Der Irrtum des Abraham-Abkommens: Warum eine Normalisierung ohne Palästinenser dem Nahen Osten keine Stabilität bringen wird

[SS from essay by Khaled Elgindy, Visiting Scholar at Georgetown University’s Center for Contemporary Arab Studies and the author of [*Blind Spot: America and the Palestinians, From Balfour to Trump*](https://www.amazon.com/Blind-Spot-America-Palestinians-Balfour/dp/0815731558).]

U.S. President Donald Trump’s efforts to cement his legacy in the Middle East were well underway even before he reclaimed the White House. “There’s just no way that President Trump isn’t going to be interested in trying to expand the Abraham Accords,” Jason Greenblatt, Trump’s former Middle East envoy, told thousands of international delegates at Qatar’s Doha Forum in December. The Abraham Accords, a series of normalization deals signed in 2020 by Israel and Bahrain, Morocco, and the United Arab Emirates, remain Trump’s signature foreign policy achievement from his first term, and one hailed by both his allies and his staunchest political opponents—including former President Joe Biden.

Indeed, [Biden](https://www.foreignaffairs.com/topics/joe-biden-administration) not only wholeheartedly embraced the Abraham Accords but sought to build on them by securing a landmark deal with Saudi Arabia, the most powerful and influential Arab state. Biden’s offer was that, in return for Israeli-Saudi normalization, the Saudis would get a major upgrade in the strategic partnership with the United States, on par with that of a NATO ally. A Israeli-Saudi agreement would be the biggest breakthrough in Arab-Israeli diplomacy since Egypt broke ranks with the Arab world and became the first Arab state to sign a peace treaty with Israel in 1979—and would pave the way for other Arab and Muslim nations to follow suit.

The Palestinians have rendered themselves unreliable partners. Sidestepping them is not only possible, it is necessary to peace since they will block every action possible to attain it.

We had a ceasefire on October 6th, that was broken by Hamas.

Five or so deals for statehood have been rejected by the Palestinians, that’s on them.

When have the Palestinians put forward much if any effort into building stability and peace? It seems they have spent the last half century trying to “resist” and fight with little to no effort into building stability. Why is it that the Palestinians themselves never seem to be seen to have any agency or responsibility for what they do?

I am going to respond to specific paragraphs of the aricle that I find particularly egregious.

>Critics of the Abraham Accords, however, have never claimed that resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict would end all other disputes in the region. They have instead argued the opposite: that regional peace and security are not possible without a resolution of the Palestinian question. Indeed, the central premise of the Abraham Accords—that regional peace and stability could be achieved while sidelining Palestinians—has been totally upended by Hamas’s October 7 assault on Israel, and everything that has happened since.

The claim that Palestinian terrorist violence and war crimes disproves the idea that Israel can make peace with other Arab states is blatantly untrue. Israel’s longstanding peace agreements with Jordan and Egypt are the primary counterexamples.

>Moreover, the Abraham Accords removed one of the few sources of leverage Palestinians had in their already highly asymmetrical conflict with Israel: pressure from Arab neighbors whose publics were still overwhelmingly sympathetic to the Palestinian cause. In so doing, they also eliminated some of the last remaining incentives Israel had to end its occupation of Palestinian territory or otherwise acknowledge Palestinian rights.

This is nonsense. The Abraham Accords were the specific and explicit reason why [Israel did not annex major settlement blocs in the West Bank in 2020.](https://www.npr.org/2020/06/18/878305307/netanyahu-plans-to-annex-parts-of-the-west-bank-many-israeli-settlers-want-it-al) Specifically, [the Abraham Accords included a committment by the US to the UAE](https://www.uae-embassy.org/abraham-accords-sustainable-inclusive-growth) that the US will not recognize an Israeli annexation of any West Bank territory until 2024, with the understanding that this will effectively prevent Israel from doing so and give the next US administration the time to hammer out an actual regional peace, which would include a hard commitment by Israel to not annex that territory.

[As can be seen in the UK Parliament’s official timeline of the Abraham Accords (and discussion of UK foreign policy w.r.t. the same)](https://lordslibrary.parliament.uk/abraham-accords-uk-government-policy/), as a reaction to the immediate consequences of the [2022 Israeli election](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2022_Israeli_legislative_election) (which saw Ben Gvir and other Kahanist trash join the Israeli government): the UAE pushed back against Israel diplomatically, Oman declined to formally join the Accords, and the Saudis began to push hard for their inclusion into the Accords to be predicated on on-the-ground Israeli concessions designed to guarantee the eventual creation of a Palestinian state. Note that Saudi Arabia has consistently made some form of Israeli concessions to Palestine a necessary element for normalization and expansion of the Abraham Accords, both [before](https://www.usip.org/publications/2023/09/saudi-israel-normalization-agreement-horizon) and [after](https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R48162) Hamas‘ illegal and obscene acts of October 7.

[The UAE has in 2023 publicly called for other Arab states to continue engagement with Israel to prevent annexation when the 2024 commitment expires.](https://www.timesofisrael.com/uae-envoy-de-facto-west-bank-annexation-unfolding-but-our-ability-to-stop-it-wanes/) And now that Trump is back in the Oval Office, Israeli settlers are pushing for a major annexation; it’s possible that this threat of annexation is just a stick Israel is waving towards the Saudis to get them on board with the Abraham Accords, and will be dropped again just like it was during Trump I.

>Meanwhile, claims that Arab states could leverage their budding relations with Israel to advance the cause of the Palestinians or that of a two-state solution have simply never materialized. Neither Bahrain, Morocco, nor the United Arab Emirates have sought to intervene with Israel to prevent home demolitions or evictions of Palestinians from their homes in East Jerusalem, or to address record-breaking settlement expansion and settler violence across the West Bank. They have not wielded their supposed influence to step in regarding Israel’s assault on Gaza—an offensive that has already killed more than 46,000 Palestinians and annihilated most of its civilian infrastructure.

Untrue. The UAE has made its participation in the „day after“ of Gaza [contingent on the creation of a Palestinian state shortly thereafter.](https://www.timesofisrael.com/uae-vows-it-wont-take-part-in-gazas-day-after-without-palestinian-state/) Note that [Israel has publicly pushed for the UAE to take a very direct role in Gaza instead of a Palestinian body](https://www.timesofisrael.com/emirati-fm-pans-netanyahus-suggestion-country-might-help-manage-gaza-after-war/), so the UAE’s insistence on supporting a reformed PA reincorporating Gaza and forming a Palestinian state is absolutely critical. And the ultimate result of that agreement would be the full and permanent end of Israeli home demolitions and other punitive actions in the West Bank, of course.

What exactly did the author of this article expect the UAE to do here?

I believe some of the interpretations of the drivers that the author attributes to the architects of the Abraham accords are too simplistic.
In essence, the author claims that the sole purpose of these agreement was to benefit Israel.
The argument made at the time by the people involved was quite different. The way it worked since 1990 is that the most extreme groups gets to veto any progress of peace in the region. The minute the sides were on the ‚brink‘ of peace, a new wave of violence has erupted. 7 Oct is no different. It is not a proof that 2 state solution is the preliminary condition for stability in the region. It is a proof that the extreme fringe does not accept Israel acceptance in the region at all.
The hope is that with the Abraham accords the extreme and actively destabilising Iran’s circle of influence with diminish, the benefits to the region from commerce, tourism, and cooperation will drive a change in the public sentiment and will further diminish the ability of extreme fringe to control the trajectory of the region.
That way, the two state solution will be brought back to life and a settlement will be reachable.
The reality today, after 7 Oct, is that the two state solution is no longer a viable solution without a period of trust building in between. The Abraham accords may just be the tool to get there.