On 15 September 2020, the COVID-19 figures were not the first of the day. Something was happening on Tuesday to which few were indifferent: at the White House, sitting at the same table, Bahrain’s Foreign Minister Abdullatif Al Zayani, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, now former U.S. President Donald Trump and UAE Foreign Minister Abdullah bin Zayed, signed the Abraham Accords.
The historic agreements sealed the normalization of diplomatic relations between the state of Israel, the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain. The latter joined, in this way, a group to which Egypt (1979) and Jordan (1994) already belonged.
These agreements were also watched closely by Saudi Arabia, Sudan and Morocco.
Reactions were immediate:
“Let’s overcome any political division. Let’s put all the cynicism aside. Let us feel on this day the pulse of history. When the pandemic is gone, the peace we make today will endure,” Netanyahu said.
“The pursuit of peace is an innate principle. However, principles are effectively carried out when they are transformed into action. Today we are already witnessing a change in the heart of the Middle East, a change that will send hope to everyone,” said Abdullah bin Zayed Al-Nahyan.
From the Democratic Party of the United States (now in government) dissenting voices emerged in relation to these agreements: “What we run the risk of doing here is driving an arms race. Today we can sell the F-35s and MQ-9s to the UAE, but the Saudis are going to want it, the Qatari have already requested it, and that only fuels Iran’s interest in continuing to develop its own military programming,” Democratic Sen. Chris Murphy argued in December.
To understand a little more about the impact of these agreements, I wanted to share some reflections:
The importance of Abraham’s agreements
I consider the “historic” label to be accurate in describing the Abraham Accords. Since its founding in 1948, Israel had only been able to establish diplomatic relations with two countries in the area (Egypt, in 1979, and Jordan, in 1994). It has taken 26 years to expand this reality. Today, it is no longer just four countries in the area that recognize Israel; this group has also been joined by Morocco.
It is not difficult to project that trade, military and social relations between these countries will grow.
In my opinion, the Abraham Accords have prompted the creation of an exclusive club that would bring together countries from the Middle East, Asia and Africa, marking a path in the area completely different from what had been seen until now.
What does it mean for Israel?
Since the 1970s, Israel and the Gulf countries have tried to activate some kind of relationships. Political and military collaborations between Israel and some Arab countries are well known, but official recognition of these relations has never been achieved. Therefore, the Abraham Accords represent the culmination of years of Israeli diplomacy in the quest to improve Israel’s situation in the area.
Previously covert relations will now develop openly and directly between these countries.
At the political level, these agreements show significant progress towards stability in the area. Socially, these agreements reflect an understanding between two historically antagonistic religions; that is, the neighbours have understood that they have to get along. Finally, economically, it is not difficult to intuit that Israel’s technological potential and the energy wealth (oil) of Gulf countries can generate a highly successful and cost-effective combination.
Participating Arab countries
These agreements mean radical change in the Middle East. For decades, countries in the area had kept Israel isolated. With the creation of this new bloc of allies, important steps can be taken to reduce instability in the area.
The Abraham Accords will impact the Arab world beyond the territories of the participating countries. These agreements mark an evolution not only in the Middle East, but also in North Africa and Eastern Europe. Many analysts agree that it’s only a matter of time before more countries join this club.
It is also becoming clear that the feeling of pan-Arab solidarity is in decline. Writer Ed Hussein has explained in several articles that Arab states, especially those in the Gulf, are beginning to create their own national profiles. In these new profiles, hatred of Israel and the Jews does feature; with weakening pan-Arab solidarity, the need for a unifying enemy also drops away.
The name chosen for the covenant conveys a strong symbolic message; Abraham is a prophet common to both the Jewish and Islamic religions.
And Palestine?
I believe that the Abraham Accords do not change the essence of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, but it does profoundly change its form and scope. This dispute is no longer only a matter between two countries; it involves the entire Middle East. Israel, for its part, has openly stated that the exit to the problem with Palestine is about improving relations with all countries in the area.
The board is changing. Not only is Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates pushing for these agreements, the Kingdom of Morocco, which chairs the Al-Quods committee, has also joined this new diplomatic scenario.
In general, these Arab countries have found that the only solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict lies in a mutual understanding: recognizing the State of Israel, recognizing Jerusalem as a multicultural international capital, and fostering a real ceasefire that allows religions and cultures to interact.
The key to these agreements is coexistence and give and take on both sides. For example, in order to achieve the signing of these agreements, Israel has promised the United Arab Emirates that no land from the West Bank will be formally annexed.
Will other countries join?
For the time being, the Abraham Accords have been signed by the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain and Morocco; there has also been a rapprochement between countries such as Sudan and Oman. Regardless of the reactions, these agreements will chart the future of the region.
Just as in the last century we saw the birth of clubs such as the European Union or NATO, today we will see the emergence of the Abraham Accords club, which has the potential to bring about profound changes in Asia, Europe and Africa, especially on issues of religious, economic and social coexistence.
Europe and the Abrahamic Agreements
Europe is obliged acknowledge its place at the edge of the frame. The United States has won a major diplomatic coup by becoming the mediator who managed to broker these agreements.
Historically, the events of the Middle East impact Europe. It is therefore critical that the EU generates a strong profile that also supports the resolutions of these agreements. Europe’s extensive diplomatic, social and economic experience could play an important role through a direct accompaniment to this club.
While it was the Trump Administration, which did not conduct the most delicate of foreign policies in the region, that developed these agreements, today Europe has the opportunity (taking advantage of a new administration in Washington) to support the Abraham Accords and play a role in them in the future.
What does this agreement represent for the future of the world?
The Abraham Accords are a path to the future of the region, and the change they user in is indisputable. Most major historical conflicts have been the product of political, social, religious, economic differences. Today we live in a world that understands that war is a waste and that conflict is a painful, unsustainable reality.
The Abraham Accords are creating a platform capable of sustaining socio-economic and geopolitical change in the region.
Some caveats
The first caveat is obvious: the religious aspect has been set aside from the discussion thus far.
A political and economic agreement should not necessarily be mistaken for a more fundamental religious rapprochement. The Abraham Accords rely more on the first and second aspects than on the third. Nevertheless, peace between Israel and Arab countries will lead to a significant exchange of investment, strategies and know-how. This opportunity can translate into growth and improvements in the quality of life of these societies, and this increased cultural exchange may in turn increase tolerance.
Second, Israel has to make sure that its internal political dynamics do not affect the continuity of the agreements.
Third, all countries participating in these agreements must effectively communicate why they are doing what they are doing. Israel and Arab countries must explain very clearly that these agreements are designed to bring to an end years of struggle.
Muslim societies should see these agreements as an opportunity to live together in peace and stability, not as a defeat. Conflict will always be a step backwards; peace is a step forward.
Morocco
Morocco’s decision to join the accords is politically significant, and also provides direct benefits. In negotiations with the United States, they have managed to get the White House to recognize Morocco’s sovereignty over the Western Sahara in return for signing the accords, thus recognizing Israel as an independent state and entering into formal relations.
Morocco’s readiness is also consistent with a social feeling. Historically, Morocco has been relatively close to its Jewish community; Morocco has welcomed many Jews during complex periods throughout its history.
Mallorca
Global business and investment hubs are shifting and large economic hubs are getting closer to the Mediterranean. With the Abraham Accords, Mallorca lost its position as a liaison between Morocco and Israel, as for many years all Israeli flights made a stopover in Mallorca before departing for Morocco. With the restoration of relations, Tel Aviv’s flights now go directly to Morocco. Will Mallorca be able to take advantage of the new situation in the Mediterranean to become a strategic and commercial platform?
Some conclusions
The Abraham Accords continue to leave grey areas. The most complex aspect is in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, which has brought repeated criticism from different communities.
However, I agree with David Makovsky of the Washington Institute for the Middle East and Daniel Shapiro, Obama’s ambassador to Israel, who explained in an article published in The Washington Post: “History and common-sense show that Arab states that maintain diplomatic relations with Israel play a more active role in supporting Palestinian aspirations than those who do not”.
The contours of the Israel-Palestine conflict have definitely changed as a result of the accords and it will be essential to adjust to the new scenarios.
Much also rests on Joe Biden’s foreign policy decisions. Biden disagreed with almost all measures taken by the Trump Administration; however, many analysts believe that, despite their public rejection by certain factions of the Democratic Party, the new president of the United States will not revoke these agreements.
On this, I agree with Jay Solomon of the Washington Institute for the Middle East, who suggests that Biden should not dismantle the Abraham Accords, but build on them. “Successive U.S. administrations, for more than 70 years, have made Israel’s integration into the Middle East a cornerstone of foreign policy. Now that it’s happening, Washington shouldn’t be a barrier to its expansion, but an agent of improvement and expansion. President-elect Biden has a unique position to shape this new Middle East in a way that best aligns with America’s interests,” he concludes.
