Selling out for the American reward
In 1967, a political slogan emerged from the Arab League Summit in the aftermath of the Arab-Israeli War. Popularly called ‘The Three Noes, the declaration was simple: no peace with Israel, no recognition of Israel, and no negotiations with Israel.
What followed were decades of attempts at peace with a free Palestine firmly at the forefront of Arab demands, including the Arab Peace Initiative of 2002. Each time, Israel rejected the proposal, refusing to give back occupied territories.
When the Abraham Accords were announced to the public, they were loftily presented as a conflict resolution tool and the first step towards ending the Israel-Palestine war.
Four years have passed since its ratification, and Gaza is currently starving through a genocide with no end in sight.
The birth of the Accords
2019 was the ‘Year of Tolerance’ in the United Arab Emirates. It was a thinly veiled marketing ploy to portray the country as a cultural melting pot and a hub for expats.
What followed was a year of slapping the tagline on planes, bridges, and community events. The country also revealed plans to build the ‘Abrahamic Family House’, a complex that would house a mosque, church, and synagogue.
Promoting coexistence was the brand. It was also a way to signal to global investors that they were open for business.
In the midst of all this positive PR, the country invited Israel to participate in the 2020 World Expo. This decision raised a few eyebrows at the time, as Arab countries largely refrained from publicly associating with Israel.
The key word here, however, is ‘publicly’. Israel has long maintained secret relationships with Middle Eastern governments, supplying weapons and spyware to anyone who could pay.
On the other side of the world, the Trump administration was working on a Middle Eastern peace plan. This was in part to fuel the President’s laughable obsession with winning the Nobel Peace Prize.
But the government had already lost the support of Palestinian leaders in 2017 after several missteps, including moving the US embassy to Jerusalem and recognising it as Israel’s capital.
Jared Kushner, who was at the forefront of peace talks, was hitting wall after wall. Israel wanted relationships with the Arab states but Netanyahu was refusing any sort of compromise to his annexation plans.
At the same time, certain Middle Eastern leaders were slowly toning down their support for Palestinian liberation. This was because of the growing concern against Iran, a common enemy they shared with Israel.
So what did America do? Take the opportunity to kill two birds with one stone by proposing the ‘Abraham Accords’. Signed into agreement in September 2020, they normalised relationships between Israel and the UAE and Israel and Bahrain.
The agreement proposed investing opportunities, jobs, and overall economic growth for both parties. However, the end to Israeli occupation and withdrawal of its forces from Palestine was replaced with a vague promise of “working together to realise a negotiated solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict that meets the legitimate needs and aspirations of both peoples, and to advance comprehensive Middle East peace, stability and prosperity.”
The agreement also made sure to acknowledge their benevolent negotiators by “Expressing deep appreciation to the United States for its profound contribution to this historic achievement.”
The Accords completely sidestepped Arab countries that had a direct conflict with Israel (like Syria and Lebanon) and favoured countries that had little involvement in past regional conflicts.
It was assumed by Trump (and later, Biden) that the success of normalisation would eventually entice other Arab states (including Palestine) to reconsider their position.
Soon after, Morocco and Sudan also normalised relations with Israel. Sudan was of special interest to America as it was key to protecting the Red Sea Corridor, a major trade route.
Israel was also interested in Sudan to gain traction in Latin America, whose flight route crossed into Sudanese airspace.
Fill your pockets and look the other way
In return, all these countries got a little reward (read: bribe). The UAE was first in line for advanced American weaponry, Bahrain was designated as a ‘major US security partner’, and Sudan was removed from the U.S. State Sponsors of Terrorism list and granted financial aid.
Ironically, Morocco was recognised as having sovereignty over Western Sahara, a territory that it had annexed in 1976.
And Israel was painted as an eager partner, keen for regional stability and friendship with their neighbours. They came away with free trade agreements and added four more tallies to their sovereignty campaign.
The agreements were preceded by the condition that Netanyahu stop his annexation of the West Bank. Bizarrely, when the Accords were publicly announced, the Emirati leaders touted the Accords as a win for Palestine, while Israel stressed that the halt was merely temporary.
The reaction to the Accords from the Palestinian side was, unsurprisingly, hostile. Leaders viewed it as a betrayal of their cause, with many civilians taking to the streets to protest the deal.
Then Palestinian Prime Minister Mohammad Shtayyeh addressed a crowd of protestors, calling the decision a “stab in the back,” saying, “Today we tell the world that we are united against 'the deal of the century', annexation and normalisation. Any normalisation legitimises the occupation of Palestinian territories."
It’s been four years since the Accords were signed, and business is booming. Trade relations hit almost $3 billion last year, and over a million Israelis were reported to have visited the UAE in the past three years.
Meanwhile, the war machine chugs on. Even before October 7th, Israel was using brutal, unchecked military violence to raid Palestinian villages, imprison and kill thousands of civilians, and blockade the Gaza Strip. All while receiving US military aid.
It is relevant to mention that the Accords Arab leaders have oftentimes voiced their disapproval of the Israeli government. The UAE summoned the Israeli ambassador in 2022 over their attacks in Jerusalem and the Al-Aqsa Mosque. Then again in 2023, after the violent raid of the Jenin refugee camp. At an event marking the three-year anniversary of the Accords, Yousef Al-Otaiba, the Emirati ambassador to the US, who until that time had defended normalisation as a means to curb Israeli annexation, finally admitted that they might have been unsuccessful.
Trump had allegedly promised the UAE that his government would wait until 2024 to recognise Israel’s annexation of the West Bank. This promise was not sought from Israel because nobody trusted Netanyahu and believed that he would not proceed without US backing.
Al-Otaiba said,
“Our deal was based on a certain time period, and that time period is almost done, and so we have no ability to leverage the decisions that are made outside of the period that was what the Abraham Accords was based on. I think it’s up to now future countries if they are to take that particular approach, but there’s very little that the UAE can do at this moment to shape what happens inside Israel.”
More recently, the country opposed Netanyahu’s postwar plans for Gaza, stating that the government had no authority to implement those plans.
Bahrain expelled the Israeli ambassador, recalled their ambassador from the country, and suspended economic ties in November 2023, expressing, “a solid and historical stance that supports the Palestinian cause and the legitimate rights of the Palestinian people.” (Israel claimed to have no knowledge of the decision and stressed stable relations.)
However, despite these proclamations, diplomatic ties are still holding. Trade with the Accords countries has only experienced minor drops since October 7th.
So it begs the question of whether these statements were just paying lip service to placate the Arab people, who were never on board in the first place.
Regional public opinion of the Accords was always overwhelmingly negative. Pro-Palestinian protests were held across Kuwait, Bahrain, Morocco, and Yemen in October last year. Tourism has remained largely one-sided.
Volunteers in the Arab states gathered to send aid to Palestine (and more recently, to Lebanon) and are still enforcing boycotts. But people are cautious of voicing public dissent, as government critics often face prolonged imprisonment and mistreatment.
This reflects the broader political dynamics at play, where governments that profess to support peace are often complicit in the violence.
Do not look to the enabler for peace
The US government is not a helpless spectator to this genocide; it is an enabler. So is every government that sends military aid or continues to have relations with Israel.
To quote Arundhati Roy,
“Let us once and for all dispense with the lie about the US being a mediator, a restraining influence, or as Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (considered to be on the extreme Left of mainstream US politics) put it, ‘working tirelessly for a ceasefire’. A party to the genocide cannot be a mediator.”
The Abraham Accords came to be without a single Palestinian in the room. Just a group of Americans who equated normalisation to dollar signs and as a way to feed its genocidal pet, along with Arab leaders who decided that the price on a free Palestine’s head wasn’t worth it.
There cannot be peace in the Middle East without a permanent ceasefire, a complete withdrawal of Israeli occupation forces, and resolute international support to keep it that way.
Arab states must withdraw from the Accords, condemn Israel beyond a slap on the wrist, and stand arm in arm alongside their Palestinian kin.
The recent US election and its preceding campaigns serve as a stark reminder: we must no longer look at the ruling class as saviours of the oppressed, but rather as defenders of the status quo. The same status quo that thrives on hyper-individualism, designed to isolate and disempower us.
Real change will come not from above but from collective action and mass organisation.
When Palestine is finally free, it will be because of the people on the ground—those who organise, resist, and fight.
Nithila is a writer interested in global politics, intersectionality, and decolonisation. She is also an avid list maker and cool phrase collector.
Comments