Interior Minister Ayelet Shaked clarified her stance on Israel’s maritime border agreement with Lebanon, approved Wednesday by Israel’s Security Cabinet.
Shaked – the sole dissenting vote on the agreement – issued a lengthy statement on the issue Wednesday night, saying that although she agrees there are advantages is reaching a settlement on the maritime border, the agreement should not come in the form of a surrender to Lebanon’s Iranian terror proxy, Hezbollah.
It is also important to note that caretaker Prime Minister Yair Lapid ignored a recommendation by Attorney-General Gali Baharav-Miara, who said the agreement must be approved by the Knesset since the current government is transitional, and the agreement once signed will be irreversible, em>Globes reported.
Shaked also categorically opposed Lapid’s move to prevent Knesset lawmakers from voting on the agreement — as did Otzma Yehudit chair and MK Itamar Ben Gvir, and Likud chair and Opposition leader Benjamin Netanyahu. Ben Gvir said he intends to file a petition with Israel’s Supreme Court, requesting the court block execution of the agreement.
“I agree that there are advantages in reaching a settlement with Lebanon regarding the maritime border,” Shaked said in her statement, “But not this way. Not out of surrender to threats by the enemy. Something serious happened here,” she said. “Either we confirm the agreement, or we reach a military confrontation with Hezbollah.
“When Yair Lapid himself writes that according to the agreement ‘Israel receives 100 percent of Karish [gas field]’ he is actually saying that without an agreement we will not be able to produce gas from Karish.
“The Karish gas reservoir was ours; it will remain ours and there is no discussion about any achievement that it remains ours. A strong country doesn’t do such a thing,” she said. “The agreement has economic, political and security advantages, but it should have been reached in a different way.
“If, as Lapid says, this is a “historic” agreement, then when there is a major and historic move, broad public support is needed. It certainly cannot rely on a transitional government that has lost public support,” Shaked said.
“The Knesset, which is sovereign, must approve such an agreement before elections. If it depended only on me – I would veto this agreement as long as it is not being brought to a vote in the Israeli Knesset.
“Lapid wanted a political achievement and therefore compromised with Lebanon and Nasrallah. The only thing missing was the Yesh Atid jingle in the background,” Shaked said. “And one more word about the left side of the government that makes sure to speak all the time in the name of democratic values — there is a trampling of Israeli democracy here.
“If [former Prime Minister Benjamin] Netanyahu had reached such an agreement three weeks before elections, Lapid and his friends would have shouted that it was the end of democracy and raised the barricades,” she noted.
“The right thing to do is to bring the agreement to the Knesset for approval.”
In his own statement, Netanyahu emphasized the security risks presented by the agreement.
“Hezbollah will use the billions from the gas to arm itself with missiles and rockets against Israeli citizens; Iran will position itself against Rosh Hanikra and against Israel’s gas reserves,” he warned.
“This weak and amateur transitional government has no mandate to make such a dangerous decision, just days before elections.”
