic and diplomatic levels.

READ: Karish gas field to help address Europe’s energy crisis: Israel

Israeli media said the deal was signed in the same tent but without a handshake between the two parties and no photos were taken.

President Michel Aoun concluded his presidency in 2022 with an agreement with the Zionists. Under this agreement, Lebanon officially became a protector of the borders of the Zionist entity and an economic partner with it, and this is not new to Aoun, when he was army commander, he was among the first to welcome the Israeli forces when they invaded Lebanon in 1982.

Thus, both the Zionist entity and Hezbollah consider the agreement a political achievement that can be politically exploited in their environment or society. Lapid is taking part in the new legislative elections against Benjamin Netanyahu, who attacked this agreement and considered it a concession from Israel to Hezbollah. “This is not a historical agreement with Lebanon, rather, it is a historic Israeli surrender,” Netanyahu said.

Hezbollah also needs to promote this agreement as a political victory added to its military victories to counter the accusations that were brought against it as a party of resistance and opposition against the Zionist enemy, and not as a political force that supports negotiations that lead to agreeing with its enemy.

But what is noticeable is that Lebanon did not refer to the security benefit of the historic agreement, and it seems that Lebanon deliberately neglected this aspect, while the officials of the Zionist government were keen to show the interdependence between securing stability and ensuring security in the north of the Zionist entity, besides the economic interest in operating the Karish field since it generates huge funds to the public treasury, and contributes to enabling energy independence. In previous statements, Lapid considered that the agreement “weakens Lebanon’s dependence on Iran” and also weakens Hezbollah, and this will provide stability as the agreement will contribute to avoiding war.

Certainly, working in the gas and oil fields requires stability and not wars between the two parties that signed the agreement, and I think that this is the reason Lebanon avoided talking about the security dimension of the agreement to satisfy Iran and Hezbollah, who want to continue pretending that they are at war without firing a single shot at the Zionist entity.

The worst aspect of the border demarcation agreement, however, was that it recognised the full right of the Zionist entity to the gas and land of Palestine, and Hezbollah became a guarantor of the security of the occupation state.

OPINION: Is Uday Al-Tamimi the icon of the third intifada?

The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.