THE MARITIME BOUNDARIES AND NATURAL RESOURCES OF THE REPUBLIC OF LEBANON

Challenges and Opportunities

Version of December 2014 THE MARITIME BOUNDARIES AND NATURAL RESOURCES OF THE REPUBLIC OF LEBANON

Challenges and Opportunities

Version of December 2014 Introduction

Introduction

Background In 2007, Lebanon signed an agreement with Cyprus on the delimitation of their Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZ). As stipulated by the Law of the Sea, the two southernmost and northern most points of the Lebanese EEZ were left for further negotiations with 1 1. In accordance with Lebanese law neighboring countries namely Israel and Syria. The agreement was never ratified by and practice, the term ‘Israel’ quoted the Lebanese government. On the other hand, Israel marked the northern point of its in this document from media and other resources refers to territorially EEZ on the western point of Lebanon’s proposed border with Cyprus (known as point to ‘Occupied Palestine’ and politically to the ‘Zionist Entity’. one) thus pushing its EEZ boundaries with Lebanon 17 km north and creating a sliver of at least 860 square kilometers in dispute. Israel’s announcement of gas discoveries in the Tamar, Leviathan and Tanin fields has also spurred reactions from Lebanese officials claiming that the gas fields fall within Lebanon’s EEZ.

The discourse on over EEZ boundaries and natural resources raised various interpretations of international maritime law, by which countries draw their borders at sea, and created a need to clarify the legal context of maritime boundary conflicts and the practical difficulties that branch out of it. Maritime Borders Claims

Lebanese Goverment submits Maratime Borders Map to the UN in July 2010 Southern Border: Based on line 23 The EEZ has been drawn according to International Law. Lebanon’s maratime borders might also extend further south of point 23. Map Conflicts with the line agreed upon with Cyprus and conflicts with the line Lebanon itself agreed on with Cyprus where point 1 was used as the southern extremity. Suleiman: Lebanon is determined to defend its territory and rights by all available and legitimate means Introduction Introduction

Maritime Borders Claims

Methodology and Composition The legal resource package is based on desk research that relies, to the extent possible, on raw data (primary sources) openly accessible to the public, in order to support multiple perspectives and create a neutral basis for interaction. Legal concepts and pertinent legal questions arising from the delimitation of Lebanon’s EEZ are framed in a question/answer style that aims at making specialized legal information accessible to a broader public.

The research was further developed through various consultations with stakeholders in the oil and gas portfolio in Lebanon and passed through a review process by national and international legal experts.

Israel Council of Minister signs Maratime Border Map in July 2010 Southern Border: Based on line 1 The Resource package consists of six parts. Part I is a glossary for the clarification Israel’s claim: The EEZ has been drawn according to International Law and will be submitted to the UN for review. of technical maritime terms utilized in the maritime field. Part II indicates the international laws and statutes that regulate maritime borders and limits, whereas Part III is a Lebanon’s claim: Demarcation has infringed on Lebanon’s Economic rights and contradicts International Law. description of the general legal process for delimiting maritime borders and limits. Natanyahu: We will not give up any part that is rightfully ours. The only option is through direct negotiation with Lebanon as part of a comprehensive peace deal. Part IV is an account of the basic facts that shape the legal issues concerning the delimitation of Lebanon’s maritime borders, and of the neighboring countries’ various There is no ‘right way. Lebanon’s The UN will support technically Cyprus is commited to cooperate map conforms with the standards Lebanon in marking its maritime on all unresolved issues. claims and positions vis a vis contiguous maritime boundaries. Part V lays out the set forth by International Law and boundary and ensure its right map-making. There is a need to its offshore resources. peaceful mechanisms for conflict prevention and resolution with a brief synopsis on to review Israel Map and take the appropriate measures to the merits of each mechanism based on case law. Part VI addresses the role of oil and avoid conflict in the region. gas companies in a maritime conflict, in addition to the legal consequences of exploration and exploitation activities in a disputed area. Purpose The maritime boundaries and natural resources is a multifaceted matter of national This Resource Package is understood to be a live document, growing with the present priority to all Lebanese stakeholders. The Common Space Initiative (CSI) aims to developments. Comments on the Legal Resource Package, including suggestions address conflict related issues ensuing from this portfolio in support of national short for future packages, are always welcomed. To request copies of the package, provide term and long term strategies that ensure Lebanon’s complete jurisdiction over its comments, or make suggestions for new topics, please email the CSI to: maritime areas. [email protected] [email protected] This legal resource package on ‘The Maritime Boundaries and Resources of The Republic of Lebanon’ focuses on legal constituents of a potential maritime conflict and aims at: Disclaimer • Compiling diverse and scattered data in one package; • Keeping abreast of latest updates concerning Lebanon’s maritime boundaries; The depiction and use of maps, boundaries, geographic names and related data are not • Clarifying general legal maritime principles and processes; warranted to be free of error, nor do they necessarily imply official endorsement by CSI. • Identifying conflict areas and generate feasible options for peaceful settlement of disputes; • Drawing on comparative experiences through case law. Introduction Contents

Contents

In accordance with Lebanese law and practice, the term ‘Israel’ quoted in this document 1 Key Terms 12 from media and other resources refers to territorially to ‘Occupied Palestine’ and politically to the ‘Zionist Entity’. 2 Applicable Conventions and Protocols 16

Contributors International Instrumnets 18 National Maritime Legislation 18 Vida Hamd, Ph.D Foreign Policy and Natural Resources Coordinator and Research Officer Soha Frem, Senior Project Officer Karam Karam, Ph.D Head of Research General Legal Process of Delimiting Maritime 3 Borders and Limits 20 Hannes Siebert, Chief Technical Advisor Joanna Abou Samra, Graphic Designer 1. How is a Baseline Determined? 22 1.1 Normal Baseline 22 1.2 Straight Baseline 22 Acknowledgement 1.3 Low-Tide Elevations 22

This guide was made possible with the kind financial support of the Norwegian Embassy 2. What are the Methods Used for the Delimitation in Lebanon and Berghof Foundation. of Maritime Borders and Limits? 23 2.1 Equidistance Line Method 23 2.2 Equitable Principle 23 2.3 Combined Method (International Standard) 24

3. How is the Territorial Sea Delimited? 24

4. How is the EEZ Delimited? 25

5. What is the Procedure that a Country Undergoes to Proclaim its EEZ? 25

6. What are the Applicable Principles Should States with Opposite or Adjacent Coasts Fail to Reach a Bilateral Agreement 26

7. How is the Continental Shelf Delimited? 27

4 Legal Issues Concerning Lebanon’s EEZ 28

1. Statement of Facts 30

2. Delimitation of Lebanon’s EEZ 34 2.1 What are Lebanon’s Maritime Boundaries and Limits? 34 2.2 How did Lebanon Demarcate its EEZ? 34 2.3 Is the Maritime Agreement Between Lebanon and Cyprus Valid? 35 2.4 What are the Legal Flaws in the Lebanese-Cypriot Agreement of 2007? 35 2.5 How Does an Agreement Between Cyprus and Israel Impact on the Maritime Boundaries of Lebanon? 36 2.6 Is it Relevant that Israel did not Sign Unclos? 37 2.7 What is the Extension of Lebanon’s Continental Shelf? 37 Contents Contents

3. Conflicting Claims 38 3. Case Law 62 3.1 Position Mapping of Countries Claiming Maritime Rights 38 3.1.1 Positions on Lebanon’s South and Southern West Borders 38 3.1.2 Positions on Lebanon’s North and Northern West Borders 40 Conflict Prevention and Peaceful Mechanisms for Settlement 6 of Lebanon’s Maritime Disputes 68 4. Progress of Exploration and Production in the East Mediterranean 41 4.1 Syria Petroleum Rights and Offshore Hydrocarbon Field 42 1. General Legal Options 70 4.2 Israel Petroleum Rights and Offshore Hydrocarbon Field 43 1.1 What are the Legal Instruments that Determine the General Mechanisms 4.3 Cyprus Petroleum Rights and Offshore Hydrocarbon Field 44 of Resolving Disputes Among States? 70 4.4 Lebanon Petroleum Rights and Offshore Hydrocarbon Fields 45 1.2 What Dispute Settlement Options Does the Maritime Conventions (Unclos and 1958 Maritime Conventions) Provide? 70 A) Unclos Dispute Settlement Options 70 Impact of Exploration Activities by Oil and Gas Companies B) 1958 Maritime Conventions Dispute Settlement Options 71 5 on Maritime Boundary Disputes and Right to Sovereignty 1.3 Are the Above Mentioned Mechanisms Mandatory or Optional? 72 over Natural Resources 46 1.4 What are Provisional Options to Settle the Boundary Dispute? 72 1.5 How is a Dispute Settlement Process Designed? 74 1. Oil and gas activities and maritime delimitation in the case of disputed area 48 2. Lebanon Specific Options 75 1.1 Does the licensing of oil and gas activities determine a state’s sovereign 2.1 What Mechanisms of International Dispute Resolution can Lebanon rights over the delimitation of its territory or that of the neighboring state? 48 Consider to Resolve EEZ Issue with Cyprus? 75 1.1.1 International Jurisprudence 48 2.2 What Mechanisms can Lebanon Consider to Resolve EEZ Issue with Israel? 76 1.2 What comprises a tacit or express agreement between two states over the 2.2.1 Resort to UN Mediation 76 licensing of oil and gas activities and when does such an agreement affect 2.2.2 Protest at UN Security Council 76 the delimitation of maritime boundaries? 49 2.2.3 Protest at UN General Assembly 77 1.2.1 International Jurisprudence 49 2.2.4 Advisory Opinion from the ICJ 77 1.3 Lebanon and neighboring countries scenario 50 2.2.5 Litigation 78 2.3 Can Lebanon Sue Israel for Compensation if Oil or Gaz was Extracted 2. Oil and gas companies and maritime delimitation 51 from the Territory of Lebanon? 79 2.1 What activities can be carried out by companies in disputed areas and 2.4 What are the ramifications of the US proposed solution? 80 to what laws are they subject to? 51 2.2 To what extend does unresolved territorial delimitation affect the entry of Oil and Gas companies? And how do companies mitigate risks/conflict Annexes 82 related to maritime delimitation? 51 2.2.1 Due diligence 52 Annex 1. Lebanon Geographic Coordinates & Letters Addressed to the UN 84 2.2.2 Contractual safeguards 52 . Addendum to Lebanon Geographic Coordinates Deposited in 2010- 2.2.3 Contracting with both states 53 Southern Borders 84 2.2.4 Assistance to the host state government 53 . Lebanon Geographic Coordinates Deposited in 2010-Southern Borders 85 2.3 Does political risk affect the entry of international oil companies (IOC)? . Lebanon Geographic Coordinates Deposited in 2011- And what are mechanisms put in place to share/mitigate this risk? 53 South/West/North Borders 88 2.3.1 Political Risk Management 54 . Lebanon Letter to UN-July 2011 89 2.3.2 Political Risk Insurance 54 . Lebanon Letter of 3 September 2011 90 2.3.3 Sharing risk with the government 56 2.3.4 Joint development zone 56 Annex 2. EEZ Agreements in the Mediterranean 91 2.3.5 Unitizing reserves 57 . EGY-CYP EEZ Agreement 91 2.4 Can a claimant neighboring state use force against a company operating . ISR-JOR Maritime Boundary Agreement 91 in the disputed area? And what are enforcement mechanisms that a state . ISR-CYP EEZ Agreement 92 can resort to? 58 2.4.1 General principles of good faith and peaceful settlement of disputes 58 Annex 3. Lebanese Legislation Concerning Maritime Boundries 95 2.4.2 What is the difference between use of force in violation of international . Decree 138-LEB Territorial Sea 95 law and law enforcement in application of state legislation? 59 . Decree No. 6433- Delineation of LEB EEZ 96 2.4.3 What are the consequences of breaching the obligation to enter . Lebanese Petroleum Law 97 a provisional arrangement and not to jeopardize a final agreement on the maritime boundary stated in UNCLOS articles 74 (3) and 83 (3)? 60 1 Key Terms 14 Key Terms Key Terms 15

The following is a general overview of mainland or an island. (UNCLOS, art. 13) or to a distance of 200 nm from the baselines seabed and its subsoil; sovereign rights key terms used in maritime law. It aims If the coastline is deeply indented or cut, from which the breadth of the territorial with regard to other activities for the at clarifying the terminology used in the or if there are some islands along the coast, sea is measured where the outer edge of economic exploitation and exploration of resource package. The definitions provided a straight line may be drawn across the the continental margin does not extend the zone, such as the production of energy below are derived from the 1982 United bays and/or river mouths and islands to up to that distance. (UNCLOS, art. 76) from the water, currents and winds; and Nations Convention on the Law of the form the baseline. (UNCLOS, art. 7, 9, 10) jurisdiction over artificial islands, installations Sea, hereafter referred to as UNCLOS. and structures. (UNCLOS art. 56) • Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) • Nautical Mile The exclusive economic zone is an area • Maritime Boundary • Baseline/Coastal Baseline A nautical mile (nm) is a unit of length used beyond and adjacent to the territorial sea The normal baseline for measuring the in sea and air navigation. It was defined but may not extend beyond 200 nm from A Maritime Boundary divides the maritime breadth of the territorial sea is the low-water in the First International Extraordinary the territorial sea baselines. (UNCLOS, zones of one state from those of another line along the coast as marked on large-scale Hydrographic Conference that was held art. 57). In the EEZ, a State has sovereign adjacent or opposite state(s). A bilateral or charts officially recognized by the coastal in Monaco in 1929. Nautical miles are rights to explore, exploit, conserve and multilateral agreement among these states State (UNCLOS, art. 5). measured using the latitude/longitude manage the natural resources of the waters is needed to demarcate the boundary. scale whereby each nautical mile is superjacent to the seabed and of the Continental Shelf equivalent to 1,852 km (approximately 6,076 feet). • Maritime Limit The Maritime Limit defines the space over which a state can exercise its jurisdiction Exclusive Economic Zone (200 nautical miles) • Territorial Sea (see the description of the different maritime zones mentioned above) and is thus established unilaterally by the state. A Maritime Boundary differs from a Maritime Limit The Territorial Sea, also known as Territorial as follows: Waters, is 12 nm measured from the coastal Maritime Boundary Maritime Limit baseline. (UNCLOS, art. 3) Division in relation to maritime zones Limit of space over which state can

Contiguous Zone of another state exercise jurisdiction (12 nautical miles) International Waters (outside territorial waters) • Contiguous Zone Bilateral or multilateral in nature State can establish its own limits Territorial Waters relating to territorial sea and EEZ (12 nautical miles) The Contiguous Zone is adjacent to the Unilateral nature Interral Waters territorial sea and extends up to 24 nm from the coastal baseline. A coast state • Delimitation • Seismic Survey Baseline (mean low water mark) exercises law enforcement control over The process of setting the limits of a Seismic surveys use reflected a sound wave this zone to prevent and punish violations particular area by means of a treaty, or to produce a scan of the Earth’s subsurface. of its laws. (UNCLOS, art. 33) another written source such as a map, Seismic surveys can help locate ground or a chart. water, are used to investigate locations for landfills, and characterize how an area will • Continental Shelf Naturally formed areas of land which are shake during an earthquake, but they are surrounded by and above water at low The continental shelf comprises the seabed • Demarcation primarily used for oil and gas exploration. tide but submerged at high tide, may be and subsoil of the submarine areas that The means by which the described alignment • High Seas used as baselines when situated wholly extend beyond its territorial sea throughout is marked, or evidenced, on the ground or partly at a distance not exceeding the the natural prolongation of its land territory by means of cairns of stones, concrete All parts of the sea that are not included in the breadth of the territorial sea from the to the outer edge of the continental margin, pillars, technical beacons of various territorial waters or internal waters of a state kinds, cleared roads, and so on. (1958 Convention on the High Seas, art. 1) Applicable Conventions 2 and Protocols 18 Applicable Conventions and Protocols Applicable Conventions and Protocols 19

Main International Instruments that Govern Maritime Issues • The 1958 Conventions on the Law of the Sea that include: 1. Convention on the Territorial Sea and Contiguous Zone 2. Convention on the High Seas 3. Convention on the Continental Shelf 4. Convention in Fishing and Conservation of Living Resources of the High Seas 5. Optional Protocol of Signature concerning Settlement of disputes

• United Nations Convention on the Law on the Seas (UNCLOS), concluded in 1982 and entered into force in 1994 to replace the 1958 conventions

Existing National Maritime Legislation • Legislative Decree No 138 concerning territorial waters and sea areas (September 1983) • Offshore Petroleum Resources Law No 132 (August 2010) • Law No 163 on the Delimitation and Declaration of the Maritime Limits of the Lebanese Republic (August 2011) General Legal Process of Delimiting Maritime 3 Borders and Limits 22 General Legal Process of Delimiting Maritime Borders and Limits General Legal Process of Delimiting Maritime Borders and Limits 23

2. What are the methods used 1. How is a baseline for the delimitation of maritime determined? borders and limits?

1.1 Normal Baseline There exist two distinct delimitation After drawing a provisional equidistant methods; the equidistant line method, line, historical considerations and other The normal baseline for measuring the breadth of the territorial sea is the low-water and the equitable principles method. special circumstances, such as the presence line along the coast as marked on large-scale charts officially recognized by the coastal Tensions developed between these two of small islands, may warrant adjusting the State (UNCLOS, art. 5). principles leading to a mixed application equidistant line accordingly. For example, See figure 1, point B. of the two methods known as the in the case of Bahrain against Qatar, the Figure 1. Zone of National Jurisdiction 1982 Law of the Sea Convention equitable solution principle. International Court of Justice (ICJ) did not give any effect in the delimitation of borders between the two states to the Territorial Contiguous Exclusive Economic Zone 2.1 Equidistance Line Method Waters Zone Bahraini island of Qit’at Jaradah, a small B 12 nm 24 nm 200 nm An Equidistance line is one for which island of 12 by 4 meters. Since the island every point on the line is equidistant from was uninhabited, devoid of vegetation,

Continental Shelf the nearest points on the baselines being and located midway between the used. According to this method, a state’s mainland of Qatar and that of Bahrain, maritime boundaries should conform to a the ICJ decided that this island constituted median line equidistant from the shores a special circumstance and therefore of the opposite state. adjusted the provisional equidistance 1.2 Straight Baseline 1.3 Low-Tide Elevations Figure 1. Example of equidistance between line in such a manner that the line passed If the coastline is deeply indented or cut, Naturally formed areas of land which are opposite states immediately to the east of the island. By 1.Maritime Delimitation and Territorial or if there are some islands along the coast, surrounded by and above water at low Ulleungdo Island contrast, Qatar’s slightly larger island of Questions between Qatar and Bahrain, a straight line may be drawn across the tide but submerged at high tide, may be Merits, Judgment, ICJ reports, 2001, Janan, located only 2.9 miles from the Qatar bays and/or river mouths and islands to used as baselines when situated wholly paras. 176, 191-222 , p. 115, 123-145. coast, was not considered to be a special http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/ files/87/7027.pdf Korea 1 form the baseline (UNCLOS, art. 7, 9, 10). or partly at a distance not exceeding the Oki Islands circumstance and was given full effect . See red line in figure 2. breadth of the territorial sea from the Japan mainland or an island. (UNCLOS, art. 13) Figure 2. Coastal Waters: Moreton Bay Equidistant line between Ulleungdo and Oki. 2.2 Equitable Principle and Marine Park Distance of Korea’s and Japan’s Oki Islands Figure 3. Coastal Waters: Moreton Bay from an Equidistant EEZ line (approx 122.5km) Delimitation based on equidistance may and Marine Park Illustration based on: www.dokdo-takeshima.com/ why-japan-cant-have-dokdo-i.html result in inequities particularly in the case Bribie Island Figure 2. Example of equidistant line between of adjacent and opposite states. The two adjacent states equitable principle attempts to remedy Low Tide State B EEZ Elevation (Part V) this inequity by using other geometrical State A approaches to delimitation that produce Moreton Bay Moreton A Marine Park Island Island Contiguous an equal division of areas. For example, in Zone Limit Territorial the case of Nicaragua versus Honduras, the Sea Limit Bay Closing Line Max. 24nm Straight ICJ maintained that while equidistance North Baseline B Stradbroke c b a Island remains the general rule in delimiting the

Internal Waters (Art.8) territorial sea, it formed the opinion that Brisbane it would not be sufficient simply to adjust 24nm Normal Baseline 12nm C the provisional equidistance line but that South State B Stradbroke Territorial Island Sea Baseline special circumstances required the use of a different method of delimitation known as Illustration based on: http://www.derm.qld.gov.au/ Illustration based on: http://prawo.uni.wroc.pl/pliki/2566 register/p02224aa.pdf 24 General Legal Process of Delimiting Maritime Borders and Limits General Legal Process of Delimiting Maritime Borders and Limits 25

4. How is the EEZ delimited?

the bisector method (i.e., the line formed priori, because of their highly variable A state with an EEZ that does not intersect with another state’s EEZ proclaims its EEZ by bisecting the angle created by a linear adaptability to different concrete situa- following certain procedures (refer to point 5). 1. Territorial and Maritime Dispute approximation of coastlines)1. Hence the tions. Codification efforts have left this between Nicaragua and Honduras in the 2 Caribbean Sea(Nicaragua v. Honduras), equitable principle does not give any field untouched.” States with opposite or adjacent coasts and an EEZ area that intersects among them Judgment of 8 October 2007, para. primacy for the equidistance principle as should reach a bilateral/multilateral agreement on the delimitation of their respective 277, p. 170. http://www.icj-cij.org/ docket/files/120/14075.pdf a method of delimitation. Under customary international law and EEZ as per article art. 74 (1) of the UNCLOS that stipulates: “The delimitation of the according to UNCLOS, the delimitation exclusive economic zone between States with opposite or adjacent coasts shall be approach applied in delimitation is a effected by agreement on the basis of international law, as referred to in Article 38 of 2.3 Combined Method combination of these two methods. This the Statute of the International Court of Justice, in order to achieve an equitable solution.” (International Standard) is corroborated by the jurisprudence of the 2. Delimitation of the Maritime There are no systematic criteria which ICJ in the case of the Gulf of Maine and Boundary in the Gulf of Maine Area (Canada/United States of America), should be used to determine an equitable reiterated in the Qatar versus Bahrain case: Judgment of 12 October 1984, para delimitation. As such, the equitable 157, p. 137. http://www.icj-cij.org/ “In the case of coincident jurisdictional docket/files/67/6369.pdf principle remains a rather ambiguous zones, the determination of a single and imprecise rule. This is corroborated boundary for the different objects of 5. What is the procedure that a country by the ICJ that noted in the case of the delimitation ‘can only be carried out by undergoes to proclaim its EEZ? Gulf of Maine between Canada and the the application of a criterion, or combination USA that: “There has been no systematic of criteria, which does not give preferential definition of the equitable criteria that treatment to one of these… objects to the 1. Libya v. Malta, ICJ Reports, 1985, 1 3. Maritime Delimitation and Territorial An EEZ cannot legally come into existence until proclaimed by a state. The proclamation may be taken into consideration for an detriment of the other, and at the same para 13, p. 33. Questions between Qatar and Bahrain, of the EEZ takes place through: Merits, Judgment, ICJ reports, 2001, international maritime delimitation, and time is such as to be equally suitable to para. 173, 191-222 , p. 113. this would in any event, be difficult a the division of either of them’.”3 • Depositing charts and lists of geographical coordinates as designated by cartographers defining the limits of the EEZ at the office of the UN Secretary General- if the state is party to UNCLOS. This data is then published in the UNCLOS Bulletin that is accessible online. 3. How is the territorial • Provisioning the relevant national legislation. sea delimited? • With respect to opposite or adjacent states, an agreement between the neighboring The delimitation of the territorial sea is governed by article 15 of the UNCLOS which states can be concluded at any stage. is identical to the text of the 1958 convention on the Territorial Sea and Contiguous Zone. Both conventions provide that unless the states agree otherwise or there are historical titles or special circumstances, states may not extend their territorial sea beyond the median line every point of which is equidistant from the nearest points on the baselines from which the breadth of the territorial seas of each of the two States is measured: “Where the coasts of two States are opposite or adjacent to each other, neither of the two States is entitled, failing agreement between them to the contrary, to extend its territorial sea beyond the median line every point of which is equidistant from the nearest points on the baselines from which the breadth of the territorial seas of each of the two States is measured. The above provision does not apply, however, where it is necessary by reason of historic title or other special circumstances to delimit the territorial seas of the two States in a way which is at variance therewith.” 26 General Legal Process of Delimiting Maritime Borders and Limits General Legal Process of Delimiting Maritime Borders and Limits 27

6. What principles apply should states with opposite or adjacent coasts fail to 7. How is the continental reach a bilateral agreement shelf delimited?

If a bilateral agreement on the EEZ limits cannot be reached, a State can relate to Article 83 (1) of UNCLOS stipulates: international standard of international law. “The delimitation of the continental shelf between States with opposite or adjacent coasts shall be effected by agreement on the basis of international law, as referred to The provisions in the treaties that govern maritime delimitation, and the principles and in Article 38 of the Statute of the International Court of Justice, in order to achieve an standards that they incorporate, are ambiguous and only provide general guidelines, equitable solution.” thus allowing for different interpretations. Article 6 of the 1958 Convention on the Continental Shelf stipulates: Nevertheless, there are certain principles that are set by jurisprudence and are applicable “Where the same continental shelf is adjacent to the territories of two or more States by the ICJ should the states fail to reach a bilateral agreement. These principles state that: whose coasts are opposite each other, the boundary of the continental shelf • Delimitation between opposite coasts is characterized as having two end points. appertaining to such States shall be determined by agreement between them. In the With respect to end points, the predominant practice of the Court is to delimit the absence of agreement, and unless another boundary line is justified by special single maritime boundary, EEZ or continental shelf up to 200 nm or until it reaches circumstances, the boundary is the median line, every point of which is equidistant a point where the rights of third States may be affected. from the nearest points of the baselines from which the breadth of the territorial sea of each State is measured.” • With respect to the point where the rights of third States may be affected, two different approaches are apparent in the jurisprudence of the Court. The first approach Therefore, in both conventions, adjacent or opposite states are obliged to reach an is to leave the terminal point of the delimitation open and simply indicate the direction agreement on the EEZ and continental shelf limit. Nevertheless, whereas the 1958 in which the line is to extend until it reaches the point where a third State’s rights are Convention incorporates the equidistant-special circumstances principle, the affected. The benefit of this approach is that it ensures that when an agreement is UNCLOS clearly states that the EEZ and continental shelf are delimited based on reached with the third State, there will be a completed delimitation in the area and the the equitable principle. rights of the third State are not prejudged by the Court.

The second approach is to cut off the line at the limit of claims put forward by third States A shortcoming of this approach is that it may lead to a situation where the determination of the Court’s jurisdiction is placed in the hands of a third State and depends on that State’s claims. Legal Issues Concerning 4 Lebanon’s EEZ 30 Legal Issues Concerning Lebanon’s EEZ Legal Issues Concerning Lebanon’s EEZ 31

1. Statement of Facts

1. Available at http://www.un.org/Depts/ Geophysical surveys and explorations for oil and gas started long before the Lebanese 1.The official letters of Lebanon the south (shared with Cyprus) and point 6 marks the land border between Lebanon los/LEGISLATIONANDTREATIES/PDF- mention Palestine and not Israel as FILES/LBN_1983_Decree.pdf civil war and indicated the presence of considerable hydrocarbon resource bases both Lebanon does not acknowledge the in the North (shared with Syria). Nevertheless, and Israel, as per the 1949 Israeli-Lebanese onshore and offshore. National legislation to regulate maritime borders and resources, statehood of Israel. technically speaking, Lebanon’s outermost General Armistice Agreement table of however, were limited to Legislative Decree no 138 concerning Territorial Waters and 2. Letter of the Permanent Mission EEZ extends beyond these 2 points to coordinates, and terminates at Point 23 Sea Areas1 that was passed on 7 September 1983. of Lebanon to the Secretary General include points 23 in the south and point 7 which lies 133 kilometers from the coast of the United Nations. Ref: 1506/10 Available at http://www.un.org/ in the North, as claimed by the Lebanese at an average angle of 291 degrees. Depts/los/LEGISLATION- In 1999, a number of oil and gas discoveries were made in what is known as the ANDTREATIES/PDFFILES/DEPOSIT/ Government. Levantine basin located beneath the territorial waters of Lebanon, Israel, Cyprus lbn_mzn79_2010.pdf The letter ascertained that Point 1 does

and Syria. 3. Letter of the Permanent Mission • In May 2009, The Council of Ministers not represent the southern end of the of Lebanon to the Secretary General endorsed the army’s findings and deposited median line that separates the EEZ of of the United Nations. Ref: 2399/10 These discoveries were followed by a series of maritime measures by Lebanon and Available at http://www.un.org/ the geographical coordinates defining the each country and thus it should not be Israel. The following chronological account of actions taken by both States provides Depts/los/LEGISLATION- Southern limit of Lebanon’s EEZ (bordering taken as a starting point between Cyprus ANDTREATIES/PDFFILES/DEPOSIT/ 1 5 a more meaningful view of these maritime measures that may seem isolated. lbn_mzn79add1_2010.pdf Palestine ) at office of the UN Secretary and Israel. It also requested the UN to General on 15 July, 2010.2 take the needed measures to resolve the 4. Article 1 (e) of the Agreement between the state of Israel and the problem and ensure Lebanon’s right. republic of Cyprus on the delimitation • On 20 October 2010, Lebanon Chronology of the EEZ: “Taking into consideration the principles of customary international deposited the Southern part of the western • On 12 July 2011, Israel ignored law relating to the delimitation of the 3 • As part of the regional speculative survey was a clause that left open the possibility EEZ between States, the geographical median line of its EEZ - that is the point Lebanon’s protests to the UN and deposited conducted over the east Mediterranean of amending Point 1 and 6 in light of future coordinates of points 1 or 12 could be bordering Cyprus, in addition to the the geographical coordinates of its northern reviewed and/or modified as necessary region in the year 2000, various 2D and delimitation of the EEZ with other concerned in light of a future agreement regarding Southern coordinates that it had deposited territorial waters and EEZ designating point 3D seismic surveys of Lebanon’s Exclusive neighboring states, meaning Israel to the the delimitation of the EEZ to be reached earlier and that borders Palestine. 1 as the limit that separates its EEZ from that by the tree States concerned with Economic Zone, hereafter EEZ, were south and Syria to the north. The agreement respect to each of the said points.” of Cyprus and Lebanon, and point 31 as the conducted by Spectrum Company. From was ratified by Cyprus in 2009 but not by • Two months later, on 17 December northern limit that separates its territorial 5. Letter of the Lebanese Foreign 3. Presentation on Hydrocarbon 2000 to 2007, further seismic surveys Lebanon in order to maintain diplomatic Minister to the UN Secretary General. 2010, Israel signed an agreement with sea and EEZ from that of Lebanon.6 Exploration Offshore Lebanon: relations with Turkey who disproves any Available at: http://www.un.org/ Current Status and Way Forward, were carried out by other companies as Depts/los/LEGISLATION- Cyprus delimiting their EEZ zone. The University of Cyprus, June 23 2011. well. All seismic data indicate the presence agreement that does not include the ANDTREATIES/PDFFILES/com- agreement consisted of 12 geographical • Following the letter that Lebanon sent http://www.thegulfintelligence.com/ munications/lbn_re_cyp_isr_agree- uploads/Oil%20and%20gas%20pre- of a considerable hydrocarbon resource Turkish-Cypriot part of the island. ment2010.pdf points defining the edges of the EEZ with in June 2011, Israel stated that it would sentation%20Lebanon.pdf offshore Lebanon. the first boundary marker placed surprisingly demarcate maritime border with direct 6. Letter of the Permanent Mission of • In October 2007, the Lebanese Council Israel to the Secretary General of the at the same coordinates of point 1 defined negotiation with Lebanon and as part of a 4. The designation of equidistant • In 2001, Southampton Oceanographic of Ministers passed national legislation United Nations. Available at http:// by the Cyprus-Lebanon EEZ agreement comprehensive peace agreement. www.un.org/Depts/los/LEGISLA- coordinates is an application of the concerning the petroleum policy for offshore median line principle stipulated in Center was tasked with delimiting Lebanon’s TIONANDTREATIES/PDFFILES/ (33-38’ Lat and 33-53’-40 Long). The the UNCLOS. EEZ3. exploration5 that was drafted with the isr_eez_northernlimit2011.pdf Israel-Cyprus agreement contained the • On Aug. 4, 2011, the Lebanese assistance of the Norwegian Agency for 7. Nizar Abdel-Kader, Potential Conflict same clause regarding amending the first Parliament endorsed a law on the between Lebanon and Israel over Oil • In January 2007, a bilateral agreement Development, hereafter NORAD. The and Gas Resources - A Lebanese and last markers depending on future delimitation of Lebanon’s EEZ. The was signed between Lebanon and Cyprus legislation was endorsed by the Parliament Perspective, Defense magazine, border agreements with other states.4 relevant decrees are expected to be http://www.lebarmy.gov.lb/article. 7 in which the edges of the zones were in August 2010. asp?ln=en&id=29445 drafted at a later stage. 5. Offshore Petroleum Resources marked by six coordinates judged to be • On 20 June 2011, the Lebanese 8. Dana Khraiche, Lebanon Asks UN to Law. Available at http://lebanon- 4 exploration.com/DownLoads/ equidistant between the two countries. • In April 2009, Lebanese army Protect Peace over Maritime Borders, Minister of Foreign Affairs and Emigrants • Since August 2011, Israel has deployed LR_Docs_Eng/Hydrocarbon_Law_ Point 1 marked the southern extent between geographers established the limits of the The Daily Star, 22 August 2011. addressed a letter to the UN Secretary unmanned aerial vehicles to monitor its http://www.dailystar.com.lb/News/ Eng_V14Apr11.pdf 8 Lebanon and Cyprus and Point 6 marked EEZ along the lines of two points that are Politics/2011/Aug-22/Lebanon-asks- General clarifying that Lebanon’s EEZ maritime resources, intensifying the tension. the northern. Included in the agreement shared with Cyprus and Syria; point 1 in UN-to-protect-peace-over-maritime- boundary begins at Ras Naqoura which borders.ashx#axzz1wpG4r7Uh 32 Legal Issues Concerning Lebanon’s EEZ Legal Issues Concerning Lebanon’s EEZ 33

1. Letter of the Lebanese Foreign Minister • On 3 September 2011, the Lebanese • On 8 March 2012, Finance Minister, 1. Presentation by Ali Berro at the the US mediation proposal aimed at agreement for future right holder to the UN Secretary General. Available ‘International Conference on Arbitration 1 at: http://www.un.org/Depts/los/ Foreign Minister addressed another letter Safadi, said: “Now we are counting on and ADR in Oil and Gas’ held on 8-9 creating a so called ‘Maritime Separation companies to enter into joint explorations LEGISLATIONANDTREATIES/PDF- to the UN Secretary General objecting to the United Nations to find a solution May 2014 in Beirut, Lebanon. Line’ (MSL) which is very similar to the of maritime blocks.1 FILES/communications/lbn_re_isr__ 6 listofcoordinates_e.pdf the agreement signed between Israel and concerning the line with Israel.” His blue line demarcated with Israel on land. Cyprus and ascertaining that the points that statement was made in Cyprus where The proposal envisaged a buffer zone On 24 April, 2014 Israel announced the 2. U.S. sees progress on Lebanon- Israel gas row, The Daily Star, 28 April 2. The Paulet-Newcombe agreement Israel adopted- that is, points 1 and 23 are the Lebanese and Cypriots decided to adjacent to the MSL where no petroleum end of US mediation. US deputy assistant 2014. was signed between the French and in violation of Lebanese sovereignty. The form a joint committee to exchange activities would be allowed without the secretary for energy diplomacy, Amos the British in Paris on 3 February 1922 and entered into force on 10 March letter stated that: information and expertise in the financial consent of the other party. It also aimed Hochstein, denied this claiming that 1923. The agreement delimits the sector as the two countries are trying to at reaching a unitization framework discussions are actually progressing.2 southern border of Lebanon from Ra’s - Point 1 is not the equidistant point start offshore oil and gas exploration. Naqurah at point 1 B, the coordinates between Lebanon, Cyprus and Israel of which were officially confirmed on Maritime Borders Agreements the 1949 map detailing the borders of Lebanon, Syria and Palestine further to - Point 31 falls north of Lebanon’s • In March 2012, the US offered to the armistice agreements between the internationally recognized borders as mediate the maritime dispute between Lebanon January 2007: Lebanon and Cyprus EEZ border concerned parties. 2 per the Paulet-Newcombe agreement. Lebanon and Israel. Cyprus has also of- agreement. with the southern border left to negotiation. Cyprus ratified the agreement Lebanon didn’t as not 3. Assafir newspaper, Issue:11993, fered to resolve the disagreement since to antagonize Turkey. Tukey doe not acknowledge 22 September 2011. • On 21 September 2011, the Lebanese any amritime or Actions by Cyprus in light of the Lebanon is delaying ratification of the conflict between the two states. Minister of Foreign Affairs stated that he EEZ agreement with Cyprus until the Lebanon and Syria did not complete the demarcation مارلني خليفة، هل يعمد مجلس النواب الى .4 .will be meeting with the Cypriot Minister resolution of the dispute with Israel. 7 Mediteranean of their land and their maritime borders نقض االتفاقية اللبنانية-القبرصية، السفير، 23/3/2012. http://assafir.com/ Signed Bilateral Agreement of Foreign Affairs to discuss the Cypriot- Delimits parts of the EEZ with Article.aspx?EditionID=2108&Chann Sea southern limit for further negotiations Mid 2011: A tripartite committee is negotiating EEZ elID=50271&ArticleID=2375 Turkish conflict and the revisiting of the • On 25 April 2012, Lebanese military Cyprus Syria boundaries between Lebanon and Israel. Cypriot-Lebanese Agreement.3 sources maintained that during the tripartite 5. Stefanos Evripidou, Lebanon will Israel Ratify EEZ Deal when Issues resolved meetings in Naqoura, the Israeli military had September 2010: Israel and Cyprus sign and ratify with Israel, Cyprus Mail, 1 March 2012. Signed & Ratified Bilateral Agreement • In March 2012, Cyprus informed, requested enforcing security measures Delimits the EEZ Lebanon an agreement on the delimitation of their EEZ and Available at: http://www.cyprus-mail. Leb-Isr Disputed Border exploration rights. com/cyprus/lebanon-will-ratify-eez-deal- Parliament Speaker Berri that the flaws along the Lebanese maritime borders. when-issues-resolved-israel/20120301 Israel and Egypt have an unwritten understanding on that Lebanon claim in the EEZ agreements The Lebanese military, though, refused to maritime borders. are of no concern to Cyprus. The Cypriot 6. Safadi Stresses Bilateral Ties with take any such measures before pushing Israel and Jordan sign an understanding delimiting Cyprus, Lebanon’s Right to Defend its Minister of Foreign Affairs reiterated the demarcation line to its correct position maritime borders at the Gulf of Aqaba. Maritime Border, Naharnet, 8 march 8 2012. Available at: http://www.naha- that amending the existing treaty with (200 to 800 meters further south). Israel unlitaterally defined its maritime boundary with rnet.com/stories/32632-safadi-stress- Lebanon will only happen in light of an Gaza Strip. es-bilateral-ties-with-cyprus-lebanon-

Signed & Ratified Bilateral Agreement agreement between the three countries; • In December 2012, Fredrick Hof gave Over maratime boundries s-right-to-defend-its-maritime-border Cyprus Cyprus, Lebanon and Israel.4 Lebanon and Israel a map that proposed Gaza February 2003: Cyprus and Egypt sign an agree- 7. Lebanon welcomes US mediation in ment on the delimitation of their EEZ. It was ratified a compromise for dividing natural gas Israel Unilaterally Marks resolving Maritime Dispute, Daily Star, Border with Gaza by both parties in 2004. 24 March 2012 • In March 2012, following his official Egypt Unilaterally Marks resources between them. The US map Border with Gaza Israel visit to Cyprus, Parliament Speaker, Berri acknowledged 500Km2 of the dispute area Egypt 8. remarked the Lebanese Parliament is as Lebanese maritime territory and suggests Egypt unlitaterally marked its maritime boundary هيثم زعيتر، لبنان يبدأ مسيرة األلف ميل .Unwritten with Gaza Strip في االستحواذ على النفط والغاز، جريدة اللواء، 25/4/2012. http://www.halasour. ready to ratify an agreement on the exclusive Lebanon starts exploiting this area with Unsderstanding com/full_articles_news.php?articles_ Egypt id=7011221 economic zones (EEZ) between Cyprus guarantees that the US will employ and Lebanon within a fortnight from the diplomacy to resolve dispute over the moment the EEZ dispute between Lebanon remaining area. Neither Lebanon nor 5 and Israel is settled. Israel replied to this proposal. In 2014, Ministry of Petroleum and Mineral Resources of Syria 34 Legal Issues Concerning Lebanon’s EEZ Legal Issues Concerning Lebanon’s EEZ 35

2. Delimitation of Lebanon’s EEZ

1. Official Letter submitted by the As a party to UNCLOS, Lebanon adopted The 2011 law on the delimitation of Phase 3: Applying the equidistant Included in the agreement was a clause Minister of Foreign Affairs, Adnan Mansour, to the UN Secretary its principles & methods that have been Lebanon’s EEZ however, stipulates that method. that left open the possibility of amending General on June 20, 2011. http:// explained in section III. the equidistant point between the three When drawing the median line between Point 1 and 6 in light of future delimitation of www.un.org/Depts/los/LEGISLA- TIONANDTREATIES/PDFFILES/com- countries is Lebanon’s lowest possible Lebanon and Cyprus according to the the EEZ with other concerned neighboring munications/lbn_re_cyp_isr_agree- boundary.3 This implies the possibility of equidistant method (refer to section 2.1), states, meaning Israel to the south and ment2010.pdf 2.1 What are Lebanon’s Maritime extending Lebanon’s southwest boundary it is not clear whether the Lebanese army Syria to the north. boundaries and limits? to a point further south to point 23. relied on the straight baseline of Cyprus to 2. For more information on historical The EEZ northern boundary begins at from calculate the mid area between Lebanon The agreement was not ratified by and legal issues concerning Lebanon’s territorial borders, refer to Tareq Majzoub, point 7 that falls north of Al-Arida river and and Cyprus, or on the base points that Lebanon in order to maintain diplomatic 2.2 How did Lebanon demarcate “Towards a New Reading of the extends southwards to include point 23 Cyprus has declared to the UN according relation with Turkey, who disproves any Journey of Looking for Lebanon’s its EEZ? Southern Borders: Preliminary Legal which lies 133 kilometers from the southern 1. Law of the Sea Bulletin, Cyprus to the UNCLOS bulletin1. This information agreement that does not include the Remarks” in Arabic, National Defense coastal area of Ras Naqoura, which marks The delimitation process was conducted geographical coordinates, http:// 3 Magazine, Issue 316, 1 October 2011. www.un.org/Depts/los/LEGISLA- has not been made available to the public Turkish-Cypriot part of the island . By the land border between Lebanon and by the Lebanese Army cartographers TIONANDTREATIES/STATEFILES/ and is thus beyond the scope of this research. signing the agreement, Lebanon has CYP.htm Israel, at an average angle of 291 degrees. and assessed in September 2011 by the demonstrated its intention of examining it United Kingdom Hydrographic Office Phase 4: Reaching agreements with domestically. Nevertheless, the fact that قانون رقم 163 حول حتديد وإعالن املناطق .3 البحرية للجمهورية اللبنانية، املادة 6: As the Minister of Foreign Affairs, (UKHO) that confirmed the geographic opposite and adjacent states. Lebanon did not ratify the agreement “حتدد املنطقة االقتصادية اخلالصة للجمهورية Adnan Mansour, stated in his official coordinates and charts as drawn by the army4. In January 2007, a bilateral agreement entails that it is not legally binding to اللبنانية، وتقاس من خط األساس ومتتد الى أقصى احلدود املتاحة على أن ال تتعدى مسافة .letter submitted to the UN Secretary The process included several geographic 2. Refer to the Lebanese-Cypriot was signed between Lebanon and Cyprus. Lebanon 200 ميل بحري وفقا ألحكام اتفاقية األمم .General on June 20, 2011: and legal phases as follows: Agreement املتحدة لقانون البحار ولسائر قواعد القانون ,Though it was never ratified by Lebanon الدولي ذات الصلة، ومتتد غربا لتكون حدودها The southern maritime border extends it was ratified by Cyprus in 2009 (refer to“ الدنيا في البحر: Phase 1: Determining the coastline: 2.4 What are the legal flaws in أ- من الناحية الشمالية الغربية: النقطة from point B1 on the shore at Ra’s section 3.3). No direct negotiations over a since it is the reference point for measuring the Lebanese - Cypriot agreement الواقعة على املسافة ذاتها من أقرب النقاط Naqurah, the first point on the 1949 maritime boundary agreement took place على ساحل كل من اجلمهورية اللبنانية ?all maritime limits. The coastline includes of 2007 واجلمهورية العربية السورية وجمهورية قبرص : - Israeli-Lebanese General Armistice between Lebanon and Israel given the .the mainland and any islands over which 3 ب من الناحية اجلنوبية الغربية النقطة ترسيم احلدود البحرية جنوب لبنان انطالقاً Agreement table of coordinates, to point 1949 state of enmity. Lebanon had sent several Legal experts maintain that by following الواقعة على املسافة ذاتها من أقرب النقاط من خط هدنة وليس من اخلط االزرق،النهار، the state has sovereignty. This phase has /http://old.naharnet.com .2010/6/6 على ساحل كل من اجلمهورية اللبنانية ”. 23, that is equidistant between the three the equidistance method or median line a geographical as well as a legal component domino/tn/ArabicNewsDesk.nsf/sto letters to Syrian counterparts, but no وجمهورية قبرص وفلسطني احملتلة countries concerned, and on the method, Lebanon has lost some of its EEZ whereby bilateral border agreements ry/11DB65736DF3B331C22577580 formal negotiations followed. coordinates of which all must agree.”1 0227B37?OpenDocument areas in the North and South, and that a between neighboring countries are taken 4. Energy and Geopolitical Risk, Middle combination of the Equidistance and East Economic Survey, Vol 2, No. 7-8, into consideration. July August 2011. http://www.mees. Thus, the charts and list of geographical 2.3 Is the maritime agreement Equitable principle4 would have been more com/system/assets/000/001/201/ coordinates that Lebanon submitted to between Lebanon and Cyprus valid? in line with international jurisprudence.5 original_Geopolitical_Risk_JULY- Accordingly, Lebanon’s coastline begins at AUGUST_2011-3.pdf the UN are based on the internationally Al Arida north and extends towards Ra’s 4. Refer to pages 8-10. In January 2007, a bilateral agreement recognized borders of Lebanon as per the Also, when designating the EEZ borders Naqoura in the south as per the Paulet- was signed between Lebanon and Cyprus Paulet-Newcombe Agreement of 1922 with Cyprus, Lebanon mentioned point 1 5. For more information on his- Newcombe Agreement of 1922 that was - never ratified by Lebanon but ratified torical and legal issues concerning that was reestablished in the Armistice by Cyprus in 2009 - in which the edges of as its initial west southern border point Lebanon’s territorial borders, refer reestablished in the Armistice Agreement with Cyprus. In fact, point 1 is around to Tareq Majzoub, “Towards a New Agreement signed between Lebanon and 5 the zones were marked by six coordinates Reading of the Journey of Looking signed between Lebanon and Israel in 1949. miles away from point 23. This retreat 10 مشروع وساطة أميركية بني بيروت والرنكا وتل .Israel in 1949. This is a clear indication 5 for Lebanon’s Southern Borders: Pre- judged to be equidistant between the أبيب في ملف النفط فهل يعمد مجلس النواب liminary Legal Remarks” {in Arabic}, that Lebanon still has reservations on the 2 happened with the view that the adjacent . two countries الى نقض التفاقية اللبنانية-القبرصية، السفير، :Phase 2: Determining the baseline National Defense Magazine, Issue so called blue line that infringes on the 23/3/2012. http://www.assafir.com/ area that includes point 23 is the equidistant 316, 1 October 2011. The Lebanese army adhered to the normal Article.aspx?ArticleId=2375&EditionI Lebanese villages of Sheba’a, Rmeish, point between Lebanon, Cyprus and Israel, baseline method, in addition to the straight d=2108&ChannelId=50271 Point 1 marked the southernmost extent of and Odaisah- Mutillah.2 and thus should be subject to agreements baseline method in areas such as the bay the boundary and Point 6 the northern limit. 6. Meeting of the Public Works and with the relevant parties as per article 74 (1) Energy Parliamentary Commission, 27 of Jounieh and the islands facing the September 2011. northern coast of Lebanon.6 36 Legal Issues Concerning Lebanon’s EEZ Legal Issues Concerning Lebanon’s EEZ 37

of the UNCLOS . Nevertheless, the provisions In December 2010, two months after 2.6 Is it relevant that Israel did 2.7 What is the extension of of the agreement did not ascertain that these Lebanon submitted its southern maritime not sign UNCLOS? Lebanon’s continental shelf? 10 miles - that is point 23 in the south and boundary proposal to the UN, Israel Israel is party to the 1958 conventions According to geologists, Lebanon’s 7 in the North - are Lebanese (See maritime signed an agreement with Cyprus on on the law of the sea and is bound by its continental shelf is very narrow with a boundary map in introduction). their own EEZ4. The agreement consisted provisions. The 1958 Conventions did not width of 10 km that drops down abruptly of 12 geographical points defining the put forward the concept of the EEZ, but to water depths of 1500m.3 On July 11, 2011, Cyprus’ Ambassador edges of their EEZ. The first boundary provided that coastal states were entitled handed an official memorandum to the marker in the agreement was placed in 1. to special rights in coastal areas such as the Lebanon’s right over its continental shelf Lebanese Minister of Foreign Affairs that exactly the same location as point 1 in the اسرائيل تنتهك احلدود واحلقوق البحرية continental shelf. (refer to section III - point 7. is ipso jure- that is, Lebanon has an inherent اللبنانية، جريدة السفير، 11/6/2011. http://www.ministryinfo.gov.lb/ assures the cooperation of Cyprus with Lebanon - Cyprus EEZ agreement. News/Politics/Details/11-07-11 How is the continental shelf delimited.) right over its continental shelf that does not Lebanon to conclude all the unresolved need to be proclaimed in order to come issues and guarantee Lebanon’s rights1. As such, Israel’s EEZ delimitation has Israel is not party to the UNCLOS and into existence. This is stipulated in article infringed on at least 854 square kilometers as such is not bound by its provisions. 77 (3) of the UNCLOS: Nevertheless, in March 2012, the Cypriot of Lebanon’s EEZ, that is the area stretching However, maritime issues depend on a “The rights of the coastal State over the Minister of Foreign Affairs declared that between Lebanon’s point 23 and point 1. variety of sources of international law continental shelf do not depend on Cyprus is bound by both the Lebanese which includes customary international occupation, effective or notional, or any and the Israeli agreements and that it Even though the agreement between law. Certain aspects of the UNCLOS have express proclamation.” is not responsible for the correction of Israel and Cyprus is not binding towards become accepted as customary international any mistake that was committed by the Lebanon, it defies the object and purpose law since there has been a consensus on Also, in the North Sea Continental Shelf Lebanese. Cyprus reiterated that it will of Cyprus’s prior agreement with Lebanon their applicability. case, the ICJ held that: not amend the EEZ agreement except before its entry into force. This is a violation هل يعمد مجلس النواب الى نقض االتفاقية .2 the rights of the coastal state in respect“ اللبنانية-القبرصية، السفير، 23/3/2012. http://mtv.com.lb/News/75893 following a tripartite agreement that of article 18 of the Vienna Convention on This has been the position of the ICJ in of the area of continental shelf that includes Israel.2 the Law of Treaties concerning the obligation the case concerning the continental shelf constitutes a natural prolongation of its not to defeat the object and purpose of a between Libya and Malta, whereby the land territory into and under the sea Lebanese Parliament Speaker, Berri, had treaty prior to its entry into force. full bench of the ICJ took careful account exist ipso facto and ab initio, by virtue of visited Cyprus earlier in March 2012 and 1. Ian Brownlie, Principles of Public of certain aspects of the UNCLOS as its sovereignty over the land, and as an assured that Lebanon can ratify the EEZ Nevertheless, article 1 (e) of the agreement International law, Ed. 6, Oxford University Press, 2003, p. 208. evidence of customary international law1. extension of it in an exercise of sovereign agreement with Cyprus shortly once the between Cyprus and Israel stipulates: Also, in the same case, the ICJ held that: rights for the purpose of exploring the dispute with Israel over the southern “Taking into consideration the principles “it is incontestable that…the EEZ is shown seabed and exploiting its natural resources. maritime border of Lebanon is resolved. of customary international law relating to 2. ICJ, Continental Shelf case (Libyan by the practice of States to have become In short, it is an inherent right.”4 the delimitation of the Exclusive Economic Arab Jamahiriya v. Malta), Judgment of 3 June 1985, ICJ Reports 1985, p. 33. part of customary law.”2 Zone between States, the geographical 2.5 How does an agreement The Lebanese law number 163 concerning coordinates of points 1 or 12 could be between Cyprus and Israel impact 3. C.D Walley, The Geology of Lebanon: The court had thus found that the rules the delimitation and proclamation of the reviewed and/or modified as necessary A summary, AUB, 23 May 2003. the maritime boundaries of Lebanon? that govern the EEZ are rooted in state Lebanese republic maritime Areas states in light of a future agreement regarding 3. Nicholas Blanford, Diplomacy is practice and customary international in article 8 that the Lebanese continental Israel claims that the EEZ boundary begins the delimitation of the Exclusive Economic key to Maritime Border Dispute, 4. ICJ North Sea Continental Shelf law in 1985 - that is, even before the shelf includes the immersed seabed and The Daily Star, 27 July 2011. http:// from Ra’s Naqoura (albeit 35 meters north Zone to be reached by the three States cases, Judgment of 20 February www.dailystar.com.lb/ArticlePrint. of Lebanon’s starting point) and stretches 1969, paras. 18-20 UNCLOS entered into force in 1994. its interior that naturally extends beyond aspx?id=144722&mode=print concerned with respect to each of the the territorial sea and up to a distance of 127 kilometers at 298 degrees to terminate said points.” The Cypriot-Israeli agreement Based on the above, Israel is bound by 200 nautical miles as per provisions of 4. Israel- Cyprus agreement at http:// at Point 1, which lies 17 kilometers north may as such be amended to reflect the www.un.org/Depts/los/LEGISLA- 3 maritime customary international law international law. TIONANDTREATIES/PDFFILES/ east of Lebanon’s Point 23 . correct maritime boundaries of Lebanon. TREATIES/cyp_isr_eez_2010.pdf that is influenced by certain provisions of the UNCLOS. 38 Legal Issues Concerning Lebanon’s EEZ Legal Issues Concerning Lebanon’s EEZ 39

3. Conflicting Claims 1. Cyprus and Israel to set up com- mittee on Mediterranean peace vision, Famagusta Gazette, 04 November 2011

1. Nizar Abdel-Kader, Potential Conflict A US survey that was published in 2009 “Until Lebanon decides to exploit this 2.Stelios Orphanides, Cyprus, Lebanon for the relations between the European negotiation with Lebanon and as part of a in the Mediterranean, Real Clear World, indicated the presence of around 1.22 trillion area, Israel must be warned against on Talks on Oil and Gas Ties, Bloomberg Union and all the states in the region.” 1 comprehensive peace agreement.6 16 March 2012. http://www.real- News, 25 November 2011. http:// clearworld.com/articles/2012/03/16/ cubic feet of gas and 1.7 billion cubic meters extending its hands to it.” www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-11- potential_gas_conflict_in_the_mediter- 25/cyprus-lebanon-in-talks-on-oil-and- ranean_99965-2.html of oil in an area off the coasts of Israel, Gaza, gas-ties-minister-says.html • Cypriot foreign minister • The Israeli military requested Lebanon Lebanon, Cyprus and Syria known as the “Whoever harms our future oil facilities in (25/11/2011): “We are committed to to enforce security measures along its رضوان عقيل، بري وصف لـ”النهار” االجتماع .3 1 2. Official Letter submitted by the Levantine basin . The Israelis were quick Lebanese territorial waters, its own facilities intensify our work in order to extend our southern maritime border, however, the النفطي بـ”املثمر” كريستوفياس يتعهد حماية Minister of Foreign Affairs, Adnan cooperation in every area.”2 Lebanese military refused to take any مصلحة لبنان، النهار، to announce its gas discoveries stirring will be targeted,”3 1/3/2012 Mansour, to the UN Secretary http://www.annahar.com/article. General on June 20, 2011. a series of reactions from Lebanon and php?t=mahaly&p=11&d=24663 such measures before a proper demarcation other neighboring countries. The tension • Lebanese Diplomatic Sources • Cypriot President, Christofias that starts off from Naqoura. UNIFIL مارلني خليفة، هل يعمد مجلس النواب الى .4 3. Hussein Dakroub, Nasrallah: tells Lebanese Parliament assumed bilateral negotiations with both (2012/02 /29) نقض االتفاقية اللبنانية - القبرصية، السفير، is already high on oil and gas fields with a (11/11/2011) state that ongoing negotiations Hands off our waters, Daily Star, 27 23/3/2012. July 2011. http://www.dailystar. potential for future conflict. This section with Cyprus are complex as Cyprus insists Speaker that Cyprus does not mind sides to demarcate Lebanon’s southern 7 com.lb/News/Lebanon-News/2011/ maps the positions of countries involved that Lebanon ratifies the agreement of 5. Elad Benari, Israel and Cyprus to revisiting its EEZ agreement with Israel and maritime border. Jul-27/144724-nasrallah-hands-off- to portray potential conflict indicators. February 2007 before correcting the Hold Joint Military Exercise, Arutz assures him that Cyprus’s good relations our-waters.ashx#ixzz32X8OX2oi Sheva, 10 April 2013. http://www.is- 3 (The Daily Star :: Lebanon News :: geographical coordinates of Lebanon’s raelnationalnews.com/News/News. with Israel will not be at Lebanon’s expense. • May 2011 http://www.dailystar.com.lb) EEZ as stipulated in the agreement.4 aspx/166956#.U4L5q3Yj5eF The Israeli military started increasing its 3.1 Position Mapping of Countries 5. Barak Ravid, Netanyahu: Maritime • Cypriot Minister of Foreign Affairs naval patrols to protect its offshore gas 4. Lebanese-Cypriot discussions Claiming Maritime Rights • Parliament Speaker, Berri (29/2/2012) Borders Proposed by Lebanon En- (March 2012) declares that her country facilities. in Nicosia to correct borders and croach upon Israel Territory, Haaretz, Introduce Apportionment, Annahar pointed out that the problem was not 10 July 2011. http://www.haaretz. is not responsible for the flaws in the EEZ Newspaper, 11 November 2011. com/news/diplomacy-defense/ne- http://www.annahar.com/content. 3.1.1 Positions on Lebanon’s South and between Cyprus and Lebanon but between tanyahu-maritime-borders-proposed- agreements and that it will not amend • In 2012 and 2013, Israel continued php?table=mahaly&type=mahaly&pri Southern West Borders Lebanon and Israel, with Tel Aviv trying by-lebanon-encroach-upon-israel- these agreements except based on a to boost its military capacity to secure ority=8&day=Fri territory-1.372467 to exploit the sensitivities in the area and tripartite agreement among Lebanon offshore facilities.8 Lebanon: relations with Turkey, in order to benefit 6. Israel Official: Hizbullah Exploiting Cyprus and Israel.4 5. Lebanon can ratify EEZ agreement • Minister of Foreign Affairs, Mansour, Maritime Border Issue to Wage War from an area of 850 square km.5 Turkey: when Differences with Israel Settled, in a letter to the UN (14/7/2011): against Israel, Naharnet, 26 July 2011. Famagusta Gazette, 1 March 2012. http://www.naharnet.com/stories/ Cypriot Defense Minister (April 2013) • In January 2007, Turkey called http://famagusta-gazette.com/ “Lebanon objects to the agreement en/11226-israeli-official-hizbullah- lebanon-can-ratify-eez-agreement- Berri assured that the Lebanese Parliament confirms that Israel is set to send war- on Lebanon and Egypt to put on hold between Cyprus and Israel in which they exploiting-maritime-border-issue-to- when-differences-with-israel-set- can ratify the EEZ agreement with Cyprus wage-war-against-israel ships to the eastern Mediterranean for agreements with Cyprus, saying the tled-p14651-69.htm delimited their respective EEZ because within 15 days of settling the boundary a joint military exercise with Cyprus that agreement infringed on the rights of the هيثم زعيتر، لبنان يبدأ مسيرة األلف ميل .it affects points falling north of the line 7 will focus on the security of the eastern breakaway Turkish Cypriot state on the في قضية االستحواذ على النفط والغاز، اللواء، conflict with Israel.6 6. Stefanos Evripidou, Lebanon will constituting the southern border of the 25/4/2012. ratify EEZ deal when Issues resolved Mediterranean region and that of gas divided island.9 EEZ of Lebanon. Lebanon requests that with Israel, 1 March 2012. http:// Cyprus: 8. Israeli navy to get 2 German frig- companies.5 www.cyprus-mail.com/cyprus/ the Secretary-general of the UN take all ates to shield natural gas fields, UPI, lebanon-will-ratify-eez-deal-when- • Cyprus Ambassador hands an 17 December 2013. • In December 2010, Turkey objected issues-resolved-israel/20120301 measures that he deems appropriate, with official memorandum (11/7/2011) http://www.upi.com/ Israel: the agreement between Israel and a view to avoiding conflict and safeguarding Business_News/Security- Industry/2013/12/17/ 2 to Lebanon Minister of Foreign Affairs that • Prime Minister, Netanyahu, states Cyprus on the basis that it disregards 7. Lebanese Press Round Up: international peace and security . Israeli-navy-to-get-2-German-frig- 11 July 2011, Now Lebanon, 11 assures the cooperation of Cyprus with ates-to-shield-natural-gas-fields/UPI- (7/7/2011) that the maritime borders the rights and jurisdiction of Turkish July 2011. http://www.nowl- Lebanon to conclude all the unresolved 40851387306062/#ixzz32o6NNaio declared by Lebanon are further south Cypriots on the island.10 ebanon.com/NewsArchiveDetails. Hezbollah Leader Seyed Hassan Nasrallah issues and guarantee Lebanon’s rights.7 than those determined in previous deals aspx?ID=290185 (July 2011): 9. Turkey: Oil Deals Signed by Cyprus with Lebanon, Egypt Invalid, and encroach upon Israel territory.5 Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip “We warn Israel against extending its Lebanon News, 31 January 2007. President of Cyprus Demetris Christofias Erdogan (15/9/2011): hands to this area and steal Lebanon’s http://www.lebanonews.net/mainra. (04/11/2011): asp?raid=7833 • Following the letter that Lebanon sent ”Israel cannot do whatever it wants in resources from Lebanese waters,” ‘’Together with President Peres we have 10. Turkey criticizes Israel-Cyprus in June 2011, Israel states it would the eastern Mediterranean. They will see decided to establish a joint committee on Maritime Border Accord, The Associ- demarcate maritime border with direct what our decisions will be on this subject. ated Press, 21 December 2012. our Mediterranean vision for peace and 40 Legal Issues Concerning Lebanon’s EEZ Legal Issues Concerning Lebanon’s EEZ 41

4. Progress of Exploration and Production

1. Erdogan warns Israel: Turkey can in the East Mediterranean send warships to east Mediterranean at any time, Haaretz, 15 September Tracking the Process 2011. http://www.haaretz.com/ news/diplomacy-defense/erdogan- Lebanon Israel Cyprus Syria warns-israel-turkey-can-send-war- Our navy attack ships can be there at any 3.1.2 Positions on Lebanon’s North and 1960s-mid 1970’s: Lebanon begins ships-to-east-mediterranean-at-any- exploration of oil resources. Exploration 1 stopped with the break of the Civil War in 1975. time-1.384657 moment.” Northern West Borders 1999: Discovery of a field named Noa. Production from Noa started in July 2011. 2. Turkey to Maintain Static in the • Turkish Ministry of Foreign Affairs Lebanon: 2000: Spectrum oil data company conducts 2000: Discovery of a field named Mary offshore 2D & 3D seismic surveys of Lebanon’s B. Production started in 2004. Mediterranean, Unal: We will object EEZ as part of a regional speculative survey on to any unilateral agreement between spokesman Selçuk Ünal (23/9/2011): • In October 2011, MP Mohammed the Eat Mediterranean region. 2000: Discovery of a field located offshore Ashkelon. Commercial production started Lebanon and Cyprus, Assafir News- “We will oppose any unilateral agreement Qabani announces that negotiations 2000-2007: further seismic surveys in 2004. As of 2012, this field is nearly conducted by other companies. Data paper, 23 September 2011. http:// 2 exhausted - earlier than expected to due www.assafir.com/article.aspx?Editio between Cyprus and Lebanon.” with Syria on maritime boundaries will indicates the presence of considerable increased pumping to compensate for the hydrocarbon resources. loss of Egyptian gas. 7 nId=1956&ChannelId=46202&Artic begin soon. 2003: Cyprus signed EEZ delimitation November 2003: Syria issues law in the leId=2512 2001: Southampton Oceanographic Center agreement with Egypt. The agreement boundaries of its territorial sea. United Nations: tasked with delimiting Lebanon’s EEZ entered into force in 2004. 2004: Cyprus issued a law to provide for 3. Patrick Galey, U.N. refuses to act • In its reply to the request of Lebanon’s Syria: the proclamation of its EEZ boundaries. on Foreign Ministry request for action Foreign Minister to exert every possible • In June 2010, President Assad and 2005: First petroleum law drafted. to stop Israel exploiting fossil fuels, 2006-2007: Petroleum Geo Services (PGS) Daily Star, 6 January 2011. effort to deter Israel, U.N. spokesperson President Suleiman discuss joint land oil data company conducts geological seismic surveys that confirm oil deposits Martin Nesirky said (4/1/2011): “The and sea borderlines and agree to direct in Lebanese waters. 4.Berri meets Williams; Warns of mandate [of U.N. Security Council Resolution committees to complete the gathering January 2007: Lebanon signed EEZ Feb-Aug 2007: Cyprus offered 11 blocks in Mid-2007: Syria held first offshore licensing Dangers if Lebanon’s Oil Resources boundary agreement with Cyprus. its first licensing round. round, offering four blocks covering a total Agreement has not been ratified yet. area of 5000 square kilometres. Only one are exploited, The Daily Middle East 1701] is very specific on what UNIFIL of information and data by every side bid was received (by a consortium led by Reporter, 10 January 2011. October 2007: Lebanese Council of British firm Dove Energy). No awards were made. does including its maritime component, in prelude for initiating the process Ministers passed the Offshore Petroleum Resources Law. and it is also fairly specific that it does not of defining and demarcation of these Oct. 2008: Exploration and Production 5.Brooke Anderson, U.N. looking 3 8 Sharing Contract awarded to Noble Energy. into helping Lebanon draw maritime include delineating lines - maritime lines”. borders as soon as possible. April 2009: Lebanese Army drew EEZ 2009: Discovery of Tamar and Dalit fields. 2009-2011: Continuation of seismic security line, Daily Star, 21 July 2011. boundary as per UNCLOS provisions. Production expected to commence in 2013. surveys. http://www.dailystar.com.lb/News/ May 2009: Council of Ministers endorse 2009: Cyprus ratified EEZ delimitation Middle-East/2011/Jul-21/144244- Nevertheless, the UN Special • No progress has been noted since the Lebanese Army map. agreement with Lebanon. un-looking-into-helping-lebanon- coordinator for Lebanon Michael outbreak of violence in Syria. July 2010: Lebanon deposits geographical 2010: Discovery of Leviathan field. December 2010: Cyprus signed EEZ June 2010: President Assad and draw-maritime-security-line. coordinates that define the Southern limit of Production expected to commence in 2017. delimitation agreement with Israel. President Suleiman discussed joint land ashx#axzz32oH6wU3r Williams (10/1/2011) stated that the Lebanon’s EEZ (bordering Occupied Palestine) and Sea borderlines and agree to direct at the office of the UN Secretary General. December 2010: Israel and Cyprus sign committees to complete necessary data EEZ delimitation agreement. gathering to initiate demarcation process. country was entitled to benefit from its August 2010: Parliament endorsed the Read more: http://www.dailystar. Offshore Petroleum Resources Law. com.lb/News/Middle-East/2011/ national energy resources, and that the October 2010: Lebanon deposited Jul-21/144244-un-looking-into-help- Southern part of the Western median line ing-lebanon-draw-maritime-security- UN would help the country mark its of its EEZ (bordering Cyprus), in addition to line.ashx#ixzz32oHUZcmL 4 Southern coordinates that it had deposited maritime border with Israel. earlier, at the office of the UN Secretary General. (The Daily Star :: Lebanon News :: http://www.dailystar.com.lb) January 2011: A commission composed 2011: Discovery of Dolphin field. March 2011: Syria opened a second of specialists from Lebanon’s army, Foreign offshore licensing round. It was originally UNIFIL Force Commander Major General Ministry and the National Council of July 2011: Israel deposited geographical scheduled for closure by October 2011, Scientific Research was commissioned to coordinates of its northern territorial but was then re-scheduled twice. As of 6. U.N. Looking Into Helping Alberto Asarta Cuevas (July 2011) stated delimit maritime boundaries with Israel. waters and EEZ at the office of the UN early 2012, there was no new date for Lebanon Draw Maritime Security Secretary General. completion of the bid round. that UNIFIl will look into acting “as a June 2011: Lebanon addresses letter to Line, Daily Star, 21 July 2011. http:// UN Secretary General ascertaining that www.dailystar.com.lb/News/Middle- mediator between Israel and Lebanon point 1 does not represent the southern East/2011/Jul-21/UN-to-assist-Leb- end of the median line that separates the EEZ boundary with neighboring countries, anon-draw-maritime-security-line. in an effort to demarcate the maritime & claiming that the Lebanese EEZ terminates ashx#ixzz1a1GbrjmV security line, even though it’s outside at point 23. August 2011: Parliament endorsed law the scope of its mission.”5 on the delimitation of Lebanon’s EEZ. 7. Daniel Dhaher, Lebanon Adamant September 2011: Lebanon sends letter about Claiming its Maritime Rights in to the office of the UN Secretary General Arabic, AlHayat, 28 October 2011. • July 2011: UNIFIL proposed to act as objecting to the EEZ agreement that was http://international.daralhayat.com/ signed between Cyprus and Israel in Oct 2011: Cyprus renews exploration December 2010. license. print/323109 a mediator between Lebanon and Israel in September 2011: UKHO endorses Dec 2011: Noble energy announces gas demarcating the maritime boundary and mapping of EEZ by the Lebanese Army. discoveries in block 12. 8. Presidents al-Assad and Suleiman: creating a maritime security zone.6 2012: Discovery of Tanin field. Production Feb 2012: Cyprus announced second Necessity to Pursue Bilateral Rela- expected to commence in 2013. licensing round for blocks 1-11 and 13. February 2013: Lebanon expected to tions Bolstering, JP News, 16 June commence licensing and bidding rounds. 2010. http://jpsyria.net/en/news. 2015: Interim solution to meet domestic php?id=1123 demand in Cyprus by transporting natural gas from Israel is currently under evaluation. Tracking the Process of Boundary Demarcation and Agreements 2017: Gas extraction expected to begin. 2017-2018: Expected gas supply from Tracking the Process of Exploration block 12 via pipeline. and Exploitation 2019: Construction of a Liquefaction Plant. 42 Legal Issues Concerning Lebanon’s EEZ Legal Issues Concerning Lebanon’s EEZ 43

Syria Petroleum Rights and Offshore Hydrocarbon Field Israel Petroleum Rights and Offshore Hydrocarbon Fields

Seismic Surveys CURRENT PRODUCTION Karish In 2005, and in cooperation with the Ministry of Petroleum and Tanin 1. Tamar Field Block: I/12 Mineral Resources, CGGVeritas acquired, processed and Leviathan Discoveryed: January 2009 interpreted regionsal 2D seismic survey over offshore Syria. Estimated gas discoveries: 10 Tcf Commercial production: March 2013 Right: Lease 02/12/2008 - 01/12/2038 Tamar Consortium: Noble Energy Mediterranean Ltd. st Isramco Neveg 2 Ltd.Partn. / Avner Oil Ltd. Partn. 1 Licensing Round 2007 Delek Drilling Ltd. Partn. / Dor Gas Exploration Ltd. • One Bid was submitted Dalit Partn. Gas produced from Tamar is carried to onshore • No Blocks were awarded Myra facilities at Ashdod via a pipeline that links it to existing infrastructure at the Mari-B development site. Plans are Dolphin moving forward on a floating LNG project by 2017.

nd 2. Dalit Field 2 Licensing Round March 2011 Sarah Block: I/13 The Syrian Ministry of Petroleum and Mineral Resources along Discovery : March 2009 with the General Petroleum Corporation (GPC) announced Estimated gas discoveries: 0.5 Tcf on the 24th March 2011 the opening of the International Bid Commercial Production: 2013 Round 2011: Right: Lease 02/12/2008 - 01/12/2038 • All three offshore blocks were open for bidding. Each Consortium: Noble Energy Mediterranean Ltd. block covers an area of around 3000 cubic km. Isramco Neveg 2 Ltd.Partn. / Avner Oil Ltd. Partn. Delek Drilling Ltd. Partn. / Dor Gas Exploration Ltd. Partn. • Closing date: October 2011. No blocks were awarded. Noa Marie-B

Break of Conflict in Syria 2011 Planned Production With the sanctions imposed on Syria by the US and EU, 1. Leviathan Block: 350/349 (divided into sub fields) many oil and gas companies halted their operations. Oil Discovered: December 2010 production in Syria stopped in early 2013 and that the rest of Esimated capacity: 450 bcm of Gas the country’s production was down to 15,000 barrels per day. Commercial Production: 2016 - 2017 Right: License 14/02/2014-13/02/2044 The only oil companies still operating in Syria as of September Consortium: Noble Energy Mediterranean Ltd. 2013 were Hayan Petroleum and the Elba Petroleum Company, Avner Oil Ltd. Partn./ Delek Drilling Ltd. Partn. without their IOC partners. Ratio Oil Explor.Ltd.Partn.

In December 2013 the Syrian government and Russian 2. Tamar SouthWest company SoyuzNefteGaz signed a 25-year exploration Block sandwiched between the Tamar and Leviathan agreement over Block 2, covering around 2,190 square gas fields km between the ports of Banias and Tartus. Discovered: 2013 Estimated discoveries: 0.7 Tcf Commercial Production: TBD Consortium: Tamar partners will own an 80% share of Tamar Southwest, while the Leviathan partners will hold a 20% share.

Recent Explorations 1. Tanin Block: 364/365 Discovered: February 2012 The Ministry of Infrastrucutre encourages exploration by providing both geological and geophysical data Estimated gas discoveries: 1.2 Tcf which have been obtained from previous exploration surveys and government research. Exploration and Consortium: Noble Energy Mediterranean Ltd. production (E&P) is controlled by the Petroleum Law which defines three rights: Avner Oil Ltd. Partn./ Delek Drilling Ltd. Partn. (Italian Edison interested in acquiring Tanin from Preliminary Permit Noble and Delek). The owner of which may request a priority right which gives exclusive exploration rights on the area. A permit 2. Dolphin may be granted for a period up to 18 months. Block: 351 Ministry of Petroleum and Mineral Resources of Syria Discovered: 2011 Estimated gas discoveries: 0.08 Tcf License Consortium: Noble Energy Mediterranean Ltd. License must be optained prior from drilling. This type of licence will be valid for three years and can be extended Avner Oil Ltd. Partn./ Delek Drilling Ltd. Partn. for up to 4 more years. 3. Karish Block:Alon C/366 Discovered: May 2013 Lease Estimated gas discoveries 1.6-2 Tcf Lease is granted to the license holder, if oil has been discovered in commercial quantities. The lease maximum Consortium: Noble Energy Mediterranean Ltd. Avner Oil Ltd. Partn./ Delek Drilling Ltd. Partn. period is 50 years. The royalty paid for oil and gas is 12.5%. Ministry of National Infrastructure of Israel, List of Ownership in Petroleum Rights, Updated 01/06/11 44 Legal Issues Concerning Lebanon’s EEZ Legal Issues Concerning Lebanon’s EEZ 45

Cyprus Petroleum Rights and Offshore Hydrocarbon Fields

Seismic Surveys In 2006, and in cooperation with the Ministry of Commerce, Industry and Tourism of the Republic of Cyprus, PGS acquired, processed and interpreted regional 3D and 3D seismic survey over offshore Cyprus.

1st Licensing Round 2007 • 11 Blocks (46,000 km2) were on offfer Lebanon Petroleum Rights and Offshore Hydrocarbon Fields • Block 3 and 13 were excluded • 3 applications were submitted • One Exploration Licence was awarded for Block 12 Seismic Surveys According to Petroleum Geo-Serivces, the deep water area of offshore Lebanon in = the Easter Mediterranean covers more that 20,000 sq. km and offers a variety of unexplored Exploration Block 12 hydrocarbon plays, including; the Syrian Arc, the Levantine • Estimate: 7 TCF of gas, with a probability of 60% Basin and the Levant Margin. • October 2008: Awarded to Noble Energy International LTD (USA) • September 2011: First Exploratory Well • December 2011: Discovery of Aphrodite Well First Licensing Round • December 2011: Cypriot government agrees to transfer First licensing round was opened in 2013. Awards are 30% of Block 12 rights to Avner and Delek Drilling equally. expected by November 2014. Operators qualified for Delek and Noble Energy are also partners in Leviathan, Israel. bidding include: Anadarko International O&G Company (USA), Chevron East Mediterranean Exploration and Offshore Cyprus Seismic Surveys, Petroleum Geo-Services Production Ltd. (USA), Eni International BV (Italy), ExxonMobil Exploration and Production Lebanon Ltd. nd 2 Licensing Round March 2011 (USA), Inpex Corporation (Japan), MAERSK Olie og Gas Onwards A/S (Denmark), Petrobras International Braspetro BV • All Blocks were offered (except Block 12) (Brazil), Petronas Carigali SDN BHD (Malaysia), Repsol • 15 bids were submited: 5 from companies and 10 from Exploracion SA (REXSA) (Spain), Shell Exploration and joint ventures from 15 different countries, including the Production (LXV) N.V. (Netherlands), Statoil ASA (Norway), USA, Norway, Canada, France, Italy, Australia, South Total S.A (France). Korea and Israel. • Four consortia won the tenders: . 24 January 2013: Blocks 2,3 & 9 awarded to the consortium of Italy’s ENI and South Korea’s KOGAS. Signature bonus Oil and Gas Milestones that Cyprus received amounted to €150m. • January 2007: Signature of EEZ agreement with Cyprus. . No Israeli company won any bid (including Delek, Agreement was never ratified by Lebanon. Isramco and other). February 2013-January 2014: Total E&P • August 2010: Parliament endorsed Offshore Petroleum was granted exploration concessions on blocks 10 & 11 and Resources law license to carry out seismic exploration for oil and gas on • October 2010: Lebanon submited EEZ boundary coordinates parts of blocks 10, 6,7 &11. Signature bonus that Cyprus with Occupied Palestine to the UN • August 2011: Parliament endorsed law on the delimitation received for blocks 10 & 11 amounted to €24m. of Lebanon’s EEZ • February 2012: Petroleum Law Guidelines issued • October 2012: Appointment of Petroleum Administration • 2013: Opening of 1st licensing round Petroleum Rights Exploration License A Hydrocarbon Exploration Licence is granted for an initial Pending period of three years and may be renewed for up to two terms, • Delimitation agreements with neighboring countries Nobel Energy Awared Exploration Licenses of Block 12 in 2008 each term not exceeding two years, provided that the licensee • Maritime legislation in conformity with UNCLOS has fulfilled all their obligations with repsect to a current • Licensing strategy (shape of blocks, etc) exploration term.Upon each renewal of the term of the • Bidding items (profit share, work program, recovery ceiling) exploration period, the licensee relinquishes at least 25% • Long term strategic Gas Policy (domestic consumption, of the initial surface of the licensed area. infrastructure, etc)

Exploitation License A Hydrocarbon Exploitation License is granted for a period not exceeding twenty-five years and may be renewed for Petroleum Law a maximum of ten years. 24 January 2013: Blocks 2,3 & 9 Reconnaissance License awarded to the consortium of Italy’s Eni and South Korea’s • Granted for up to 3 years; Shall not be exclusive and shall KOGAS. not give the Right Holder any preference with regards to obtaining any other Petroleum Right; A Hydrocarbon Exploitation Licence,with respect to a • The resulting data shall be the property of the State commercial discovery during exploration, shall be granted after the approval of a Development and Production Plan. Exploration License • The Exploration phase is up to 10 years; The duration of each phase is stipulated in the EPA; Prospection License • On each renewal, at least 50 % of the initial area is The Hydrocarbon Prospection Licenze, issued a maximum relinquished; of one year, gives permission of prospection using various • Transfer or assignment of Petroleum Right may be geophysical techniques (no drilling) and evaluating the granted by the Council of Ministers offshore Cyprus hydrocarbon potential by identifying geological structures. Production License Block 3 and 13 Excluded from First Licensing Round Offshore Cyprus The production phase is up to 30 years Ministry of Commerce Industry and Tourism of Cyprus Ministry of Energy and Water Lebanon Impact of Exploration Activities by Oil and Gas Companies on Maritime Boundary Disputes and Right to Sovereignty 5 over Natural Resources Impact of Exploration Activities by Oil and Gas Companies on Maritime Impact of Exploration Activities by Oil and Gas Companies on Maritime 48 Boundary Disputes and Right to Sovereignty over Natural Resources Boundary Disputes and Right to Sovereignty over Natural Resources 49

1. Oil and gas activities and maritime delimitation in the case of disputed area

1.1 Does the licensing of oil and The Permanent Court of Arbitration over the oil-rich Bakassi Peninsula and to 1.2 What comprises a tacit or gas activities determine a state’s (PCA) rejected the argument put forward specify the land and maritime boundary express agreement between two sovereign rights over the by Guyana that the conduct of the parties between the two states. states over the licensing of oil and delimitation of its territory or gas activities and when does such an granting oil concessions should determine that of the neighboring state? agreement affect the delimitation the final location of the boundary line, Reviewing the relevant facts the Court of maritime boundaries? 1. A concession is “a defined area The discovery of oil and gas increases holding that “the cases reveal a marked held that the oil practice of the Parties are of land that is licensed or leased to a exponentially the strategic and economic reluctance of international courts and not a factor to be taken into account in Given the gravity of establishing permanent company for a given period of time, boundaries and the importance of ensuing for exploration and development of importance of territorial delimitation and tribunals to accord significance to the oil the maritime delimitation in the present natural resources under specified sovereign rights, agreements between terms and conditions.” Chris Park, in some cases it has played an important practices of the parties in the determination case: “… although the existence of an Oxford Dictionary of Environment factor in promoting maritime delimitation. line”.5 express or tacit agreement between the countries are not easily presumed. and Conservation, Oxford University For example, a de facto line might in Press, New York, 2008 However, in the case of disputed area, parties on the sitting of their respective oil and gas activities and concessions1 in Case 2: Greece v Turkey oil concessions may indicate a consensus certain circumstances correspond to the themselves cannot be considered as In the Aegean sea continental shelf dispute on the maritime areas to which they are existence of an agreed legal boundary 2. “A tacit agreement is an agreement determining factors in delimiting a maritime between Greece and Turkey, Greece entitled, oil concessions and oil wells or might be more in the nature of a which is implied through action provisional line or of a line for a specific, or lack of objection, though not boundary. There is no requirement in the expressed in its case to the International are not in themselves to be considered stated explicitly; a very useful tool delimitation process to respect any limits Court of Justice (ICJ) “… that Turkey is as relevant circumstances justifying the limited purpose, such as sharing a scarce of international relations where later resource. Even if there had been a deniability of involvement for political which are set out under a concession not entitled to undertake any activities 1. Land and Maritime Boundary adjustment or shifting of the provisional reasons may be very important.”, between Cameroon and Nigeria provisional line found convenient for a J.Fox, Dictionary of International or licensing agreement. Concessions or on the Greek continental shelf, whether (Cameroon v Nigeria: Equatorial delimitation line. Only if they are based and Comparative Law, Third edition, licensing are only relevant in the process by exploration, exploitation, research Guinea intervening), Judgment, ICJ on express or tacit agreement between period of time, this is to be distinguished Oxford University Press, Inc., New Reports 2002, p. 303, at p. 447, at from an international boundary.”2 York, 2003 of determining a state’s sovereign rights or otherwise, without the consent of para. 304 the parties may they be taken into over the delimitation of its territory or Greece, and that the activities of Turkey account. In the present case there is no that of the neighboring state, if they are described constitute an infringements agreement between the Parties regarding The International Court of Justice has 3. Oil and Gas: A practical Handbook, further to an express or tacit agreement2 of the sovereign and exclusive rights 2. Case concerning Territorial and oil concessions.”1 taken into account the granting of oil Global Law and Business Publishing Maritime Dispute between Nicaragua 3 concessions in the delimitation of Ltd, London, 2009, p. 20-21 between the states concerned . of Greece to explore and exploit its v Honduras in the Caribbean Sea, Nicaragua v Honduras, ICJ Reports maritime borders, only if there is solid continental shelf or to authorize scientific 2007, available at http://www.icj-cij. 1.1.1 International Jurisprudence research respecting the continental org/docket/files/120/14075.pdf at Conclusion: evidence for a tacit agreement and after 3 4. In the Matter of Arbitration Award shelf”6. The ICJ rejected the argument para. 253 According to international jurisprudence, carefully considering the parties’ conduct. between Guyana and Suriname, Case 1: Guyana v Suriname Award of the Arbitral Tribunal, put forward by Greece stating that “it is the existence of oil fields and the practice September 17, 2007, at p. 41, In the Guyana v Suriname arbitration, clear that neither concessions unilaterally of state parties over these fields do not 1.2.1 International Jurisprudence para. 169 Guyana contended that the delimitation line 3. Oil and Gas: A practical Handbook, granted nor exploration activity unilaterally op.cit, p. 21 qualify as ‘special circumstances’ and as should follow an “historical equidistance Case 1: Indonesia v Malaysia undertaken by either of the interested such oil concessions granted over these line’ along an azimuth of N34°E from In the Indonesia v Malaysia case, 5. In the Matter of Arbitration Award States with respect to the disputed areas fields do not affect the delimitation of between Guyana and Suriname, Point 61 for a distance of 12 nautical particularly regarding sovereignty over op.cit, at p. 125 para. 390 can be creative of new rights or deprive maritime boundaries, nor does it justify miles to a point at the outer limit of the Ligitan/Sipadan, the International Court the other State of any rights to which in the adjustment of the equidistant line territorial sea. Guyana argued that there of Justice (ICJ) considered the context law it may be entitled …” 7. that divides the maritime zones between was no justification admissible under in which State actions took place before 6. Aegean Sea Continental Shelf, countries. Interim Protection, Order of September Article 15 of the Convention for departing presuming the existence of a tacit 11, 1976, ICJ Reports 1976, p. 3, at Case 3: Cameroon v Nigeria agreement between the two States. p.4, para. 1 from the provisional equidistance line in In the Cameroon v Nigeria, Cameroon An exception to this principle lies in the Suriname’s favor, and that the conduct filed an application with the International existence of an express or tacit agreement of the parties granting oil concessions When granting oil concessions, the Parties Court of Justice requesting that it concerning oil and gas practices between 7. Aegean Sea Continental Shelf, should determine the final location of the relied on a boundary line that was fixed Interim Protection, op.cit, p. 3, determines the question of sovereignty the Parties. at p. 10, para. 29 boundary line4. in the 1891 Convention between Great Impact of Exploration Activities by Oil and Gas Companies on Maritime Impact of Exploration Activities by Oil and Gas Companies on Maritime 50 Boundary Disputes and Right to Sovereignty over Natural Resources Boundary Disputes and Right to Sovereignty over Natural Resources 51

2. Oil and gas companies and maritime delimitation

Britain and the Netherlands as the limit coincided with the perpendicular line 2.1 What activities can be carried Therefore, and according to the Guyana 1. Case concerning Sovereignty of their respective jurisdiction over the that divided the sponge banks of the two out by companies in disputed v Suriname arbitration, when operating over Pulau Ligitan and Pulau Sipadan areas and to what laws are they (Indonesia/Malaysia), ICJ Reports maritime area. Nevertheless, the ICJ did States and that was acquiesced to by in disputed waters, companies should 2002, at p. 664, para. 79 not consider this line to be a fixed boundary both States.2 subject to? only carry on activities which do not because the limits set out in the concessions involve physical change, such as seismic When operating in disputed areas, 2. Robert Kolb, Case Law on Equitable did not constitute a tacit agreement and In its judgment, the ICJ stated that “a de operations. If a company goes beyond Maritime Delimitation: Digest and “may have been simply the manifestation facto line … was the result of the manner companies are not only subject to the this and carries on exploration activities, Commentaries, Martinos Nijhoff, laws and regulations of the host state USA &Netherlands, 2003, p.180 of the caution exercised by the Parties in in which both Parties initially granted there is a risk that it would be in breach granting their concessions. This caution concessions for offshore exploration and the terms and conditions of their of international law since exploration of was all the more natural in the present case and exploitation of oil and gas. This line contracts, but they will also have to take oil and gas reserves falls within activities 3. Continental Shelf (Tunisia/ because negotiations were to commence of adjoining concessions, which was into consideration that when operating which involve physical change in the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya), Judgment in disputed waters, certain activities 5 of 24 February 1982, General List no soon afterwards between Indonesia and tacitly respected for a number of years… seabed or subsoil. 63,para. 96. http://www.worldcourts. Malaysia with a view to delimiting the does appear to the Court to constitute a may not be permitted as a matter of com/icj/eng/decisions/1982.02.24_ 1 1 international law . continental_shelf.htm continental shelf.” circumstance of great relevance for the 2.1.1 What activities can be carried out delimitation.”3 in the disputed maritime area bordering As such, the ICJ did not assume that oil 1. Oil and Gas: A practical Handbook, Where a boundary is disputed, the Lebanon, Israel and Cyprus? op.cit, p. 24 concessions indicated the presence Guyana v Suriname arbitration has set According to the above mentioned (see 2.1), of a tacit agreement over the maritime 1.3 Lebanon and neighboring out the parameters within which oil-and any exploration activities in the disputed boundaries because the actions undertaken countries scenario 2. In the Matter of Arbitration Award gas-related activities may be carried out: between Guyana and Suriname, “In the context of activities surrounding area potentially change the physiology of by the Parties over the disputed area-that With respect to the Lebanon scenario, Award of the Arbitral Tribunal, hydrocarbon exploration and exploitation, the seabed and are as such in violation of is granting oil concessions, when viewed and in light of international jurisprudence, September 17,2007,at parag. 466 two classes of activities in disputed waters international law and case law. in their relevant context, did not clearly oil concessions that neighboring countries are therefore permissible. The first evidence a tacit presumption for the grant to oil companies over fields that are 3. Oil and Gas: A practical Handbook, comprises activities undertaken by the limits of the continental shelf. located near the disputed maritime area op.cit, p. 24 2.2 To what extend does unresolved parties pursuant to provisional arrangements do not, in principle, affect the delimitation territorial delimitation affect the of a practical nature. The second class is Case 2: Tunisia v Lybia of maritime boundaries between Lebanon entry of Oil and Gas companies? 4. In the Matter of Arbitration Award composed of acts which, although And how do companies mitigate In the Tunisia v Lybia case, the ICJ and these countries. between Guyana and Suriname, analyzed a series of de facto lines that op.cit, at para 467 and 470 unilateral, would not have the effect of risks/conflict related to maritime jeopardizing or hampering the reaching delimitation? marked the maritime activities of both There is no tacit agreement between of a final agreement on the delimitation countries. While it considered the line Lebanon and either Israel or Cyprus. In 5. Ibid, p. 22 of the maritime boundary”2. Furthermore, The existence of disputed areas does not that defined the area over which Tunisia fact, Lebanon has repeatedly protested the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) stand as a criterion by itself to define the claimed historic fishing rights irrelevant to against ongoing oil and gas exploration and went on to explain that unilateral acts entry of the oil and gas companies. In areas the delimitation of the continental shelf, the exploitation activities in the maritime area which do not physically change the where there are abundant hydrocarbon ICJ considered the de facto oil concession along the Lebanese maritime boundaries marine environment generally fall into resources neighboring or straddling an line (at 26 degrees) to be or some legal and warned against the possibility of the second class, but anything involving a undefined or disputed boundary, oil and relevance to the delimitation, since it has usurping Lebanese natural resources physical change may only be undertaken gas companies undertake a full evaluation been tacitly observed by the parties for in the disputed area adjacent to both pursuant to an agreement 3; a party of the risks involved in advance of committing many years, and since it approximately Cyprus and Israel. to a dispute should not “undertake their resources and commercial reputations. any unilateral activity that might affect Whilst it is not possible to predict with the other party’s rights in a permanent certainty how a boundary may be delimited manner”4 or what the outcome of a dispute may be, Impact of Exploration Activities by Oil and Gas Companies on Maritime Impact of Exploration Activities by Oil and Gas Companies on Maritime 52 Boundary Disputes and Right to Sovereignty over Natural Resources Boundary Disputes and Right to Sovereignty over Natural Resources 53

various safeguards can be considered by settling the dispute, political relations • If it is determined that all or part of 2.2.4 Assistance to the host state oil and gas companies in order to mitigate between the concerned states, the legal the contract area does not lie within the government the very real economic and commercial principles that may be applied and the boundaries of the host state, the contract Oil and gas companies can assist a host risk of operating in disputed waters technical difficulties in delimiting the should include an indemnity by the host state government in understanding the including the following:1 boundary in question)2. state indemnifying the company for any legal complexities, commercial issues, losses due to such circumstances. economic analysis and technical problems. 2.2.1 Due diligence • On 24 February 2004, Guyana initiated International oil and gas companies can arbitration proceedings concerning the • The company’s obligations, in so far The first step for an oil and gas company provide information and data to support delimitation of its maritime boundary as they are affected or put at risk by a being granted a concession or awarded the delimitation of a boundary and/or with Suriname, and concerning alleged boundary determination, should be licensing rights is to check the status of resolving a dispute. While companies with breaches of international law by Suriname suspended and the contract should the contract area. A state’s right to grant international resources and technical in disputed maritime territory. Suriname remain in full force until the boundary rights over its hydrocarbon resources expertise can be of positive assistance, demanded through diplomatic channels dispute is resolved1. can only be exercised within its own the host state government will ultimately that Guyana cease all oil exploration boundaries therefore: be the decision-making authority on the activities in the disputed area, and 2.2.3 Contracting with both states strategy it decides to pursue in relation ordered the company that was granted a 1. Oil and Gas: A practical Handbook, • If the contract area belongs to the host op.cit, p. 23 Oil and gas companies can consider the to its boundaries. concession for seismic testing by Guyana, state and this is confirmed by way of an possibility of contracting with both the to immediately cease all activities in the undisputed treaty, judgment or arbitral original host state and the claimant disputed area. Guyana responded to award, then this should provide a degree 2. A. Berlin, Managing Political Risk neighboring state. In practice, however, 2.3 Does political risk affect Suriname that according to its position, in the Oil and Gas industries, Oil, Gas of legal certainty going forward. & Energy Law Intelligence=, Vol. 1, this is often not realistic options, since the entry of international oil the maritime boundary between Guyana No.2, March 2003 companies (IOC)? And what 1. Ibid, p. 22 each state may believe it has legitimacy and Suriname lay along an equidistance are mechanisms put in place • If there is a determination that all or claim to the whole contract area and line. Two patrol boats from the Suriname to share/mitigate this risk? part of the contract area does not lie there may also be political objections, navy approached the company and ordered 3. Cosset, J.-C. and J.-M. Suret 2. Ibid, p. 23 within the maritime borders of the host (1995). “Political Risk and the particularly in unfriendly relations. Given the its service vessels to leave the area. The Benefits of International Portfolio One of the major considerations inherent state, this could lead to the license holder Diversification. ”Journal of international potential loss of revenue from a reduced company that was granted concession in any international investment is the losing rights in so far as the rights do business studies 26(2): 301 contract area, states may be reluctant to 3. In the Matter of Arbitration Award by Guyana did not since return to the political risk represented by the host between Guyana and Suriname, not lie in an area which is within the be part of such an arrangement. 2 op.cit, at p.32, para. 151 concessions area.3 country . Political risk has largely been boundaries of the host state. Moreover the 4. J. Frynas, Political Instability and defined as risk that involves all non- neighboring state could demand that any Business: Focus on Shell in Nigeria, Noble Energy, a US owned company, and 2.2.2 Contractual safeguards: Third World Quarterly, Vol. 19, No. 3 business risks, that have the potential to activities be discontinued and/or impose its partners have in fact been contracted (Sep., 1998), p. 457-478 change the prospects of the profitability penalties against a company which has Although host state governments may be by both Israel and Cyprus. Noble energy of a given investment3. Although some been illegally operating in its territory. In reluctant to grant additional provisions to has been operating in Israeli waters since studies suggest that political instability has this case, the potentially applicable laws protect companies, where there is doubt 5. Energy Economist Roudi 1998 and has made discoveries in wells Baroudi, Speaking at the European not deterred some IOCs from investing of any relevant neighboring states should as to the territorial scope of the contract that include for example Tamar, Leviathan, Mediterranean Oil & Gas Exploration in a country and may even have been be assessed. area, companies can seek to negotiate and Production Summit, Larnca, Dalit, Dolphin, and Karish. In October Cyprus, September 2012 beneficial to the company4, heightened safeguards such as following: 2008, Noble received a concession to political risk is still considered as a factor • If the contract falls within an area explore Cyprus’s Block 12 that is located that would dissuade international oil which has not yet been delimited and/or • If there is a territorial or boundary near the maritime boundary of both Lebanon companies (IOC) from investing into new potentially neighbors or crosses disputed dispute which involves the contract area, and Israel. In August 2011, Noble entered projects in the affected region5. However, boundary, this will necessitate a more there should be no breach of the contract a production sharing agreement with various mechanisms have been developed detailed assessment of the risks and by the company and the host state should Cyprus and has been drilling since then. uncertainties involved (potential for not apply any penalties. Impact of Exploration Activities by Oil and Gas Companies on Maritime Impact of Exploration Activities by Oil and Gas Companies on Maritime 54 Boundary Disputes and Right to Sovereignty over Natural Resources Boundary Disputes and Right to Sovereignty over Natural Resources 55

to share or/and mitigate the political risk company but are countrywide, for example catalyst to restore market confidence United State Overseas Private Investment with the private companies: a government’s decision to forbid currency for investors. MIGA encourages Corporation (OPIC) transfers or the outbreak of a civil war developmentally beneficial investment OPIC is the U.S. Government’s development 2.3.1 Political Risk Management within the host country. by providing political risk insurance (PRI) finance institution. OPIC works with the against the risks of currency inconvertibility U.S. private sector, it helps U.S. businesses When evaluating a prospective investment While investor can reduce the impact and transfer restriction; expropriation; gain footholds in emerging markets, in a foreign country and following geological of firm-specific risks (include strong war, terrorism, and civil disturbance; by providing investors with financing, and economical assessment, the company arbitration language in the contract, breach of contract; and non-honoring guarantees, political risk insurance, and assesses the political risk inherent in a on-site security, etc.), firms however of sovereign financial obligations. MIGA support for private equity investment particular investment to determine if that have much less control over the impact requires that the company making the funds. Political risk insurance provides risk can be managed in an acceptable way. of country-level political risks on their investment be in a MIGA “member various risk-mitigation products to cover The degree of willingness to accept political operations, where the only way to avoid country” and the investment be made in a losses to tangible assets, investment value, risk varies from company to another. There it is to stop operating in the country in MIGA “member country.” and earnings that result from political perils is also a direct relation between the degrees question2. including: Currency Inconvertibility, of political risk that a company is willing to The agency also helps resolve disputes Expropriation, Political Violence and accept and the degree of potential resources The second distinction made is between between investors and host governments more targeted specialty products. in the contract area1. government risks and instability risks. to keep MIGA-supported projects and Political Violence coverage compensates Government risks are those that result their benefits on track. The agency also investors for equity assets (including Various indicators are looked at by from the actions of a governmental works closely with its private and public property) and income losses caused by: companies when assessing the degree authority, whether used legally or not. sector reinsurance partners to maximize Declared or undeclared war, Hostile of political risk in a particular country: the the insurance capacity that MIGA can actions by national or international current activity in the host country that is While on the other hand, instability risks bring to a project. By fronting transactions, forces, Revolution, insurrection, and affecting or is likely to affect the stability are the result of political power struggles, MIGA provides access to insurance civil strife and Terrorism and sabotage. of the government, prospect for change for example conflicts between members capacity that otherwise would not have OPIC pays compensation for two types of national or local government, past of government, civil war, and conflict with been available to clients and host countries. of losses: Assets (Damage to covered history of nationalizations/expropriations, neighboring countries3. tangible assets), and Business Income experience of other companies in the Since its inception, MIGA has provided (Income losses resulting from damage country, political activity and trends in the 1. A. Berlin, op.cit 2.3.2 Political Risk Insurance more than $27 billion in guarantees (PRI) to assets of the foreign enterprise caused region, the overall economic condition of for more than 700 projects in over 100 by political violence/terrorism)2. the country, etc. Mitigating risk can be accomplished developing countries. MIGA currently 2. D. Wagner, Defining Political Risk, through the provision of political risk has an outstanding guarantees portfolio United Kingdom, Export Credits Guarantee International Risk Management Institute, Generally, in assessing political risk, two guarantees, which provide financial April 2000, available at: of over $10 billion. In response to events Department (ECGD) http:// www.irmi.com distinctions are made: firm-specific political coverage for financial losses caused by in the Middle East and North Africa, MIGA ECGD aims to benefit the UK economy by risks and country-specific political risks. political upheavals. Private Insurance swiftly launched an initiative for the region helping exporters of UK goods and services companies as well as bilateral state agencies 3. A. Berlin, op.cit to mobilize $1 billion in insurance capacity, to win business, and UK firms to invest Firm-specific is directed at a particular and international agencies, offer political including $500 million of its own capacity, overseas, by providing guarantees, company for example the risk that a risk guarantees to IOCs in politically high 4 to help retain and encourage FDI in insurance and reinsurance against loss, 4. Ibid government will nullify its contract with risk areas : the region. MIGA has also stepped up taking into account UK’s wider international the firm or that an armed group will target 1. www.miga.org outreach to investors and lenders and is policy agenda. The largest part of ECGD’s the firm’s physical operations. World Bank, Multilateral Investment sharing global experience on managing activities involves underwriting long term Guarantee Agency (MIGA) 2. www.opic.gov political risks1. loans to support the sale of capital goods, On the other hand, country-specific MIGA is a member of the World Bank principally for the export of aircraft, political risks are not directed at a specific Group. MIGA’s guarantees act as a Impact of Exploration Activities by Oil and Gas Companies on Maritime Impact of Exploration Activities by Oil and Gas Companies on Maritime 56 Boundary Disputes and Right to Sovereignty over Natural Resources Boundary Disputes and Right to Sovereignty over Natural Resources 57

bridges, machinery and services; it helps on delimitation of maritime boundary works as the operator, while in an adjacent 2.3.5 Unitizing reserves UK companies take part in major overseas among the states with opposite or sub-zone Korean law is applied because the Even where there is an agreed boundary, projects such as the construction of oil adjacent coastlines3. operator there is concessionaire authorized the development of hydrocarbon resources 1. www.ukexportfinance.gov.uk and gas pipelines and the upgrading of by the Korean Government, the choice of on either side of the boundary will be subject hospitals, airports and power stations1. There are several reasons why states the operator being made on an equitable to differing domestic legal regimes and decide to go into joint development basis. However, the law shifts from 2. Energy Economist Roudi procedures applicable to their exploration 2.3.3 Sharing risk with the government agreement and one of those reasons is Japanese to Korean law and vice versa Baroudi, Speaking at the European and exploitation. The problem is Mediterranean Oil & Gas Exploration when states decide to leave aside their as the operator alternates between the and Production Summit, Larnca, Governments could agree to share the risk exacerbated where there is a common political or ideological differences and concessionaires of the two governments Cyprus, September 2012 with the IOCs by entering into joint ventures reservoir. Technical problems can arise cooperate towards harnessing their for a sub-zone with the shift of work with them. In such an arrangement, the in apportioning the reserves and there common natural resources to develop phase from exploration to exploitation. government would take a significant is a risk that the operations on one side 3. M.Ravin, Law of the sea. Maritime their economy or respond to the needs Expenses incurred in the exploration boundaries and dispute settlement equity stake in the venture but would sell of the boundary can have a negative mechanism. United Nations, 2005 of domestic consumption4. and exploitation phases are to be shared its interest over time to private parties, impact on the reserves on the other side equally, and so are the natural resources including its IOC partner. Once the right of the boundary. Procedures for unitizing Case 1: Japan and the Republic extracted in a sub-zone, between the 4. N.Chinedu Eze, Rethinking circumstances and reserves have been reserves have thus been adopted in many of Korea concessionaires of the two countries.1 Martime Delimitation and Promoting proven, the states in questions would be cases where such problems arise3. Joint Development of Petroleum: The In the case of Japan and Republic of Korea Nigeria-Sao-Tome and Principe Joint able to obtain financing from both commercial Agreement of 30 January 19755, the two 1. D. Wagner, Defining Political Case 2: Australia and Indonesia Development Model, University of and development banks in the region, as Unitization is an agreement to develop British Columbia, September 2011 parties agreed on the continental shelf Risk, International Risk Management In the case of Australia and Indonesia well as from multilateral financial institutions, Institute, April 2000, available at: and produce petroleum as a single unit boundary in the Sea of Japan and Tsushima www.irmi.com Treaty of 11 December 1989, the two such as the World Bank and the European from two or more oil fields for which Strait, where the dispute between the two parties agreed to establish the Zone of 5. M.Miyoshi, Maritime briefing, Investment Bank.2 separate contracts, licenses or statutory Volume 2 Number 5 countries over the overlapping concession Cooperation which consists of three 2. Ibid authorization exits. Intra-state unitization areas. Under joint development agreement, zones: Zone A under joint control, Zone 2.3.4 Joint development zone integrates two or more contract areas concessionaires, authorized by the two B under Australian jurisdiction and Zone within the territorial jurisdiction of a Joint development as per state practice respective governments, have undivided 3. A. Awambu, Unitization of C under Indonesian jurisdiction. In the single state. By contrast, Inter-State occurs where two or more states decide interest with respect to each of the nine Contract Areas: Is it an obligation delimitation of zone of cooperation, the defeating the stability of International unitization is the integration of contract to cooperate by jointly managing the defined sub-zones, and one operator is Petroleum Agreements, June 2009 Timor Trough and median line were used areas across different state territories in development of natural resources that chosen from among the concessionaires to ensure both the Australian position the case where a reservoir falls partly cut across their actual boundaries or so authorized for a particular sub-zone. of natural prolongation and Indonesian 4. www.ukexportfinance.gov.uk into the two nations. Unlike Intra-State perceived boundaries. The main essence This joint venture or consortium is not median line principle. Indeed the Treaty Unitization where oil companies enter of a joint development is the realization allowed for the exploration or exploitation provides that nothing in it shall prejudice into unitization agreement, in Inter-State that outright delimitation does note of any of the sub-zones. In accordance the position of either country on a Unitization the agreement is between resolve all maritime boundary disputes, with the article 19 of the agreement, the permanent continental shelf boundary or the states though they will involve the whether the said delimitation is a result law and regulations of one Party shall its sovereign rights in the Zone, and that IOCs. Inter-State Unitization is similar to a of agreement of the States or delimitation apply with respect to matters relating to the two countries continue their efforts Joint Development Zone (JDZ); the main resulting from decision of a third party exploration and exploitation of natural for permanent boundary delimitation. difference unitization is more applicable dispute resolution. Even though the idea resources in the sub-zones with respect The Treaty also states that after period where boundaries have been delimited of joint development does not limit the to which the Party has authorized of 40 years, it will continue in force whereas in (JDZ) the delineating line real international maritime boundary, it concessionaires designated and acting as for successive terms of 20 years unless between the nations may not have been plays a vital role in settling the maritime operators. So, Japanese law is applied in a the two countries agree on permanent determined4. disputes in the absence of the agreement sub-zone where a Japanese concessionaire’s boundary delimitation.2 Impact of Exploration Activities by Oil and Gas Companies on Maritime Impact of Exploration Activities by Oil and Gas Companies on Maritime 58 Boundary Disputes and Right to Sovereignty over Natural Resources Boundary Disputes and Right to Sovereignty over Natural Resources 59

Notable cases of Inter-State unitization are arrangements and (2) the obligation not 1. See incidents mentioned in Guyana/ As such, it can be concluded that threats areas have been mentioned as undertaken Suriname Award (note 1), para. 457; 1 bilateral treaties between the United to hamper or jeopardize the final agreement Barbados/Trinidad and Tobago (note of resorting to force to secure energy by both parties to the dispute in some kingdom and Norway Bilateral treaties on the maritime boundary. These are 62), paras. 50 and 55; in Nicaragua/ interests in the contested area of the cases; they have been considered relevant Honduras (note 65), paras. 49, 52, have been signed between the United considered obligations of conduct, rather 58, 64-66 Mediterranean Sea, breaches the obligation for determining the course of the final Kingdom and Norway for the unit of result3. Those provisions do not limit to settle disputes peacefully and jeopardizes boundary2. development of three oilfields on the the powers of each State in a contested a final and viable settlement of the dispute. 2. Barbados/Trinidad and Tobago North Sea -Frigg, Statfjord and Murchison, area that still has to be delimited; powers (note 62), para. 270 Apart from the general prohibition of with 60.82 per cent of the resources attributed to the coastal State by the relevant 2.4.2 What is the difference between use article 2 (4) of the UN Charter, there is

located on the Norwegian side of the UNCLOS provisions and customary 3. E.Milano & I,Papanicolopulu, State of force in violation of international law no rule that prohibits enforcement of border, as well as the development of international law. Nevertheless, if a Responsibility in Disputed Areas on and law enforcement in application of national legislation in contested maritime Land and at Sea, Paper presented at Markham field between the UK and coastal State exercises a right granted the 20th Anniversary Conference of state legislation? areas: enforcement action by a coastal Netherlands. under UNCLOS, without at the same the International Boundaries Research State, also involving the threat or the use Unit, “The state of Sovereignty”, An emerging issue in State practice and time complying with the requirements of of force, is not therefore per se unlawful. Durham University, 1-3.4-2009.p.622 international litigation is the extent to articles74 (3) and 83 (3) UNCLOS, it may This action, however, will have to be which law enforcement activities may be 2.4 Can a claimant neighboring incur international responsibility. specifically permitted by international carried out in the contested area. It may state use force against a company law and to be prescribed by national operating in the disputed area? be noted, preliminary, that a State must The first obligation - the obligation to make legislation, and must adhere strictly to 1. Guyana/Suriname Award (note1), And what are enforcement mech- abstain from the use of force to assert its every effort to enter into provisional the requisites set down both by national paras. 480-484 anisms that a state can resort to? rights over a disputed maritime area or arrangements - consists of a legal obligation legislation and by international law.3 to coerce its neighbor into a settlement to actively try to enter into negotiations 2.4.1 General principles of good faith and of the maritime boundary. At the same 2. “Pending agreement as provided for addressing contingent issues pending Therefore, it appears that law enforcement for in paragraph 1 [on the basis of peaceful settlement of disputes time, a State is free to apply its legislation international law], the States final settlement of the delimitation dispute. activities are permitted, in so far as force in the area it claims and consequently to concerned, in a spirit of understanding In cases of disputed territory, States are The second obligation - the obligation not is used only as the last resort and is and cooperation, shall make every enforce such legislation against possible effort to enter into provisional under a due diligence obligation to make to hamper or jeopardize the final agreement proportionate to the circumstances and arrangements of a practical nature breaches. and, during this transitional period, every effort to prevent the aggravation of - requires that a state involved in a maritime the aim pursued. In addition to these not to jeopardize or hamper the the dispute and not to hamper the final delimitation dispute refrains from acting requirements, and in the light of the fact reaching of the final agreement. Such While land can be occupied by one settlement. A due diligence obligation to in a way that would hamper the final that the State adopting enforcement arrangements shall be without prejudice state or the other where the state will be to the final delimitation.” that effect is codified in UNCLOS article settlement of the dispute. action is not the only one that claims able to enforce its legislation, disputed 74 (3) and 83 (3) and it characterizes exclusive rights in the contested areas, its Maritime areas, on the contrary, are not delimitation disputes at sea. In the Guyana/ In the Guyana/Suriname case, the Permanent action will be evaluated not only with 3. E.Milano & I, Papanicolopulu, State capable of permanent occupation, but Responsibility in Disputed Areas on Suriname arbitral award, the tribunal Court of Arbitration considered that the respect to the rule attributing the substantive navigation in them is open to the vessels Land and at Sea, Paper presented at found that unilateral exploratory drilling “threat of the use of force” violated its right, but also with respect to the obligations the 20th Anniversary Conference of of all States, including the vessels of the International Boundaries of the sea bed by Guyana and threat to obligation not to hamper or jeopardize contained in articles 74 (3) and 83 (3) Research Unit, “The state of the parties to the dispute. It is therefore use force by Suriname were both in the reaching of the final agreement. of the UNCLOS. Thus, if there is a Sovereignty”, Durham University, materially possible for both parties to a 1-3.4-2009 violation of that obligation1. Evidently, the threat to use force for the determination that all or part of the contract dispute to apply their legislation therein solution of a dispute, not to mention its area does not lie within the boundaries and to take steps to enforce it. Instances These provisions frame the general actual use, not only violates basic rules of of the host state, the neighboring state of contested law enforcement at sea are principles of good faith and peaceful international law such as article 2 (4) of could demand that any activities be therefore much more frequent than on settlement of disputes2 and contain two the UN Charter, but also jeopardizes and discontinued and/or impose penalties land. Suffice it to consider that in almost obligations: (1) the obligation to make probably hampers the final settlement. against a company which has been illegally all cases concerning maritime delimitation, every effort to enter into provisional operating in its territory. This could lead instances of law enforcement in contested Impact of Exploration Activities by Oil and Gas Companies on Maritime Impact of Exploration Activities by Oil and Gas Companies on Maritime 60 Boundary Disputes and Right to Sovereignty over Natural Resources Boundary Disputes and Right to Sovereignty over Natural Resources 61

to the license holder losing rights in so far to its reaching the point when the only permanently from negotiations aimed at been expressly ruled out by the ILC while as the rights do not lie in an area which is possibility to protect its rights was to reaching a final agreement over maritime discussing State responsibility.5 within the boundaries of the host state. apply forcefully its legislation2. If, on the boundaries. Nevertheless, a State can other hand, a State has tried in good faith demand that the other State ceases its The third possibility is in cases the conduct While in the Guyana/Suriname case, the to address the situation earlier by other unlawful conduct as a condition to carry of a State has produced economic loss for Tribunal considered that the “threat of the means, and notwithstanding such action on with the negotiations. the other party. It would then be possible use of force” against the CGX company is obliged to put in place enforcement to claim compensation along with ceasing working on a concession in the disputed action, it may not be responsible for the The second possibility is recourse to unlawful conduct, guarantees for non- area, violated its obligation not to hamper breach of articles 74 (3) and 83 (3) of the countermeasures, that prompt the other repetition and countermeasures. or jeopardize the reaching of the final UNCLOS. State to comply with its obligations under agreement, some legal arguments considers UNCLOS articles 74 (3) and 83 (3). In initiating proceedings against Myanmar, that the options enumerated by the Tribunal, Thus, the valuation of the conduct of Bangladesh has requested the judge to which include entering into negotiations, a state is done on a case by case basis, According to article 49 (2) of the Draft Articles “declare that by authorizing its licensees 1. See incidents mentioned in Guyana/ Suriname Award (note 1), para. 457; bringing the case to a judge and requesting taking into account all the elements of on State Responsibility for Internationally to engage in drilling and other exploratory Barbados/Trinidad and Tobago (note 62), paras. 50 and 55; in Nicaragua/ provisional measures, seem appropriate the case and evaluating each action or Wrongful Acts, countermeasures are activities in maritime areas claimed by Honduras (note 65), paras. 49, 52, during the planning period, before any inaction by a State in the framework of its limited to abstaining from fulfilling Bangladesh without prior notice and 58, 64-66 1. Ibid, art.53 activity begins. However, prohibiting a general conduct since the beginning of international obligations towards the consent, Myanmar has violated its State from enforcing its legislation against the dispute3. State responsible for the breach in order obligations to make every effort to 2. Guyana/Suriname Award (note 1), a company that is undertaking exploratory 2. Ibid, art. 51 to compel the latter to comply with its reach a provisional arrangement pending para. 476 drilling in the continental shelf without 2.4.3 What are the consequences of obligations. A State will therefore be delimitation of the maritime boundary as license by it appears to take too much breaching the obligation to enter a authorized not to comply with its obligations required by UNCLOS articles 74(3) and 3. Ibid, art..50 into account the interest of third parties provisional arrangement and not to under UNCLOS articles 74(3) and 83 (3) 83(3), and further requests the Tribunal 3. See incidents mentioned in Guyana/ Suriname Award (note 1), para. 457; and not sufficiently that of the coastal jeopardize a final agreement on the as a countermeasure, but only if there is to order Myanmar to pay compensation Barbados/Trinidad and Tobago (note 6 62), paras. 50 and 55; in Nicaragua/ State. It is only when enforcement activities maritime boundary stated in UNCLOS 4.Ibid, art. 50 (1) non-compliance to these articles by the to Bangladesh as appropriate”. Honduras (note 65), paras. 49, 52, use force beyond the limited amount articles 74 (3) and 83 (3)? other State1. 58, 64-66 permitted under international law that However, a State might lose entitlement The consequences of breaching the the coastal State will be in breach of rules 5. ILC debate, O. Schachter, Dispute Countermeasures are only permissible to compensation due to its own contribution above mentioned obligations are found in Settlement and Countermeasures in 2 4. The Draft Articles on State concerning the use of force and its actions the International Law Commission, if they are proportionate and do not to the injury. Alternatively, a State may the Draft Articles on State Responsibility AJIL 88 (1994), 471 et seq Responsibility for Internationally may be considered in breach of the violate obligations provided by norms of not get compensation or may prefer Wrongful Acts was adopted by the for Internationally Wrongful Acts.4 International Law Commission in obligation not to hamper or jeopardize international law, including the obligation not to ask for it, due to similar requests The first consequence of breaching November 2001. Although it does the final settlement1. to refrain from the threat or use of force3. advanced by the other State. In Guyana/ not constitute a legally binding UNCLOS articles 74(3) and 83 (3) is the 6. International Tribunal for the Law Convention, many of its provisions of the Sea (ITLOS) http://itlos.org Countermeasures are not permissible if Suriname, Guyana had originally asked obligation to cease the unlawful conduct correspond to existing rules and Accordingly, a State may incur international they are conducted using more force than the Tribunal to declare that “Suriname is principles of international law that hampers reaching a final agreement responsibility for the violation of the is legitimate, or are undertaken without under an obligation to provide reparation, on the maritime boundary and offer 7. Reply of Guyana, cit. in Guyana/ obligations under articles 74 (3) and Suriname Award (note 1), para. 157 due respect for human rights, or contrary in a form and in an amount to be deter- appropriate assurances and guarantees 5. Art 30 Draft Articles on State 83 (3) of the UNCLOS, not so much for to humanitarian principles, they will be mined”7, while in its final submission, Responsibility of non-repetition5. undertaking enforcement action in a inadmissible4 countermeasures without Guyana opted for not making any claims 8. Guyana/Suriname Award (note 1), situation of urgency, but rather for not previous recourse to peaceful dispute for compensation due to the breach of The parties also remain under the para. 158 having addressed the situation before, settlement mechanisms stipulated in UNCLOS articles 74(3) and 83(3), asking continued duty to comply with UNCOS when lesser action could safeguard its UNCLOS, because previous recourse to instead only for declaratory relief 8, which requirements as per articles 74 (3) and rights, and for having thus contributed 9. James R. Fox. Dictionary of “all the amicable settlement procedures” is a court determination that the act of the 83 (3); thus a State shall not withdraw International and Comparative Law, 3rd Edition, Oceana, 2003, p. 82 before undertaking countermeasures has defendant state is illegal.9 Impact of Exploration Activities by Oil and Gas Companies on Maritime Impact of Exploration Activities by Oil and Gas Companies on Maritime 62 Boundary Disputes and Right to Sovereignty over Natural Resources Boundary Disputes and Right to Sovereignty over Natural Resources 63

3. Case Law

PCA (Guyana v Suriname)

1. In the Matter of Arbitration Award Background1 With respect to the law applicable to the delimitation of the territorial seas, the between Guyana and Suriname, Tribunal ruled that Article 15 of the Convention places primacy on the median line Award of the Arbitral Tribunal Guyana and Suriname are situated on the northeast coast of the South American (September 17,2007) as the delimitation line between the territorial seas between opposite or adjacent continent, and the coastlines of these States are adjacent. Guyana gained independence States. The Tribunal, then, examined special circumstances which might require from the United Kingdom in 1966, while Suriname achieved independence from the adjustment of the equidistance line. In this respect, the Tribunal ruled that the Netherlands in 1975. special circumstance of navigation may justify deviation from the median line. Both On 24 February 2004, Guyana initiated arbitration proceedings concerning the delimitation of its maritime boundary with Suriname, and concerning alleged The Threat and Use of Force breaches of internal law by Suriname in disputed maritime territory. (p.1. p.1): Suriname demanded through diplomatic channels that Guyana cease all oil In addition to maritime delimitations, Guyana sought reparations for Suriname’s exploration activities in the disputed area, and ordering CGX, a concession issued threat to use force. According to Guyana, Suriname resorted to the use of force by Guyana for seismic testing, to immediately cease all activities in the disputed on 3 June 2000 to expel Guyana’s licensee, the Canadian oil exploration company area. Guyana responded to Suriname that according to its position, the maritime CGX resources Inc. boundary between Guyana and Suriname lay along an equidistance line. Two patrol boats from the Suriname navy approached CGX and ordered its service vessels to The Tribunal held that the action mounted by Suriname seemed more akin to a leave the area. CGX has not since returned to the concessions area (p.32 p.151). threat of military action rather than a mere law enforcement activity. The Tribunal concluded that Suriname’s action constituted a threat of the use of force in violation On 20 May 2005, Suriname filed Preliminary Objections on jurisdiction and of the Convention, the UN Charter and general international law. On the other admissibility. In this respect the Tribunal held that it had jurisdiction to delimit the hand, the Tribunal discarded Guyana’s claim for compensation since the damages maritime boundary in dispute between the Parties and addressed the delimitation were not proceed to the satisfaction of the Tribunal of the territorial seas and the single maritime boundary dividing the continental shelves and exclusive economic zones of the Parties (p.6 p.40). The Breach of the Obligations under Articles 74 (3) and 83 (3) These provisions require the States concerned to make every effort to enter into Delimitation of Territorial Seas provisional arrangements of a practical nature and, during this transitional period, Suriname argued that the delimitation of the territorial sea should process along not to jeopardize or hamper efforts to reach a final agreement. The Tribunal ruled an azimuth of N10°E from the 1936 Point/Point 61. This claim was based mainly that Suriname’s conduct did constitute a failure to meet its obligations under Article on the existence of de facto agreement between the Netherlands and the United 74 (3) and 83 (3). Equally the Tribunal held that Guyana also violated its obligation in Kingdom, acquiescence of estoppel and consideration of navigation. (p.42 p.174) these provisions by leading up to the above-mentioned CGX incident. The Tribunal Guyana contended that the delimitation line should follow an “historical equidistance ruled that both Guyana and Suriname violated their obligations to make every line’ along an azimuth of N34 E from Point 61 for a distance of 12 nautical miles effort not to jeopardize or hamper reaching a final delimitation agreement. to a point at the outer limit of the territorial sea. Guyana argued that there was no justification admissible under Article 15 of the Convention for departing from the provisional equidistance line in Suriname’s favor (p.41 p.169). Impact of Exploration Activities by Oil and Gas Companies on Maritime Impact of Exploration Activities by Oil and Gas Companies on Maritime 64 Boundary Disputes and Right to Sovereignty over Natural Resources Boundary Disputes and Right to Sovereignty over Natural Resources 65

ICJ Aegean Sea Continental Shelf Case, 1976 (Greece v. Turkey)

Background not appointed an agent and was not represented at the hearings, communicated to the Registry of the Court certain written observation in which it submitted in particular In June 1974, Turkey sent the Candarh, an oceanographic vessel, accompanied by that the Court had no jurisdiction to entertain the dispute and suggested that the several warships to explore parts of the Aegean where Greek and Turkish claims request for interim measures be dismissed and the case removed from the list. to the continental shelf overlapped. Athens’s reaction was diplomatic supported by the deployment of a small naval force. Prime Ministers Suleyman Demirel and In justification of its request for interim measures Greece alleged: (a) that certain Costas Karamanlis issue a joint communique in May 1975, agreeing to take the acts on the part of Turkey (the granting of petroleum exploration permits, the continental shelf issue to the ICJ and solve other problems through negotiations. explorations of the vessel MTA Sismik I) constitute infringements of its exclusive In August 1976, Turkey sent the Sismik I, accompanied by a warship, to collect sovereign rights to the exploration and exploitation of its continental shelf, and that seismic data west of Greece’s Lesbos Island. This time, Greek armed forces were the breach of the right of a coastal State to exclusivity of knowledge of its continental deployed intensively, backed by political and media upheaval. The two sides shelf constitutes irreparable prejudice, (b) that the activities complained of would, 1. International Crisis Group, Europe backed down after mediation led by the UK. In 1976, Greece then took the issue Briefing N° 64, Istanbul/Athens/ if continued, aggravate the dispute. Turkey contended: (a) that these activities cannot Brussels, 19 July 2011 to the ICJ, which dismissed the case1. be regarded as involving any prejudice to the existence of any rights of Greece over the disputed area and that, even if they could, there would be no reason why Proceedings such prejudice could not be compensated; (b) that Turkey has no intention of taking the initiative in the use of force. On 10 August 1976 Greece instituted proceedings against Turkey in respect of a dispute concerning the Aegean Sea Continental Shelf. Greece requested the So far as (a) is concerned, the Court, viewing the matter in the context of Article 41 Court inter alia to declare what is the course of the boundary between the portions of its Statute, is unable to find in the alleged breach of Greece’s rights such a risk of of the continental shelf appertaining respectively to Greece and Turkey in the area, irreparable prejudice to rights in issue as might require the exercise of the power and to declare that Turkey is not entitled to undertake any activities on the Greek to indicate interim measures of protection. With regard to (b) the Court considers continental shelf, whether by exploration, exploitation, research or otherwise, that it is not to be presumed that either Government will fail to heed its obligations without the consent of Greece. under the United Nations Charter or fail to heed Security Council resolution 395 2. Case concerning Territorial and Maritime Dispute between Nicaragua (1976) of 25 August 1976, wherein the two Governments were urged “to do Greece also requested the Court to indicate interim measure of protection to v Honduras in the Caribbean Sea, everything in their power to reduce the present tensions in the area” and called Nicaragua v Honduras, ICJ Reports the effect that the Government of both States should: (1) refrain, unless with the 2 2007, available at on “to resume direct negotiations over their differences . consent of each other and pending the final judgment of the Court, from all exploration activity or any scientific research with respect to the areas in dispute; (b) refrain from taking further military measures or actions which may endanger Judgment their peaceful relations. The Order, made by the Court in the Aegean Sea Continental Shelf case, found, by twelve votes to one, that the circumstances, as they presented themselves to the At public hearings on 25, 26 and 27 August 1976 the Court heard observations Court, were not such as to require the exercise of its power under Article 41 of its presented on behalf of the Governments of Greece on its request for the indication Statute to indicate interim measures of protection. of interim measures of protection. On 26 August the Turkish Government, which had Impact of Exploration Activities by Oil and Gas Companies on Maritime Impact of Exploration Activities by Oil and Gas Companies on Maritime 66 Boundary Disputes and Right to Sovereignty over Natural Resources Boundary Disputes and Right to Sovereignty over Natural Resources 67

Cameroon vs. Nigeria

Background The conflict between Cameroon and Nigeria was a boundary and territorial dispute on the Bakassi Peninsula. Attempts were made in the past to resolve the dispute through bilateral negotiations, but in 1981, and again in 1993, 1994 and 1996, the dispute nearly escalated to a war.1 On March 29, 1994, Cameroon filed an application with the International Court of Justice requesting that it determine the question of sovereignty over the oil-rich Bakassi Peninsula and to specify the land and maritime boundary between the two states and to order an immediate and unconditional withdrawal of Nigerian troops from alleged Cameroonian territory in the disputed area.2

Arguments and Proceedings In its judgment of June 11, 1998, the Court rejected Nigeria’s seven preliminary objections alleging that the Court lacked jurisdiction and that Cameroon’s application was inadmissible, but it reserved the remaining, eight objection - relating to the parties’ maritime boundary - for consideration at the merits stage. 3 The Court’s order of June 30, 1999, allowed Nigeria to introduce certain counterclaims, and its 1. F. Baye, 2010. Implications of subsequent order of October 21, 1999, unanimously authorized Equatorial Guinea the Bakassi conflict resolution for Cameroon, African Journal on Conflict to intervene in the case as a nonparty. Resolution, Vol 10, Number 1, 2010

Judgment 2. http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/ index.php?sum=496&code=cn&p1 =3&p2=3&case=94&k=74&p3=5 On October 10, 2002, the Court ruled, by 13 votes to 2, that sovereignty over the Bakassi Peninsula and the Lake Chad area lay with Cameroon. Upholding the vaiildaity of certain colonial arrangements invoked by Cameroon, the Court fixed, 3. Land and Maritime Boundary by clear majorities, the kand boundary from Lake Chad in the north to the Bakassi between Cameroon and Nigeria (Cameroon v Nigeria), Preliminrary Peninsula in the south. In fixing the portion of the maritime boundary between the Objections, 1998 ICJ Rep. 275 (June 11) two states over which it had jurisdication, the Court agreed with Nigeria that the equidistant line between them produced an equitable result. It did not, however, specify the location of the point off the coast of Equatorial Guinea at which the 4. Court’s order at 1999 ICJ REP.983 (June 30) & 1029 (Oct.21) maritime boundary between Cameroon and Nigeria terminates (the “tripoint”).4 Conflict Prevention and Peaceful Mechanisms for Settlement of Lebanon’s 6 Maritime Disputes 70 Conflict Prevention and Peaceful Mechanisms for Settlement of Lebanon’s Maritime Disputes Conflict Prevention and Peaceful Mechanisms for Settlement of Lebanon’s Maritime Disputes 71

1. General Legal Options

1.1 What are the legal instruments Relations and Co-operation Among • Mediation: Uses a third party - a Mechanisms that entail binding decisions that determine the general States also provides that: state, a group of states, an international include: mechanisms of resolving disputes “States shall seek early and just settlement organization or an eminent individual - • Adjudication/Litigation: can take place among states? of their international disputes by negotiation, to settle the dispute. The mediator must through two established institutions for Article 2(4) of the Charter of the United inquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, have the confidence and consent of all the ICJ and the International Tribunal for Nations provides that: judicial settlement, resort to regional parties, and must remain impartial and the Law of the Sea (ITLOS). “All Members shall settle their international agencies or arrangements, or other neutral. Unlike the good officer, the disputes by peaceful means in such a manner peaceful means of their choice.” mediator may participate in negotiations. • Arbitration: is a simplified version of that international peace and security, and a trial where parties agree to submit their justice, are not endangered.” • Enquiry: refers to a particular type claims and grounds to one arbitrator or a 1.2 What dispute settlement options of international tribunal known as the panel of arbitrators constituted as per Annex does the maritime conventions Chapter VI of the UN Charter on the (UNCLOS and 1958 Maritime commission of inquiry and introduced by VII of the UNCLOS. They are free to choose Pacific Settlement of Disputes emphasizes Conventions) provide? the 1899 Hague Convention. As the name the procedure to be followed and the several consent-based procedures to resolve itself explains, it focuses on fact-finding applicable laws. a) UNCLOS Dispute Settlement Options disputes among states. These include: procedures. The Commission of enquiry negotiation, enquiry, mediation, conciliation, UNCLOS includes two types of dispute may include a third party state that possesses • Special Arbitration: A special arbitral arbitration, judicial settlement, resort to settlement mechanisms; mechanisms advanced technical expertise that allows for tribunal of specialized experts may be regional agencies or arrangements, or other entailing non-binding decisions, and a precise and reliable fact finding process. constituted according to Annex VIII of 1. UN Charter, article 33. peaceful means of their own choice1. mechanisms entailing binding decisions. the UNCLOS upon agreement of parties Mechanisms that entail non-binding • Conciliation: involves elements of involved to address issues related to Article 35 of Chapter VI makes it possible decisions include: mediation and inquiry. However, it is more fisheries, protection and preservation of for States to bring their dispute to the • Negotiations: Article 74 (1) of UNCLOS formal and less flexible than mediation. the marine environment, marine scientific attention of the UN General Assembly or stipulates that the delimitation of a maritime research, or navigation, including pollution the UN Security Council if their dispute boundary has to be “effected by agreement A third party (a commission set up by from vessels and by dumping. is likely to threaten international peace on the basis of international law” the parties) investigates the facts of a and security. Should the Security Council dispute and submits a report containing b) 1958 Maritime Conventions Dispute deem the dispute a threat to international • Exchange of views: Article 283 of the a suggested terms of a settlement. Most Settlement Options UNCLOS provisioned that parties exchange conciliations were performed by commissions peace, it shall recommend appropriate The four maritime conventions pass dis- views expeditiously regarding the of mode (as per annex V, Section 1 of the UNCLOS) procedures for dispute settlement taking pute settlement mechanisms to the Op- of settling their maritime disputes by composed of several members but into consideration any settlement tional Protocol of Signature concerning negotiations or any other peaceful method. occasionally states may prefer a single procedures already adopted by the the Compulsory Settlement of Disputes, conciliator. parties and taking into consideration that which provides that disputes arising from • Good Offices: Involves the use of a legal disputes should as a general rule be the interpretation of the four conventions third party - a state, a group of states, an referred by the parties to the International may be brought unilaterally before the 2 international organization or an eminent 2. Ibid. article 36. Court of Justice . International Court of Justice, unless the individual - to encourage the disputing parties have agreed-within a specific parties to resolve their dispute and come The 1970 Declaration on Principles of 1. Optional Protocol of Signature time limit- to resort to arbitration or to a concerning the Compulsory Settlement International Law Concerning Friendly to a settlement. Good Offices end when 1 of Disputes, articles I. III, IV. preliminary conciliation procedure. negotiations among the parties begin and the good officer does not participate in the negotiations. 72 Conflict Prevention and Peaceful Mechanisms for Settlement of Lebanon’s Maritime Disputes Conflict Prevention and Peaceful Mechanisms for Settlement of Lebanon’s Maritime Disputes 73

1.3 Are the above mentioned 1.4 What are provisional options its partner, as is the case in the Bahrain- The Norwegian-Russian 40 years negotiations mechanisms mandatory or optional? to settle the boundary dispute? Saudi agreement. More usually, both States over the Barents sea is a relevant case will be actively involved either directly or study whereby the Norwegians refused Dispute settlement mechanisms listed One option is a provisional arrangement. It through a management Commission with to enter a joint development agreement under chapter XV of the UNCLOS are is a temporary practical arrangement that legal personality that holds licensing concerning hydrocarbons before an mandatory. According to article 299 of is agreed upon pending final delimitation rounds. This will especially be the case agreement has been reached on the the UNCLOS, parties to a dispute may of the EEZ and continental shelf. 1. Rolf Einer Fife, Le Traité du 15 if the joint development arrangement is delimitation of their EEZs1. Nevertheless, agree at any time to any dispute settlement Septembre 2010 ente La Norvège et made after the agreement on a boundary, a provisional arrangements concerning method of their choice. In principle, once a boundary is determined, La Russie Relative à la Delimitation et à la Coopération Maritime en Mer but before an oil or gas discover is made. fishing activities was quickly concluded it is meant to be permanent. However, de Barents et dans L’océan Arctique, Some joint development zones operate by in 1978 (also known as the Grey Zone Nevertheless, parties may make a on exceptional basis, states may establish Annuaire Français de Droit Interna- tional, Paris, 2010. means of joint ventures between companies Agreement) in order to ensure that fishing declaration of exclusion that allows temporary boundaries possibly in order from the two parties. activities and fishermen are subject to for withdrawal from the compulsory to consider issues that may arise with other the policing control of their respective procedures when it relates to maritime neighboring countries and that warrant The key features of areas for a joint countries. boundary disputes, particularly related further negotiations. For example, Tunisia development agreement are as follows: to the delimitation of the continental and Algeria established a delimitation for • A treaty creating and defining the The Norwegian government wanted to shelf, the EEZ and the territorial sea only six years3. extent of the area. This is often but not ascertain its sovereign rights as a matter among opposite or adjacent states. To be always the area of the overlaps. of principle and as a matter of sovereign 1. René Jean Dupuy and Daniel Vignes, exempt from the compulsory procedure, Though, once these arrangements expire, A Handbook on the new law of the sea, priority that precedes any exploitation Hague Academy of International Law, however, the state party should make a dispute may arise over the same issues • A “without prejudice” clause, making of hydrocarbons, and as such did not 1991, p. 498 the declaration of exclusion before the that were subject to a temporary agreement. clear that the arrangement is interim or opt for a joint development agreement. Convention enters into force. States making provisional pending a final delimitation Nevertheless, the issue of preserving live such reservations will be required to Another option is a joint development of the boundaries. maritime resources took precedence over agree on a conciliation procedure.1 agreement. Joint development agreements 2. Reports of the ICJ, Case concerning the delimitation dispute and prompted the the Continental Shelf (Libya/Malta), are co-operative arrangements between Judgment of 3 June 1985, para- 26-34, • Long duration (45 years in Nigeria/ conclusion of the Grey Zone provisional Lebanon has not declared any reservations states with overlapping EEZ or continental p. 20-24. http://www.sovereigngeo- Sao Tome, with review after 30), because agreement in order to avoid legal uncertainty graphic.com/maritime_pdf/1985- to UNCLOS and is hence bound by the shelf to bring the common zones under libya-malta-english.pdf oil industry needs a long time span. and policing disputes in an area that is dispute settlement mechanisms set under a joint regime that allows for the exploitation The boundary can be agreed upon by very active with fishing activities, and in UNCLOS. Israel is not party to the UNCLOS, of resources by the parties. negotiations during that time or at the order to preserve the integrity of marine however, decisions of the ICJ have 2. Ibid, p. 404. end of the agreement. ecosystems.2 3. Agreement on Provisional established certain aspects of UNCLOS There are different types of joint Arrangements for the Delimitation as evidence of customary international development agreement. Sometimes of the Maritime Boundaries between 2 • A system for exploitation and an agreed Algeria and Tunisia, article 9. http:// law . As such, Israel is bound by aspects one State runs the oil and gas operations division of the production revenue (not www.un.org/Depts/los/LEGISLA- of the UNCLOS that are considered to be in the area under its law and simply pays an TIONANDTREATIES/PDFFILES/TREA- always 50/50). TIES/DZA-TUN2002MB.pdf part of customary international law. agreed proportion of the net revenues to 74 Conflict Prevention and Peaceful Mechanisms for Settlement of Lebanon’s Maritime Disputes Conflict Prevention and Peaceful Mechanisms for Settlement of Lebanon’s Maritime Disputes 75

2. Lebanon Specific Options

1.5 How is a dispute settlement of representatives from both countries Designing a dispute settlement process Cyprus’s intention to resolve maritime process designed? and the USA was established to facilitate for Lebanon first requires recognizing the boundary issues with Lebanon without implementation of the court decision - complex political, economic and social jeopardizing its strategic gas interests Resolving international boundary disputes that is, to oversee Nigeria’s release of 32 questions that may fall beyond the scope with Israel may put Cyprus in a mediation is a complex endeavor that often cannot villages to Cameroon with UN Secretary of law. As such, a more nuanced process role that can speed up the resolving of rely solely on one mechanism such as General, Anan, supporting the peace based on parallel long-term and short-term Lebanon’s southern maritime boundary. adjudication for example, given that process. As such, the combination of settlement mechanism that are mutually Should diplomacy and negotiations boundary disputes are often interlinked adjudication by the International Court reinforcing, is more likely to ensure that fail to achieve an amended agreement with division or sharing of natural of Justice, facilitation by a commission Lebanon’s strategic and economic interests with Cyprus, both states may resort to resources. Hence, integrating various that included representatives from the are not compromised. arbitration as stipulated in the Cypriot- dispute settlement mechanisms may offer two States in addition to the USA, and Lebanese Agreement itself. It is worthy one approach for resolving multi-issue the political support of the UN led to the to mention that arbitration is more flexible or multi-stakeholder cases. 2.1 What mechanisms of resolution of the resource dispute and than adjudication by the ICJ since it is International Dispute resolution the armed conflict. a simplified version of a court where the Integrating settlement methods requires can Lebanon consider to resolve parties may choose the applicable an evaluation of the subcomponents of EEZ issue with Cyprus? The Buraymi Oasis sovereignty and procedures and laws, and reach a these methods in order to foresee how 1. UNCLOS, article 74: “The delimitation The UNCLOS obliges states to reach an resources dispute between Saudi Arabia of the exclusive economic zone binding decision. they can be combined to achieve viable agreement on disputed maritime areas1. and Oman serves as another case study between States with opposite or results. Combining rights-based processes adjacent coasts shall be effected by As such, negotiations is the primary whereby adjudication was not employed, agreement on the basis of international Nevertheless, the arbitration approach 1. Anna Spain, Beyond Adjudication: (such as litigation) with interest-based mechanism to resolve issues related to but rather an integrated approach that law, as referred to in Article 38 of has been criticized for its limited results. Resolving International Resources processes (such as diplomacy negotiation the Statute of the International Court overlapping claims on maritime boundaries. Disputes in an Era of Climate included mediation and facilitation2. of Justice, in order to achieve an For example, in the Abyei Arbitration Change, Stanford Environmental Law or mediation) will probably achieve the equitable solution” Journal, Vol 30, No 2, 2011, p. 382. Oman had began oil exploration in the case between the Sudanese government complimentary effect that makes the Indeed negotiations between Cyprus and http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers. 1940s in an undemarcated border area that and the People’s Liberation Army of cfm?abstract_id=1866378 settlement of the dispute more likely. Lebanon are still ongoing. The Cypriot Saudi Arabia later claimed sovereignty over. Sudan over the territorial boundar government has not denied Lebanon’s Negotiations between the 2 governments demarcation, oil, water and grazing Examples of successful integrated rights to the alleged disputed area. In fact, stretched from 1942 to 1952 only to end rights, the Permanent Court of Arbitration settlement methods include the Cyprus is keen on developing strategic PCA) divided the territory between the) وزيرة اخلارجية القبرصية: لنا مصلحة .in armed aggression by both sides. An 2 Cameroon-Nigeria case1. In 1961 and relations with its neighboring countries, ,two parties by issuing new boundaries مشتركة مع لبنان وإسرائيل حلل مشكلة arbitration attempt failed in 1954-55 as has been reiterated on various occasions املوارد النفطية البحرية، ام تي، في، Anne Spain, Beyond Adjudication: 1981, border disputes between the .2 Resolving International Resources despite pressure from the Arab League. 15/3/2012. and demarcated the oil fields to the territory Disputes in an Era of Climate Cameroon and Nigeria resulted in armed http://mtv.com.lb/News/73911 by its officials2. These strategic relations In 1959, the UN Secretary General belonging to the North. The underlying Change, Stanford Environmental conflict. Fighting continued in 1994 were translated into cooperation agreements law Journal, Vol. 30, No 2, 2011, p. engaged the parties in mediation which issues pertaining to oil, water and grazing 383. http://www.mediate.com/pdf/ intermittently until 2000 when leaders with Israel and a series of agreements BeyondAdjudication.pdf paved the way to direct negotiations rights remain unresolved, and the parties from both countries agreed to pursue that it intends to conclude with Lebanon. between the parties until a settlement now bear the responsibility for pursuing judicial settlement at the ICJ. In October In this spirit of cooperation and in its efforts agreement was reached in 1975 granting resolutions to these issues through other 2002, the ICJ decided that Cameroon to conclude various strategic deals with Oman sovereignty over the area while means of unspecified nature and timing. had sovereignty over parts of the Lebanon, Cyprus and Lebanon may be apportioning land with potential oil This failure to address outstanding issues disputed area. A commission composed 3 able to conclude a package of agreements 3. Ibid, p. 382. reserves and sea access to Saudi Arabia. 3. Anne Spain, Beyond Adjudication: and promote reconciliation was among that includes maritime borders. Resolving International Resources the critiques expressed by one judge’s Disputes in an Era of Climate Change, op.cit, p. 366-367. dissenting opinion.3 76 Conflict Prevention and Peaceful Mechanisms for Settlement of Lebanon’s Maritime Disputes Conflict Prevention and Peaceful Mechanisms for Settlement of Lebanon’s Maritime Disputes 77

2.2 What mechanisms can Lebanon agreement may be interpreted as a On November 16, 1948, the UN Security • Resolution 508 (1982) on the violation consider to resolve EEZ issue politicization of the conflict that aims at Council issued Resolution 62 on ”The of Territorial Integrity, Independence and with Israel? engaging Lebanon in direct negotiations Palestine Question” calling all parties Sovereignty of Lebanon. After correcting the technical and legal that address the wider issue of peace directly involved in the Palestine conflict - errors in its agreement with Cyprus, in the region. However, Lebanon has including Lebanon - to seek an agreement, • More than 200 resolutions concerning signing and ratifying a new agreement, reiterated on various occasions that direct either directly or through an acting Israel and its neighboring states have been Lebanon may request that Cyprus negotiations is impossible in light of the mediator, to demarcate lines beyond issued by the UN Security Council; however, 1 1. Georges Pierre Sassine, Resolving amends its agreement with Israel enmities and that peace in the region has 1. SC resolution 62 (16 November which armed forces shall not move . The most have not been fully implemented. Lebanon’s Maritime Border Disputes, various Palestinian and non-Palestinian 1948) http://daccess-dds-ny. negotiations were held in Rhodes under Annahar, 12 December 2011. http:// accordingly. If this option proves to be un.org/doc/RESOLUTION/GEN/ 1 georgessassine.com/2012/04/ successful, Israel could then acknowledge constituents. NR0/047/87/IMG/NR004787. the aegis of the UN mediator Ralph Bunche pdf?OpenElement 2.2.3 Protest at UN General Assembly Lebanon’s southern west border through and resulted in the border and armistice Lebanon may resort to the UN General the agreement with Cyprus. Nevertheless, for purposes of reaching an agreements with Lebanon, Jordan, Egypt, agreement with Israel on the limits of the and Syria. The agreement reiterated that Assembly for a resolution in this respect2. 2 2. UN Charter, article 35. This resolution will not be binding and 2. Joe Maakaroun, US fears new Meanwhile, certain preventive mechanisms EEZ, the current ongoing UN mediation it was a truce agreement that acknowledged Lebanon- Israel Tensions over acts as an acknowledgement of Lebanon’s can be taken to avoid engaging in a serves as an option to reach such an territorial borders and not a peace Hydrocarbons, Assafir, 7 February rights only. 2012. http://www.al-monitor.com/ maritime conflict. These measures may agreement. agreement with Israel. The agreement pulse/security/01/02/us-interested- 3. GA resolutions: 61/194 (20 December was supervised by a Mixed Armistice in-the-energy-file.html include: 2006), 62/188 (19 December 207), The UN General Assembly has already 63/211 ( 19 December 2008), 64/195 Commission that reported a continuous 2.2.2 Protest at UN Security Council (21 December 2009), 65/147 (10 issued five resolutions3 concerning Oil • An agreement with the oil company breaching of the agreement. February 2011) slick on Lebanese shores following the operating on Israeli maritime boundary to Lebanon has already protested that Israel’s 2006 wars. Israel has not complied with abstain from any activities that would lead declared EEZ infringes on its southern and Lebanon could follow the same mechanism, any of the compensation obligations to the usurping of Lebanon’s oil and gas. west southern EEZ limit3. by requesting a UN Security Council 4. GA resolution ), 65/147 (10 Febru- resolution followed by a similar negotiation established by these resolutions.4 3. Refer to section 4.1.1 ary 2011) http://www.un.int/wcm/ • A request to the UN to monitor the Lebanon could request that the Security webdav/site/lebanon/shared/docu- procedure to conclude an agreement ments/General%20Assembly%20 disputed zone in order to prevent Council issues a resolution acknowledging Resolutions/A-RES-65-147%20 with Israel. 2.2.4 Advisory opinion from the ICJ breaching of Lebanon’s right to its oil and this infringement and calling upon Israel (2011)%20Oil%20slick%20on%20 Lebanese%20shores..pdf Lebanon may seek an advisory opinion gas. This mechanism would be similar to to rectify its northern EEZ limit accordingly. There have been various precedents from the International Court of Justice the UN’s monitoring role on Lebanon’s concerning resolution through the UN concerning the limits of its southern EEZ southern territorial border. Nevertheless, it is important to note Security Council concerning Lebanon- 5. ICJ Statute, article 36. boundary5. This procedure is initiated that relying solely on a Security Council Israel: unilaterally and does not require Israel’s Notwithstanding the above mentioned resolution has limited efficiency. if the • Resolution 425 (1978) on the Immediate acceptance of the ICJ’s jurisdiction. options, an array of procedures can be UN Security Council does not enforce its Cessation of Israel Military Action against pursued to further ascertain Lebanon’s implementation on Israel. (see below Lebanon and withdrawal of its forces An advisory opinion is not binding, rights: Precedents concerning resolution from all Lebanese territory. This was but combined with other settlement through the UN Security Council). followed by resolution 426 (1978) on the mechanisms can serve as a valid declaration However, a UN resolution could serve as Establishment of the UN Interim Forces 2.2.1 Resort to UN mediation of Lebanon’s rights that strengthens its a basis for a maritime boundary agreement for an initial period of 6 months. Israel did position vis-à-vis any contradicting claims. Israel’s linking of the maritime boundary between Lebanon and Israel. not withdraw totally as per the resolution. conflict to a comprehensive peace 78 Conflict Prevention and Peaceful Mechanisms for Settlement of Lebanon’s Maritime Disputes Conflict Prevention and Peaceful Mechanisms for Settlement of Lebanon’s Maritime Disputes 79

2.2.5 Litigation Lebanon has not submitted a statement • The ICJ is mandated to resolve conflicts Precedent concerning Compensation of consent on the ICJ’s jurisdiction. of legal nature, in this case regarding the Commission: The ICJ is mandated to adjudicate legal With respect to filing a law suit against geographical maritime boundaries, • Upon the recommendation of the UN questions related to various issues Israel at the ICJ, there exists two different irrespective of a state’s position. Its mandate General Assembly, the UN Security Council including: (a) sovereignty over certain opinions in this respect; One particular is thus linked to the legal conflict aspect issued resolution no 687 (1991) that set up territories and frontier disputes; (b) those opinion of a Lebanese jurist, Edmond of the relationship between the countries a Compensation Commission in 1991 to concerning maritime delimitations and Naim, claims that suing the Israeli and not the issue of statehood. provide Kuwait with compensation for other law of the sea disputes; (c) cases government is an acknowledgement damages caused by the Iraqi invasion 5. .املرجع نفسه .involving enforcement of contracts and 1 of its statehood. There have been various precedents violation of certain principles of customary concerning attempts by Lebanon to sue • In 2008, the UN General Assembly 1. UN Handbook on Peaceful Settlement international law.1 A judicial settlement 2. Leila Hatoum, Government Studies of Disputes between States, p. 76-77 “Whether we are at war with Israel in Options to Sue Israel for War Crimes, Israel at the ICJ: decided in resolution 63/211 asking Israel through the International Court of Justice Daily Star, 22 August 2006. Available the legal sense of Public International • In 1996, following Qana massacre, to compensate Lebanon on environmental (ICJ) is not only binding like arbitration, at: http://www.dailystar.com.lb/ Law or not, Lebanon has not to date News/Politics/Aug/22/Government- the Ministry of Justice prepared a report damages caused by the oil spilled from but also final and without appeal.2 studies-options-to-sue-Israel-for-war- recognized Israel as per International crimes.ashx#axzz1to9e3HyM concerning the legal basis for Israeli Jiyyeh station during the 2006 war, and 2. ICJ statute, article 60. law methodology. As such, if we sue liability and the competent adjudicating to establish the Eastern Mediterranean Lebanon and Israel are parties to the ICJ, Israel at the International Court of Justice 3. authority1. However, the report was not Oil Spill Restoration Trust Fund to provide مجلس الوزراء ّيفوض رزق مقاضاة إسرائيل however, settlement by the ICJ is subject given full effect. assistance to countries affected. Contribution ويدعو الى االبتعاد عن لغة التشكيك والتخوين، and Israel accepted this prosecution, this .روال اخلطيب، جريدة املستقبل، to the recognition by the both parties 3/10/2006 3. Letter submitted by the Israeli would result in the recognition by the http://www.almustaqbal.com/ to this fund is voluntary6. Israel has not concerned of the jurisdiction of the Minister of Foreign Affairs to the ICJ Lebanese State of the statehood of Israel.”4 storiesv4.aspx?storyid=198588 • In 2006, the Council of Ministers complied with this resolution and the concerning the advisory opinion on courts. The recognition may be explicitly the legal consequences arising from authorized the Minister of Justice to UN Security Council has not taken any expressed by way of a special agreement the construction of the wall built by Other experts claim that it is possible to 4. SC Resolution 262 (31 December prepare a report on the mechanisms and measures to force Israel to comply with Israel, 29 January 2004. http://www. between the States parties to a dispute 1968) http://daccess-dds-ny. icj-cij.org/docket/files/131/1579.pdf sue the Israeli government at the ICJ without un.org/doc/RESOLUTION/GEN/ procedures to the sue Israel.2 The report the resolution. (compromis) that confers jurisdiction NR0/248/43/IMG/NR024843. acknowledging its statehood because: was carried out with the help of national over the maritime boundary to the ICJ, or pdf?OpenElement • The act of acknowledging statehood and international experts, and presented • Another complementary fund, known implicitly inferred if the respondent state is a sovereign prerogative that a state 5. Security Council decision 687 (3 a legal argument on the possibility of as the Lebanon Recovery Fund, was does not object to the jurisdiction of the ادمون نعيم، حروب إسرائيل ضد لبنان، “حق .4 April 1991) http://daccess-dds-ny. decides on unilaterally and carries out by adjudication without acknowledging Israel’s established upon the request of the الدولة اللبنانية بالتعويض عن األضرار التي Court thus indicating its tacit approval to un.org/doc/RESOLUTION/GEN/ 5 حلقت مبواطنيها بسبب قصف إسرائيل مجمع a clear declaration . NR0/596/23/IMG/NR059623. statehood. The legal analysis has not found Lebanese government. It enables donors ّ عسكري لألمم املتحدة، منشورات مجلس النواب settlement by the ICJ. pdf?OpenElement consensus among other legal experts.3 to pool their resources and rapidly 1997، ص. 201 • Even though Israel is a member of provide funding in the aftermath of the The Israeli government submitted to the UN, this membership is binding 6. General Assembly Resolution July 2006 war. As stated in its terms of the UN Secretary General its consent 64/147 (10 February 2011) http:// 2.3 Can Lebanon sue Israel for towards Lebanon but it does not ensure www.un.int/wcm/webdav/site/ reference, the Recovery Fund will finance 5. James R. Crawford, The Creation regarding the jurisdiction of the ICJ in lebanon/shared/documents/Gen- compensation if oil or gas was of States in International law, Oxford any acknowledgement by Lebanon of eral%20Assembly%20Resolutions/A- extracted from the territory of priority recovery and reconstruction Scholarship online, January 2012, p. 1950 for a period of five years that was RES-65-147%20(2011)%20Oil%20 20. http://fds.oup.com/www.oup. Israel’s statehood. Similarly, the ICJ is projects that are approved by the renewed in 1956. However, in anticipation slick%20on%20Lebanese%20shores.pdf Lebanon? co.uk/pdf/0-19-922842-6.pdf the main judicial body of the UN (article Government and that can be executed of litigation against it, Israel terminated 92 of the UN charter), and Israel’s Precedent concerning compensation with the support of Participating UN its acceptance of the Court’s jurisdiction 7. Lebanese Recovery Fund membership in this body does not ensue resolution by the UN Security Council: Organizations within the scope and time in 19853. http://www.un.org.lb/Subpage. any acknowledgement by Lebanon of aspx?pageid=299 • Resolution 262 (1968) called upon Israel frame of national priorities. 7 بهيج طبارة، مقاضاة إسرائيل: حقيقة ام .6 6 to pay compensation to Lebanon for the . its statehood سراب، شبكة فولتير، 18/5/2009 8. The last annual report on activities destruction of airliners at the Beirut • Both funds have been integrated, but implemented under the Lebanon international airport4. The Resolution has Recovery Fund was in 2010. http:// have not received sufficient donations to www.un.org.lb/Library/Files/LRF/ not been implemented by Israel. continue the necessary long term studies LRF%202010%20Annual%20Prog- ress%20Report%20.pdf and cleaning of oil slick projects8. 80 Conflict Prevention and Peaceful Mechanisms for Settlement of Lebanon’s Maritime Disputes Conflict Prevention and Peaceful Mechanisms for Settlement of Lebanon’s Maritime Disputes 81

2.4 What are the ramifications of This was in fact the position of Norway, Accepting the 500 km2 zone means starting middle and south. Based on this information, the US proposed solution? for instance, which held to its sovereign a conflict with Israel on the remaining zone; a pragmatic approach may lie in investing The US, through its mediator Fredrick right over its entire economic zone in its that is, Israel will claim that it is an Israeli in non-disputed areas rich in resources Hof, declared that it is convinced that negotiations with Russia on its maritime zone. Consequently, Lebanon’s negotiating instead of jeopardizing sovereignty rights 500km2 of the disputed maritime area borders in the Barents Sea and the Atlantic. position will transform into a defensive one. over the south western EEZ area. with Israel belongs to Lebanon and Based on this right, Norway rejected any proposed that Lebanon begins exploring “temporary measures” in the disputed •If the US and the UN are convinced that •Assuming theoretically that the US 2 within this area pending a final agreement zone - except for those measures related the entire 860 km zone is Lebanese, why proposal is in fact a solution, how viable on the remaining 360km2 disputed area. to protecting fisheries. defer diplomatic pressure for the recognition is this solution? Who would control the of the whole disputed area to a later stage? remaining 360 km2? Will another blue Neither Lebanon nor Israel replied formally •the principle of the integrity of land Also, are there any guarantees that future line be drawn in the sea and put under to the US proposal, however, this proposal ascertains Lebanon’s full sovereignty over endeavors shall succeed in recognition of UN supervision? What guarantees Israel’s has created an internal debate in Lebanon its entire territory. Similarly, the principle the whole disputed area as Lebanese and abstinence from undertaking any activities between those who support this solution of integrity of Lebanese territory should the amendment of the Israeli-Cypriot EEZ that jeopardize the region’s resources? as a “pragmatic option” with the view extend to Lebanon’s maritime zones, and agreement accordingly? of continuing UN and US diplomatic dividing the Lebanese EEZ undermines Even if Israel claims that this area will endeavors to restore Lebanon’s whole this integrity. • Lebanese Minister of Energy, Gibran be a neutral zone and that it would not rights over the whole disputed area, and Bassil, revealed that the quantity of gas conduct any activity there, Israel has a those who refuse the US proposal and •Lebanon’s current position is that of no available at the edge of the disputed area history full of violations of the Lebanese assert Lebanon’s right over the whole dispute exists with Israel, because the with Israel (around 12 thousand billion sovereignty and borders. Would then 2 disputed area since the delimitation of 860 km zone is Lebanese according to cubic feet) is only a sample of the resource guarantees by the UN and the US be maritime boundaries was conducted in the demarcation process conducted by quantities that Lebanon possesses, noting enough to ward off similar attacks in accordance with international standards the Lebanese army. Negotiations with that even larger quantities exist in the north, the sea? and methods. Israel aim only to establish the geodata submitted by Lebanon to the UN, which This debate raises a number of issues: are in contradiction with the data submitted •Lebanon’s right in the exclusive economic by Israel to the UN, and those agreed zone that it determined based on upon between Israel and Cyprus in the international law, and its right to exploit Maritime Boundary Agreement between its natural resources within this zone is the two countries. Consequently, Lebanon a sovereign indivisible right that is not has not yet lost any inch of this zone. subject to bargaining. Annexes 84 Annexes Annexes 85

Lebanon Geographic Coordinates Deposited in 2010 - Southern Borders

Annex 1- Lebanon geographics coordinates and letters addressed to the UN

Addendum to Lebanon Geographic Coordinates Deposited in 2010 - Southern Borders 86 Annexes Annexes 87 88 Annexes Annexes 89

Lebanon Geographic Coordinates Deposited in 2011 - South-West-North Borders

Lebanon Letter to UN - July 2011 90 Annexes Annexes 91

Annex 2- EEZ Agreements in the Mediterranean

Lebanon Letter of 3 September 2011 EGY-CYP EEZ Agreement ISR-JOR Maritime Boundary Agreement 92 Annexes Annexes 93

ISR-CYP EEZ Agreement 94 Annexes Annexes 95

Annex 3- Lebanese Legislation Concerning Maritime Boundries

Decree 138- LEB Terrirorial Sea 96 Annexes Annexes 97

Decree No. 6433 - Delineation of LEB EEZ Lebanese Petroleum Law 98 Annexes Annexes 99 100 Annexes Annexes 101 102 Annexes Annexes 103