Ministerial Council for Security and Political Affairs in the Zionist entity held a three-and-a-half-hour session in Tel Aviv on Thursday devoted to discussing the Lebanese observations on the draft agreement on the demarcation of the maritime borders, as received in Beirut by the American mediator Amos Hochstein.
However, as was expected, no decisions were taken from the session, and not much was leaked from its discussions. Although the Zionist media indicated that the Council rejected the agreement, in fact the rejection was related to the Lebanese remarks on it, and the difference between the two matters is great. Rejecting the agreement means ending negotiations and starting a path of escalation, while rejecting the remarks is a lure for American intervention in order to reach a settlement.
Despite Sanas adherence to the issue of disbursing the salaries of all employees, as a prelude to renewing the truce, the core of the rams between it and Riyadh may go beyond that stumbling block, to the gains that the two sides can generally achieve. In light of this situation, the United Nations unsurprisingly leaned last week to the Saudi side by holding Ansarullah responsible for thwarting the agreement to extend the ceasefire. The latter continues to affirm its readiness for all scenarios, including targeting Saudi oil industries, amid indications that this gray period will not be long. Time before its outcome becomes clear.