Why the Israel Lebanon War of 2006 was just another oil war

1. The Israel-Lebanon War of 2006
and the Ceyhan-Haifa Pipeline
Iakovos Alhadeff
Copyright 2014 by
Iakovos Alhadeff
Published by Iakovos Alhadeff at Smashwords

2. Table of Contents
The Baku-Ceyhan Pipeline
The Ceyhan-Haifa Pipeline
The Israel-Lebanon War of 2006

3. The Baku-Ceyhan Pipeline
I have written a lot in my previous essays about the Baku-Ceyhan and the Baku-Supsa
pipelines (white lines on the map), as the only American success in the Caspian Sea
region, a region which is controlled by the Russians and the Iranians. With the help of
the only NATO friendly country of the Caspian Sea, Azerbaijan, the Americans
managed to construct a pipeline that bypassed both Iran and Russia, using the energy
corridor Azerbaijan-Georgia-Turkey, transferring Caspian energy to the
Mediterranean Sea (Ceyhan) and to the Black Sea (Supsa).
They did so, in order to provide the European markets with an alternative to the
Russian energy, thus decreasing the Russian influence over Europe, hoping that
eventually they would manage to influence some of the other corrupted dictators of
the Caspian countries too, who are currently under Russian influence, since
Azerbaijan’s energy reserves are clearly inadequate to compete with the Russian ones.
At the following table you can see the Caspian region reserves by country.

4. As you can see at the above table, the Americans and the Europeans need the oil rich
Kazakhstan in order to fill their oil pipelines, and they need the natural gas rich
Turkmenistan in order to fill their future natural gas pipelines, if they finally develop
a natural gas pipeline network. Alternatively they can take Iran on their side, since
Iran is twice as rich as Russia in terms of oil, and its natural gas reserves amount to
2/3 of the Russian ones, and therefore Iran can clearly compete with Russia.
The Ceyhan-Haifa Pipeline
Moreover they planned to construct a new underwater four leg pipeline from Ceyhan
to Haifa, which would carry crude oil, natural gas, electricity and water from Turkey
to Israel, which would distribute it in the whole region, but also to the port of Eilat
and then to South Asia, again bypassing Iran (red line on the map). You can read
about the Ceyhan-Haifa pipeline at the above European Commission link, pages 10
and 11, tables 3.2.3 and 3.2.7, or you can see it visually at the following map.
http :// ec . europa . eu / energy / observatory / doc / country /2009_12_ turkey . pdf

5. Source:
http://geopoliticsrst.blogspot.gr/2012/04/complexity-of-eastern-med-energy-games.
html
Also note that the rich in oil Kirkuk in North Iraq (Iraqi Kurdistan), is also connected
to the Turkish port of Ceyhan, with the pipeline Kirkuk-Ceyhan (yellow line on the
map). Therefore the underwater Ceyhan-Haifa connection would actually be a
connection of Baku and Kirkuk with the Israeli port of Eilat in the Red Sea, and
finally to South Asia (Pakistan, India, China) bypassing Iran. After describing the
Ceyhan pipelines and before turning to the Israel-Lebanon War of 2006, I must also
say a few words about the economic and geopolitical implications of these pipelines.
An obvious consequence of the Baku-Ceyhan, Baku-Supsa pipelines was that the
Russians were very angry, since the Americans and the Europeans could compete
with them in Europe if they finally manage to reach countries rich in oil and natural
gas. Another consequence was that Iran was even angrier than Russia, since the Baku-
Eilat pipeline would transfer Caspian energy to South East Asia bypassing Iran. As
you can see on the map, the shortest way to provide Caspian Energy to South Asia is
through Iran.

6. However with the Baku-Ceyhan and the Ceyhan-Haifa-Eilat pipelines, another
financially viable route was created, in order to provide Caspian energy to South Asia
bypassing Iran, since for most of the distance (Baku-Eilat) only pipelines would be
used, which is a very efficient way of transferring energy, and tankers would only be
used from the port of Eilat. This was of course very bad for Iran’s exports, but also for
its geopolitical significance.
I have said many times in the past how important it is for Iran to construct a pipeline
network that would connect it to Pakistan, India and finally China (black line on the
map), since it would make Iran much more competitive than Saudi Arabia, its main
competitor in oil markets, and Qatar, its main competitor in natural gas markets, since
as you can see on the map, Saudi Arabia and Qatar cannot be connected to South Asia
with a pipeline network. Geographically it is only possible for Iran to do so. For a
detailed description on the war against Iran, in order to prevent it from connecting
itself through pipelines to Pakistan, India and China, see my previous essays.
Therefore the Saudis and the Qataris do not want a pipeline connection between Iran,
Pakistan, India and China, since it would make Iran more competitive in these
markets which are currently dominated by the Saudis in oil sales and by the Qataris in
natural gas sales. Moreover the Americans do not want this to happens, since it would
connect China to the Persian Gulf, and it would enable China to obtain Persian Gulf
energy bypassing the Indian Ocean which is dominated by the American Navy, which
makes it possible for the Americans to ‘unplug’ China very easily in the case of a war.
China partially fixed this weakness with the 400 billion dollar mammoth deal with
Russia, according to which Russia will supply China with natural gas for the next 30
years.
The Indians, who are a key connection between Iran and China, do not want to be so
heavily dependent for their energy imports on the politically unstable Persian Gulf,
since there is always the possibility of a ‘hot’ war, which would prevent access to the
Persian Gulf and to energy supplies. They have therefore been constantly looking for
the past years for a competitive alternative to the Persian Gulf energy supply.

7. Moreover having access to many energy sources is not only good in terms of energy
security, but it also ensures better energy prices.
For Indians the Iran-Pakistan-India-China pipeline was one of the Persian Gulf
alternatives, since even if access to the Persian Gulf by sea was prevented due to a
war, supply could continue through the pipelines, and they have therefore many times
in the past tried to promote this project, without however so far being successful. On
the other hand this pipeline would pass through Pakistan, India’s main enemy, and it
had its own weakness in terms of energy security.
Therefore the Baku-Eilat connection would offer India an alternative to the Persian
Gulf, which would have nothing to do with Pakistan. The following Asia Times
article calls the Ceyhan-Eilat pipeline a ‘lifeline’ for India, since it is an alternative to
the Persian Gulf and at the same time it is a source of energy independent from
Pakistan.
http :// www . atimes . com / atimes / South _ Asia / JB 27 Df 03 . html
You can also read about how important the Ceyhan-Eilat pipeline would be for India
in the following Times of India article.

8. http :// timesofindia . indiatimes . com / india / Turkey - offers - alternative - to - Iran -
pipeline / articleshow /2770237 . cms
This is one more article on the subject from Pakistan Defence, but you can find many
other articles if you simply google ‘Ceyhan-Haifa Pipeline and India’ or something
similar.
http://defence.pk/threads/turkey-offers-alternative-to-iran-pipeline.9754/
Therefore the Baku-Eilat pipeline would not only bypass Iran, but it would reduce the
pressure on the part of the South Asian countries for promoting the badly needed for
Iran project of the Iran-Pakistan-India-China pipeline. Could it be worse for Iran?
That’s why Saudi Arabia and Qatar did not object to the Ceyhan-Eilat connection,
because they realize that if the South Asian countries do not have an alternative to the
Persian Gulf, they will press harder for a land connection with Iran.
The Saudis and the Qataris can compete with oil and natural gas flowing from Eilat to
South Asia, but they cannot compete with oil and natural gas flowing from Iran to
South Asia through pipelines. After this large introduction I can finally turn to the
Israel-Lebanon War of 2006.
The Israel-Lebanon War of 2006
As you can read at section ‘Inauguration’ of the following Wikipedia link, the Baku-
Ceyhan pipeline, it was inaugurated at its Ceyhan terminal on 13.7.2006.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baku%E2%80%93Tbilisi
%E2%80%93Ceyhan_pipeline#Inauguration
As you can read at the following Wikipedia link on 12.7.2006, one day before the
Ceyhan inauguration, Hezbollah terrorists attacked the Israelis starting the 2006
Israel-Lebanon War.

9. http :// en . wikipedia . org / wiki /2006_ Lebanon _ War
More specifically, the second paragraph of the above link says:
‘The conflict was precipitated by the Zar'it-Shtula incident. On 12 July 2006, militants
from the group Hezbollah fired rockets at Israeli border towns as a diversion for
an anti-tank missile attack on two armored Humveespatrolling the Israeli side of the
border fence. The ambush left three soldiers dead. Two Israeli soldiers were abducted
and taken by Hezbollah to Lebanon. Five more were killed in Lebanon, in a failed
rescue attempt. Hezbollah demanded the release of Lebanese prisoners held by Israel
in exchange for the release of the abducted soldiers. Israel refused and responded
with airstrikes and artillery fire on targets in Lebanon. Israel attacked both Hezbollah
military targets and Lebanese civilian infrastructure, including Beirut's Rafic Hariri
International Airport. The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) launched a ground invasion
of southern Lebanon. Israel also imposed an air and naval blockade. Hezbollah then
launched more rockets into northern Israel and engaged the IDF in guerrilla
warfare from hardened position’
Moreover at the end of the first paragraph of the above link you can read the
following:
‘Due to unprecedented Iranian military support to Hezbollah before and during the
war, some consider it the first round of the Iran–Israel proxy conflict, rather than a
continuation of the Arab-Israeli conflict.’
In section ‘Contacts with Hezbollah’ of the following Wikipedia link, you can read
the following:
‘Russian intelligence agencies have a history of contacts with Lebanese Shia
organizations, such as Amal Movement and Hezbollah Russian-made anti-tank
weapons played significant role in Hezbollah operations against Israel Defense
Forces during 2006 Israel-Lebanon conflict. It was claimed that "Russian Fajr-1
and Fajr-3 rockets, Russian AT-5 Spandrel antitank missiles and Kornet antitank

10. rockets"have been supplied to Hezbollah
through Syria and Iran Muslim GRUdetachments from Chechnya were transferred
to Lebanon independently of the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon to guard
the Russian military engineers (sent to Lebanon to restore the damaged roads) and "to
improve Moscow’s image in the Arab and Muslim world.’
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russia_and_the_Iran
%E2%80%93Israel_proxy_conflict#Contacts_with_Hezbollah
In section ‘Arab League’ of the following Wikipedia link you can read:
‘The Arab League has called Hezbollah's attacks on Israel "unexpected, inappropriate,
and irresponsible acts," in the words of Saudi Arabia's foreign minister, PrinceSaud
Al-Faisal. The Arab League says they have “fears of widening of tension and possible
Israeli strike against Syria,“ “It’s up to the resistance — both the Lebanese and the
Palestinian — to decide what they are doing and why are they fighting.
Following a meeting of Arab League foreign ministers in Cairo on 16 July, Secretary-
General Amr Moussa declared that "The Middle East process is dead" and that "The
only way to revive the peace process is to take it back to the Security Council’.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_reactions_to_the_2006_Lebanon_War#.C2.
A0Arab_League
At section United States of the following Wikipedial link you can read:
‘Following the Zar'it-Shtula incident, the United States government condemned what
it called Hezbollah's "unprovoked act of terrorism", and called for the "immediate and
unconditional release" of the soldiers.
The United States rushed a delivery of satellite and laser-guided bombs to Israel, at
Israel's request. The shipment was not publicly announced.
In addition, the United States has thus far rejected what it considers to be meaningless
calls for a cease-fire . "The Bush administration has openly rejected calls for a
ceasefire. The New York Times reports that U.S. and Israeli officials have agreed the
bombings will continue for another week. "On Tuesday [18 July 2006] Secretary of
State Condoleezza Rice rejected an immediate ceasefire and said one could only occur
once certain conditions are met.’

11. http :// en . wikipedia . org / wiki / International _ reactions _ to _ the _2006_ Lebanon _ War # . C 2 .
A 0 United _ States
At section Iran of the following Wikipedia link you can read:
‘Foreign ministry spokesman Hamid-Reza Asefi condemned Israel's response stating,
"The Zionist regime is desperate because of the resistance put up by regional Muslim
nations and is now resorting to blind tactics against the innocent people of Lebanon
with full US backing."[27] Iran also adds that an Israeli attack against Syriawould be
considered an attack against the entire Muslim world and it would bring about a
"fierce response."[28] Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, quoted by
the Iranian News Agency, said "The Zionists think that they are victims of Hitler, but
they act like Hitler and behave worse than Genghis Khan.’
http :// en . wikipedia . org / wiki / International _ reactions _ to _ the _2006_ Lebanon _ War # . C 2 .
A 0 Iran
At section Iraq of the following Wikipedia link you will read that Iraq condemned the
Israelis.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_reactions_to_the_2006_Lebanon_War#.C2.
A0Iraq
Even though the pipelines were good for Iraq, since Iraq could export its oil to South
Asia bypassing Iran, Iraq condemned Israel. The reason is that after the fall of
Saddam Hussein in 2003, an Iraq had a Shiite governemnt, and even though it was
pro-American, it was very closely cooperating with the Shiites of Iran, and Iraq did
not feel that there was any need to bypass its ally.
At section Russia of the following Wikipedia link you will read that Russia
condemned the Israelis.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_reactions_to_the_2006_Lebanon_War#.C2.
A0Russia

12. However for the Russians things were more complicated than the Iranians, because
the Russians were of course against the Baku-Ceyhan pipeline, but I do not think that
they were against the Ceyhan-Haifa four leg pipeline, since Russia and Turkey are
very well connect with pipeline networks, because Russia is the main natural gas
supplier of Turkey, and Russia could use the Ceyhan-Haifa pipeline to sell its own
natural gas.
There is already the Blue Stream natural gas pipeline that connects Russia and Turkey
under the Black Sea, and they are planning the construction of the Blue Stream 2
pipeline, that would connect Samsun to Ceyhan as you can see on the following 2
maps.
Source:
http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Turkey-Israel-to-build-Mediterranean-pipeline-
2498862.php

13. Source:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Stream
Therefore the Russians could sell to the whole region their natural gas through the
route Samsun-Ceyhan and Ceyhan-Haifa. However this is back in 2006, and the
problems in the American-Israeli relations are not present yet nor is the Israel-Russia
rapprochement, and therefore the Russians have to support their traditional allies i.e.
Syria, Iran and Lebanon.
It is therefore quite simple to explain the Middle East wars if you look at the oil and
natural gas that is always hidden in the background of these wars. However the
Israelis have some problems of their own with Lebanon, since their natural gas
supplies are near the Israeli-Lebanese borders, and the Lebanese claim that a part of
these natural gas reserves belong to them as you can see at the following two maps.

14. Source:
http :// news . nationalgeographic . com / news / energy /2012/07/120703- israel - new - natural -
gas /

15. Source:
http :// www . foreignaffairs . com / articles /139069/ yuri - m - zhukov / trouble - in - the - eastern -
mediterranean - sea
Therefore the Israelis and the Lebanese, besides all the disputes I have mentioned so
far, have the natural gas disputes too. However it is mainly Iran that owns Hezbollah,
since it is Iran that provides for Hezbollah funding and weapons, and it is on Iran’s
orders that Hezbollah acts. Iran has done with Hezbollah, what Qatar has done in
Gaza with Hamas. Qatar owns Hamas. It provides its funding and weapons and
through this funding Hamas managed to provide financial support to the people of
Gaza and won the elections in 2006, and did not conduct other elections since that
time.

16. Therefore in the same way that Iran bought Hezbollah at the northern border of Israel,
Qatar bought Hamas at the Southern borders of Israel (Gaza). For the relationship
between Qatar and Hamas and Iran and Hezbollah you can simply google ‘Qatar
Hamas’ and ‘Iran Hezbollah’ to find hundreds of articles.
The main dispute between Israel, Hamas and Hezbollah is natural gas. Israel is trying
to provide an alternative source of natural gas to Europe, either through Cyprus and
Greece or by liquefying its natural gas and exporting it with ships. Iran and Qatar are
the 2nd and 3rd richest countries in the world in terms of natural gas reserves, and Israel
is closer to Europe and would provide a cheaper alternative even though it has far less
reserves, and why not in Africa too. Recently I wrote an essay about the 15 billion
dollar natural gas agreement between Israel and Jordan.
Therefore even though the Shiite Muslims of Iran and the Sunni Muslims of Qatar are
the 2nd and 3rd richest countries in the world in natural gas reserves, and therefore hate
each other as we can see with the war in Syria and Iraq now, they both do not want
Israel to provide an alternative to the natural gas markets of Europe and Africa, with
the help of other Mediterranean countries too, like Egypt, Greece and Cyprus. This is
the reason Qatar is pushing so hard for the Muslim Brotherhood to come back to
power in Egypt, since the Brotherhood is under its influence. With the Muslim
Brotherhood in power Qatar could ensure that Egypt would not undercut its prices.
Therefore in the same way that Iran bought Hezbollah at the Israeli-Lebanese borders
(black circle in the following map), Qatar bought Hams in Gaza (blue circle), and in
the same way the Sunni Muslim terrorists of Hamas take orders from Qatar and
Turkey, the Shiite Muslim terrorists of Hezbollah take orders from Iran. Therefore
Qatar and Iran can use Hamas and Hezbollah to launce energy wars on Israel
whenever they want.
As you can read at the following article, Hamas and Hezbollah had very good
relations, until the great war between the Sunni Muslims of Saudi Arabia and Qatar
and the Shiite Muslims of Iran and Iran broke out, as I was saying in my essay ‘The
Energy War Between U.S.A. and Russia’.

17. http://www.wilsoncenter.org/islamists/article/the-marriage-and-divorce-hamas-and-hezbollah
Source:
http :// www . nektarinanonprofit . com /2012/03/ israel . html
Therefore it can be seen that the Israel-Lebanon War of 2006 was another hot energy
war, in the sequence of the hot and cold energy wars taking place in the Middle East
for the last one hundred years. Any analysis about the wars in the Middle East that is
not based on oil and natural gas is always totally inadequate.