An Historic Agreement. Will More Follow?

Dwindling support for Palestinian leadership and a lack of viable regional allies creates an opportunity for Gulf states and Israel.

By
73

President Trump announced Thursday that the White House had brokered an historic agreement to establish full diplomatic ties between the United Arab Emirates and Israel. Unlike previous agreements between Israel and its Arab neighbors, this agreement is unique in a number of ways: The parties worked to reach an agreement discreetly, without the intense public scrutiny that accompanied peace agreements with Egypt in 1979 and Jordan in 1994. The UAE is also the first Gulf state and non-contiguous Arab country to establish ties with Israel. Given the coordination of foreign policy with its neighbors, the UAE could be the first of several Gulf states to recognize Israel, the result of which would be normalized relations between the Jewish state and its predominantly Sunni Arab neighbors.

The agreement, which President Trump shared over Twitter, laid out a mutually beneficial relationship in which the UAE would fully acknowledge Israel’s right to nationhood; in exchange, Israel has agreed to refrain from declaring sovereignty over stretches of the West Bank. Israel is undoubtedly one of the primary military and economic powers in the region, with advanced nuclear and cybersecurity capabilities. The 2010 Stuxnet computer worm, for example, unleashed extensive damage to Iran’s budding nuclear program. As a result of the agreement, the UAE is poised to gain access to elements of the Israeli technological and security apparatus. 

Over the coming weeks, several bilateral agreements will seek to integrate the two countries diplomatically and economically, covering areas such as investment, direct flights, security, technology, and energy. The UAE and Israel will work together to share intellectual resources and develop a vaccine for COVID-19. Notably, the statement also references the establishment of mutual embassies, although Anwar Garash—the UAE’s minister of state for foreign affairs—indicated that his country’s embassy would not be placed in Jerusalem. Israel’s capital (and the site of the U.S. Embassy after Trump initiated the move from Tel Aviv in 2018) has long been a touchpoint in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as host to a number of Muslim holy sites.

Although Israel agreed not to annex select areas of the West Bank, Palestinian representatives were quick to condemn the move by the UAE. “The Palestinian leadership rejects and denounces the UAE, Israeli and U.S. trilateral, surprising announcement,” spokesman Nabil Abu Rudeineh said in a statement on behalf of Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, adding that it was a “betrayal of Jerusalem, Al-Aqsa and the Palestinian cause.”

Create a free account
Access additional articles and newsletters for no cost, no credit card information needed. Continue ALREADY HAVE AN ACCOUNT? SIGN IN
73
By
Comments (73)
Join The Dispatch to participate in the comments.
 
  1. Avatar photo
    Kevin Johnson

    Good piece. It is obviously true that many Arabs agree with the argument that Palestinian leadership’s corruption and divisions leave Israel with no negotiating partner, even if most won’t say this out loud. Even worse, Arab leaders know that Israel has had right-wing, left-wing, and centrist governments offer plausible (if imperfect) peace terms to Palestinians, including offering to return almost all land lost to Israel after attempts to destroy it. The hard-line “Palestine to the sea” faction always blocked an agreement, wearing out Arabs who have much bigger problems. Obama’s embrace of the mullahs in Iran was the last straw for many. Israel is not going to be pushed into the sea or forced to accept millions of Arabs to destroy its Jewish nature. And Iran is not going to give up its drive to dominate Arab neighbors it has always seen as inferior historically and culturally and currently views as religious infidels. When Palestinians want a state more than Israel’s destruction, they can have one on land Israel will return, even if it will be smaller than the one Palestinians were offered in 1947 and a few times since then. It is good for these geopolitical truths to be made plain. The “Arab street” did not erupt over our moving our Embassy to Jerusalem in recognition of reality. It won’t erupt over this. The sooner Palestinians face that there is no savior coming to destroy Israel and that their leaders betray their cause the sooner they can have a negotiated peace and a state. BDS extremists in Congress and on campus will not succeed, and Palestinians deserve better.

    Collapse
  2. Avatar photo
    Dina

    This is such great news. After relentless bad news for months, it's wonderful to see that something good is happening in the world. Peace between Israel and an Arab country is fantastic, regardless of one's personal feelings about Trump and Netanyahu. More to follow would be most welcome.

    Collapse
  3. Avatar photo
    Theirn Scott

    So, it appears that United States' reduced engagement in foreign affairs was a factor in the UAE decision. The piece notes that the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) needs a powerful partner to offset a powerful Iran so they've turned to Israel. Quote, "And they’ve lost faith in the United States to occupy that role. “The Gulf states have doubts about U.S. intentions, not about U.S. capabilities,”

    Thank you, Trump Administration??

    Collapse
    1. El Kabong

      You can say Thank You Trump administration, but it more likely should be Thank You Obama Administration. Obama payed $150 billion to Iran to say they're not developing nuclear weapons while they continued to develop nuclear weapons. Also ceded Iraq to Iran by failing to address Iran's proxies in Iraq. Basically a deal Iran could not pass up. The Gulf States saw the writing on the wall, we need a different paradigm to counter Iran if the US's long term goal is to empower Iran.

      Collapse
  4. Avatar photo
    Sean

    Thanks for the great breakdown on the situation. The only thing I know about situations like this in the Middle East is that "its complicated". This really helped me understand the motivations and ramifications in ways no regular news outlet (e.g., the AP) was covering.

    Collapse
  5. William Glenn

    This is my first article to be read with my new full subscription. What a breath of fresh air! Thank you, sincerely, for respecting my intelligence by not telling me what to think

    Collapse
  6. El Kabong

    Very good article. For those with more interest, I urge you to check out the Commentary Magazine's podcast from yesterday 8/14/2020. I also think Noah Rothman may have some writeup on their website. Interesting angle that the Obama/Kerry approach to empowering Iran and ceding Iraq to Iran gave a lot of momentum to this type of arrangement as the gulf states look for stability in the region to counter Iran's ultimate intentions.

    Collapse
    1. Avatar photo
      Victor Clairmont

      Yes because the other Arab states did not want Iran to be the regional power. Thus, for the past few years countries like the UAE were pushed more to the Western camp of Israel and her allies. A complete unintended side effect of bad Obama policy, has made way for this current administration to bring more peaceful resolutions into the fold. They are seeing Israel as a more stable force than Iran.

      That’s what makes this situation so crazy. And again, I am pleasantly surprised it was pulled off in this administration.

      Should Trump go down in flames this November, he still would have achieved this event. Which, is one of the few good highlights in a rather convoluted administration.

      Collapse
      1. Avatar photo
        Paul Reichardt

        Israel and Iran are essentially in a state of war, but why does this have to hijack US policy in the region to the exclusion of everything else? When Iran or its proxies—Hezbollah or Islamic Jihad—strike at Israeli military or industrial targets we call this ‘terrorism’, but when Israel does it—say Mossad agents or assets killing civilian scientists inside of Iran—this we call it ‘self-defense.’ Iran is surrounded by (nuclear-equipped and soon to be equipped, e.g, Saudi Arabia) enemies, backed by a gross imbalance due to current US policies and strategic positioning, in the current status quo so it stands to reason that they’d have an interest in destabilizing that status quo. Iran is not going anywhere and is going to be a regional power whether’d we all like it or not. Even if the current Islamist regime fell, it’s more likely than not that something worse would move into replace it. If Iran were to disappear, Shia populations all over would be massacred so there will always be a market for Iranian influence in the region—malign, benevolent, and everything in between.

        One of the reasons I see this UAE normalization of relations as a positive development from US perspective is that it allows the US to drawdown its ME commitments and let regional actors look after their own interests. This will push more gulf states deeper into an open-alliance with Israel. Good. Egypt and Jordan posed a graver existential threat to Israel in the 60s and 70s than Iran does now, but those parties nonetheless entered into peace talks and later signed treaties. Israel and their Gulf state allies could probably do the same with Iran today if they had incentives to do so—or at least establish regional detante—in the absence of US meddling and provision of security welfare and endless supplies of arms like gasoline on the fire. The US has it hands more than full with China and Russia and the sooner we can loosen our tether to the thuggish Saudi regime, the better.

        Collapse
        1. Avatar photo
          Emily

          Even if the proxies like Hezbollah or Islamic Jihad strike at a military target, it will be seen as terrorism because the proxy also sometimes blows up noncombatants, including children. Mossad is an openly acknowledged defense/intelligence entity of Israel while Iran’s proxies are openly acknowledged terrorist groups. And also, Iran’s stated goal is the destruction of the state of Israel; the reverse is not also true. Ergo, Israel is self defense, Iran is aggression by proxy.

          Side note, I cannot but think that any organization that grooms its young people to literally blow themselves up is fundamentally evil. They twist all hopes of a future generation into self-destructive hate, they tell their youth not that they should learn and develop their minds to the best of their abilities, but that their only service to their people is as a walking corpse who can blend among civilians and take some more kids down with them. One of those suicide bombers could have been a Gandhi if he’d been raised to see his own existence as having inherent value, if he’d been raised to see enemies as fellow human beings. Those terrorist groups intentionally bury their best hopes in despair. That kind of immorality taints and delegitimizes everything else it touches.

          Collapse
          1. Avatar photo
            Paul Reichardt

            Iran will give arms and briefcases of cash to any group that harasses their enemy Israel. They supported the PLO in the 80's and 90's and Hamas/Islamic Jihad since then. It is not clear Iran has much influence on their Sunni Wahhabist ideology compared to that of our good friends, the Saudis. Their support of Hezbollah is different because their is more natural ideological alliance and is a way for Iran to project power in the region. Almost all IDF and Mossad engagements with the military arm of Hezbollah these days are in Lebanon and Syria, not interior Israel.

            "Blowing up noncombatants" either intentionally or in callous disregard for collateral damage is a poor indicator of terrorism. IDF incursions into Gaza over the last 15 years have wracked up a horrendous body count of civilians, including scores of children, for anyone inclined to dig into the details. There's no evil that can't be rationalized away once a party convinces themselves that they are acting in self-defense.

            Collapse
        2. Avatar photo
          Dina

          Iran is a major existential threat to Israel if it attains nuclear weapons because it could then easily wipe Israel off the map (its stated goal). That's why Israel's picking off nuclear scientists working on such a weapon is self-defense and not the same as terrorist groups striking targets in Israel. By the way, those targets are civilian, not military or industrial as you claim. Unless by industrial you mean places like highways and restaurants?

          Collapse
          1. Avatar photo
            Paul Reichardt

            Let me stipulate that I would love to see the Iranian people rise up and overthrow the odious government of Iran, but I events over the last 20 years have shown it to be a rational actor responding to its perceived self-interests, not the messianic doomsday cult bent on killing for its own sake as we often portray it in the media. A rational actor, not necessarily a moral actor, can still be negotiated with and will respond to incentives that align with its self-interests, for example, they were key in the destruction of ISIS in Iraq. No doubt the Iranian regime views Israel and the US as existential threats to it and sees its nuclear weapons programs as self-defense. US Republicans talk openly about regime change. It is the official point of Pompeo's maximum pressure campaign. Why would they not pursue nuclear weapons? Again, look at their incentives.

            My point was that Israel can pursue peace with Iran like it did Egypt and Jordan, who did try to wipe Israel off the map. Perhaps part of the arrangement can be for Israel to open up its nuclear weapons sites for IAEA inspections and Iran can do the same.

            Variants of the "wipe Israel of the map" comment have been widely used anti-Zionist propaganda lines by governments and elites in Arab and Muslim-majority countries all over the Middle East for decades, including ones likely to now form form open alliances with Israel. It doesn't seem to be a showstopper.

            Collapse
        3. Avatar photo
          Victor Clairmont

          If this leads to us getting out of the Middle East? I'm still all for it. We have been there too long and honestly, even if America and Israel never existed in the past 100 years, that area of the world would still be having a lot of problems. Honor culture and tribalism can sometimes, breed generations of strife like in Afghanistan. Wahabism that the Saudi Kingdom courted forever, started in the 18th century.

          I have always seen the Middle East as a quagmire. The sooner we are out the militarily the better. Of course, I do not want Israel destroyed either or anyone to continue to have misery in the area, Palestinian or not.

          But I would like us out. But I also understand that, other regional actors will move in, and non-regional actors like China or Russia. If peace agreements between nations create an alliance that tips the scale to less war than not, I am Ok with it. Especially if they can resist outside interference.

          The game of geopolitics is tough.

          Collapse
  7. Larry

    Good article. While editorial content like The French Press is what drew me to The Dispatch, I’m eager to see more reporting such as this about breaking news. It’s also nice to see more statements attributed to questions from The Dispatch than pulled from other news sources.

    Collapse
    1. El Kabong

      I second your comment. I really enjoy the world news content. We're pretty consumed by domestic issues right now so this is very welcome.

      Collapse
  8. Avatar photo
    DougAz

    https://amp.theguardian.com/world/2002/mar/28/israel7?__twitter_impression=true

    Every Arab nation offered peace to Netanyahu. He turned it down.

    Collapse
    1. Avatar photo
      Dina

      In other words, the Arab League demanded concessions from Israel that amount to national suicide. If Israel withdraws to indefensible borders and accepts the Palestinian right of return, it will cease to be a Jewish state. In return for becoming the 23rd Arab country, the Arab League promised to stop killing Jews. It's such a great peace offer, really hard to understand Netanyahu's intransigence.

      Sarcasm aside, what's really mystifying is the Palestinians' refusal of Israel's offer of statehood THREE times.

      Collapse
    2. Avatar photo
      Michael Berkowitz

      All else aside, the offer you reference invokes UN resolution 194 from 1948, which is used as a support for a "Palestinian right of return" to within Israel's recognized borders.

      Collapse
      1. Avatar photo
        DougAz

        Thank you Michael, I did not know that.

        Collapse
  9. Avatar photo
    DougAz

    I'm one person who thinks 100% of US money, blood, soldiers, arms sales should cease to every Middle East Country. Without exception.

    What keeps Netanyahu from dealing with the Arabs is America cover.

    Remove our assets. Then Benji...(I argued with him.. and directly dislike him in the early 70s), will get things done.

    I support a 2 state solution as well.

    Collapse
  10. Avatar photo
    Show Jay Janney the 🚪!

    To use a football terms, this announcement "moves the chains" towards peace. There's a ton left to be done yet, but this is good news.

    I think there will be a two state resolution: It just won't be one that makes the PA happy. The boundaries will never be what the Palestinians want.

    At the risk of sounding crass and horrific, The Gaza strip, if developed properly, could probably lift much of the Palestinian Authority out of poverty. But until there is peace, not likely to happen.
    .

    Collapse
Load More