Five years after the signing of the Abraham Accords in 2020, what initially seemed like a groundbreaking moment in Middle Eastern diplomacy now appears much more complex and intriguing. The Accords, which normalized relations between Israel and the United Arab Emirates (UAE), Bahrain, Morocco, and Sudan, promised a new regional order based on economic cooperation, shared security interests, and diplomacy. Yet, the Israel-Hamas war of October 2023 and the ensuing violence in Gaza have tested the Accords to their limits. The failure of both Israel’s leadership under Benjamin Netanyahu and Hamas to provide real solutions to the Palestinian issue has exposed the fragility of these agreements and cast doubt on the long-term success of the Accords.
The signing of the Abraham Accords in 2020 was initially hailed as a significant shift in Middle Eastern geopolitics, a moment filled with hope and optimism. For the first time in decades, Israel was welcomed into the Arab fold, with four Arab nations breaking decades of political isolation in exchange for promises of economic partnerships, diplomatic relations, and expanded trade. This “new Middle East” envisioned by the Accords included high hopes for technological cooperation, mutual defense agreements, and more excellent regional stability. The Accords were framed as a pragmatic response to shared concerns about Iranian influence and regional security. It was hoped that the normalization of ties between Israel and Arab nations would lead to a domino effect, where other countries, especially Saudi Arabia, would follow suit, further isolating Iran and changing the region’s dynamics for the better.
However, these expectations have been severely challenged by the outbreak of the Israel-Hamas war in late 2023, leading to a wave of disappointment and disillusionment. The surprise attack by Hamas on Israeli soil, which resulted in significant loss of life and widespread destruction, reignited the age-old conflict that has defined the Israeli-Palestinian struggle for decades. What followed was Israel’s overwhelming military response, an aerial bombardment campaign that ravaged Gaza, resulting in thousands of Palestinian casualties. The escalation underscored the deep divisions within the region and threw the Abraham Accords into uncertainty.
The war brought into sharp relief the glaring contradictions at the heart of the Accords. The agreements were predicated on the idea that Israel and its Arab neighbors could find common ground in areas of economic, technological, and security cooperation. Yet, the Palestinian issue, the central fault line in Arab-Israeli relations for over a century, remained unresolved. While the UAE, Bahrain, Morocco, and Sudan had normalized relations with Israel, they could not simply ignore the brutal reality of Israeli military actions in Gaza. As the war unfolded, the Arab world, particularly populations in countries like Jordan and Egypt, expressed outrage over Israel’s actions. Governments in these countries, which had longstanding peace treaties with Israel, came under intense domestic pressure to condemn Israel’s heavy-handed tactics. Their public support for the Abraham Accords started to waver.
Public opinion in the Arab world, which had accepted mainly the pragmatic benefits of the Accords, shifted dramatically in the aftermath of the violence. The normalization deals had been controversial in many Arab nations, and the Gaza war reignited longstanding resentment over Israel’s occupation of Palestinian territories. While the Accords had promised peace and stability, the events 2023 reminded the public that the Palestinian issue remains unresolved and that no true peace could exist without a resolution. Many Arabs viewed the Accords as a betrayal of Palestinian rights, particularly as they saw the brutal effects of Israel’s military campaign in Gaza, leading to widespread protests and criticism of the Arab governments that had signed the agreements.
Benjamin Netanyahu, Israel’s prime minister, found himself facing significant international backlash as the war intensified. His government’s policies, particularly the continued expansion of Israeli settlements in the West Bank and its hardline stance toward Palestinians, have consistently undermined the potential for a two-state solution. Netanyahu’s reliance on military power to maintain Israel’s security and territorial claims has only deepened divisions, making any diplomatic progress increasingly difficult. The actions of Netanyahu’s government, particularly in the wake of the war, raised questions about the true intentions behind the Abraham Accords. Were they merely an effort to solidify Israel’s standing in the region without addressing the core issues of Palestinian sovereignty and self-determination? Arguable, many Middle Eastern countries would accept one without the other.
This has been reflected following the Israel Hamas War. In the aftermath of the war, Netanyahu’s refusal to engage meaningfully with Palestinian leaders and his government’s unwillingness to consider any form of peace negotiation left little hope for a peaceful resolution. His approach has been one of military escalation rather than dialogue, reinforcing that the status quo is sustainable despite the immense human cost. The war in Gaza underscored that Israel’s security could not be guaranteed through military means alone, particularly when the root causes of the conflict remain unresolved.
On the other side, Hamas’s actions also deserve scrutiny. While Hamas’s violent tactics have been condemned for years, the organization continues to dominate Gaza and influence Palestinian politics, even as it continues to reject diplomatic engagement with Israel. Hamas’s reliance on violence and its commitment to armed struggle has led to even greater suffering for Palestinians, and its leadership has failed to unite the Palestinian people under a common cause. The group’s decision to launch a large-scale attack on Israel in 2023 only played into Netanyahu’s narrative of an existential threat, justifying Israel’s military retaliation and further cementing the cycle of violence.
While Hamas claims to represent the Palestinian cause, its failure to engage in meaningful dialogue with Israel and its refusal to pursue a negotiated peace agreement have exacerbated the situation. The continued militant approach of Hamas has only deepened the divisions between Palestinians and Israelis, making it even harder to find a peaceful resolution. The war demonstrated the limits of Hamas’s strategy. It underscored the importance of Palestinian leadership, which can bridge the divides between factions and push for a just peace that recognizes Palestinians' rights to self-determination and sovereignty.
The challenges brought by the Israel-Hamas war underscore a broader flaw in the Abraham Accords: they focused primarily on diplomatic normalization between Israel and select Arab nations without addressing the core issue of Palestinian statehood and rights. The Accords were a political victory for Israel. Still, they ignored the reality that no lasting peace can be achieved without addressing the humanitarian and political struggles of the Palestinian people. While the UAE, Bahrain, and Morocco were able to strike deals with Israel, these agreements cannot provide stability if they are not accompanied by a concerted effort to address the plight of Palestinians.
For the Accords to have a lasting impact, they must be reimagined as part of a broader, more inclusive peace process that involves not just Israel and its Arab neighbors but also Palestinian voices. The Arab countries that have signed on to the Accords must find ways to hold Israel accountable for its actions in Gaza and the West Bank and work to ensure that Palestinian rights are respected in any future peace negotiations. The Abraham Accords cannot be an end in themselves; they must serve as a starting point for a wider regional peace process that includes the full participation of Palestinians and prioritizes their dignity and rights.
In conclusion, the Abraham Accords, which once promised a new Middle East, are now at a crossroads. The violence in Gaza and the Israel-Hamas war have exposed the limitations of the Accords in their current form. While they have paved the way for greater economic cooperation and diplomatic engagement between Israel and some Arab countries, they cannot succeed without addressing the central issue that has plagued the region for over a century: the Palestinian struggle for self-determination. Both Benjamin Netanyahu and Hamas share responsibility for perpetuating the violence that undermines any hope for lasting peace. The Accords can only fulfill their promise if they are reshaped into a more inclusive framework, one that seeks justice, equality, and peace for all peoples in the region, not just those who hold power but the countless Palestinians still living under occupation.
Add comment
Comments