24 | AUGUST 27 • 2020
T
he Abraham Accord between Israel
and the UAE brought many of us
a much-needed sigh of relief. The
pressures for unilateral annexation of parts
of the West Bank, which
seemed imminent and would
have been extremely costly
— to moving toward a two-
state solution to the Israeli-
Palestinian conflict, to Israel’
s
own self-understanding as
a democracy and to Israel’
s
standing internationally —
have been averted for now.
It should be clearly stated that Israel
deserves diplomatic recognition by other
states; it should not be one of the only states
in the world upon whom conditions are set
for normal relations. All the Arab states in
the region refused to recognize Israel upon
its establishment, even before its post-1967
occupation of the West Bank. Meanwhile,
other states with disputed or occupied
territory and who refuse independence to
ethnic populations are not similarly ostra-
cized: Iraq, Syria, Turkey and Iran refuse
independence to Kurds; Morocco occupies
Western Sahara; Turkey occupies northern
Cyprus and settles Turkish citizens there.
There should be no double standard when
it comes to Israel.
Having said that, the recognition of Israel
by the UAE is praiseworthy on several
fronts. It solidifies the growing relations
between Israel and several Gulf states over
the past decade, partially motivated by a
common interest in balancing Iran. Security
and intelligence relations began between
the Mossad with their counterparts in the
1970s. Relations strengthened after the Oslo
Accords and came into public view in the
past few years.
For instance, the Israeli anthem,
“Hatikvah”
, was played when an Israeli
won the gold medal at Abu Dhabi’
s inter-
national judo championship in 2018. The
Bahrain National Orchestra played the
Israeli national anthem at an interfaith gath-
ering in 2017 at the Wiesenthal Center in
Los Angeles. King Hamad of Bahrain also
denounced the Arab boycott of Israel and
said his subjects were free to visit Israel. In
this way, official recognition by the UAE is
the culmination of a process growing over
several years in the region.
While there is reason to be pleased
and relieved by the Abraham Accords,
it is also wise to curb one’
s enthusiasm.
While it is possible that other countries
such as Bahrain or Sudan may follow suit,
most countries in the region will not until
Israel reaches a peace agreement with the
Palestinians.
The Saudis and the Moroccan prime
minister have reiterated that their normal-
ization with Israel will depend on such an
agreement. The main internationally recog-
nized paradigm for normalization, ratified
repeatedly by the Arab League, is the Saudi
2002 land-for-peace plan. The 2013 version
was based on 1967 borders with swaps.
Therefore, the Abraham Accord is not a
substitute for the land for peace deal with
the Palestinians. The Accord itself, while
motivated by the UAE’
s desire for scientific
and economic cooperation with Israel and
to balance Iran, was also partially intended
to leave the door to a two-state solution
open by averting unilateral annexation. This
is not a “peace-for-peace” deal; it is condi-
tioned on no annexation of land.
The UAE views its support of a two-state
solution as not only ultimately supporting
Palestinian statehood, but also weaken-
ing Iran and its bloc, including Hamas,
which is also supported by the UAE’
s rival
Qatar. The UAE has heavily supported
Mohammad Dhalan of Fatah’
s Democratic
Reform Bloc, some of whose members
were expelled from the West Bank in 2011.
Dhalan is an adviser to UAE Crown Prince
Mohammed bin Zayed and rumored by
some Fatah leaders to have sanctioned the
Eretz
analysis
Yael Aronoff
YOSSI ALONI/FLASH90/JTA
The Abraham
Accord Between
Israel and the UAE:
Curb Your
Enthusiasm
Israeli Prime Minister
Benjamin Netanyahu at
a military base in Ramla,
Israel, Aug. 4, 2020.