Abraham Accords: A fragile framework for regional cooperation complicated by strategic anxieties.
Context
The Abraham Accords, brokered in 2020, represent a landmark shift in Middle Eastern diplomacy. Initiated under the Trump administration, the Accords saw Israel normalise relations with the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain, later joined by Morocco and Sudan. These agreements went beyond symbolic recognition; they established diplomatic ties, stimulated economic cooperation, and, significantly, created a new regional alignment largely focused on shared concerns about Iran’s growing influence. While Sudan’s progress has stalled following the outbreak of conflict, and Morocco’s relationship remains more conditional, the UAE and Bahrain have proactively deepened ties with Israel, evidenced by trade agreements, tourism, and security cooperation. The Accords were predicated on a transactional approach – security benefits for the Arab states in exchange for normalised relations – and remain a significant, though contested, feature of the regional landscape. However, the situation in the Strait of Hormuz adds a new layer of complexity, impacting already delicate balances.
Progress Made
The Strait of Hormuz, a narrow waterway connecting the Persian Gulf to the Gulf of Oman and ultimately the Arabian Sea, is a strategically vital chokepoint for global oil shipments. Approximately 20% of the world’s oil passes through this 21-mile wide channel daily. Recent heightened tensions, rooted in escalating Iranian naval activity, directly impact the perceptions of security underpinning the Abraham Accords.
We’ve observed increased instances of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Navy (IRGCN) harassing commercial vessels in the Strait. Actions include seizing ships, conducting simulated attacks on vessels accompanied by US Navy escorts, and deploying fast attack craft in close proximity to critical infrastructure. In July 2023, the US Navy intervened to prevent Iran from seizing two oil tankers, and in January 2024, Iranian commandos boarded and seized the MSC Aries, a container ship linked to Israel.
These actions have triggered a substantial increase in international naval presence. The US Navy has bolstered its forces in the region, conducting joint patrols with the UK and other allies under Operation Prosperity Guardian. While the operation is officially aimed at safeguarding commercial shipping, its underlying motivation is clearly to deter further Iranian aggression. Simultaneously, the UAE has quietly withdrawn from similar joint maritime security initiatives with the US, citing a desire to de-escalate tensions and maintain open communication channels with Iran. This demonstrates a divergence in approach amongst the Accord partners, reflecting differing risk appetites and economic considerations. The increased military presence, however, underlines the rising perceived risk and illustrates a direct response to actions emanating from the region.
Challenges
Despite the desire to secure maritime trade routes, the situation in the Strait of Hormuz presents significant challenges to the long-term stability expected from the Abraham Accords. The Iranian actions are fundamentally driven by a desire to exert leverage, both in the context of stalled nuclear negotiations and broader regional power dynamics. De-escalation is proving difficult, and direct confrontation remains a concerning possibility.
The diverging responses within the Abraham Accords camp highlight a fundamental tension. While Israel and, to a lesser extent, Bahrain are keen on a hardline stance against Iran and strengthening security cooperation to counter Iranian threats, the UAE prioritises diplomatic engagement and economic ties with Tehran. Dubai, in particular, has long benefited from extensive trade with Iran, and disrupting those relationships would have significant economic consequences. This divergence complicates the formulation of a unified regional security architecture, weakening the core premise of the Accords: a collective response to shared threats.
Furthermore, the focus on maritime security risks overshadowing other crucial aspects of normalisation, such as people-to-people exchanges, cultural collaboration, and deeper economic integration. The constant threat of escalation distracts from these softer aspects of building trust and fostering long-term cooperation. The fragile political situations in Sudan and ongoing Israeli-Palestinian conflict also continue to cast shadows, limiting the potential scope of the Accords.
Israel-Iran Dimension
The situation in the Strait of Hormuz is inextricably linked to the broader Israel-Iran rivalry, a central driver of instability in the Middle East. Iran views Israel as a strategic adversary and supports proxy groups throughout the region, including those actively opposing the Abraham Accords signatories. The seized ship MSC Aries was linked to Zodiac Maritime, an Israeli-owned shipping company, although Israel denies direct involvement. Tehran frames its actions in the Strait as retaliation for a suspected Israeli strike on the Iranian consulate in Damascus in April 2024, demonstrating a clear escalation of this shadow war.
From Israel’s perspective, the increased Iranian aggression in the Strait poses a direct threat not only to its trade routes but also to the perceived legitimacy of the Abraham Accords. A failure to secure maritime trade – a vital component for regional economic prosperity – could undermine the economic benefits driving the normalisation process. Security cooperation with the UAE and Bahrain, initially incentivised by concerns about Iran, is now being tested by diverging approaches and the UAE’s reluctance to overtly confront Tehran. This escalation also fuels Israeli concerns about Iran’s nuclear programme and its broader regional ambitions, potentially accelerating the momentum towards confronting Iran, even without explicit US support.
Path Forward
A sustained de-escalation of tensions in the Strait of Hormuz is essential to preserve the momentum of the Abraham Accords. This requires a multifaceted approach, involving diplomatic initiatives – potentially mediated by Oman or Iraq – aimed at restoring communication channels between Iran and regional and international actors. The revival of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) remains a long shot, but any progress towards reducing the risk of Iran developing nuclear weapons would undoubtedly alleviate regional anxieties.
However, realistically, complete resolution of the underlying conflicts is unlikely in the immediate future. A more achievable goal is to establish clearer rules of engagement for maritime traffic in the Strait, perhaps through a renewed, broader multilateral security framework. The UAE’s withdrawal from Operation Prosperity Guardian, while concerning to some, underscores the need for inclusivity and recognising the legitimate security concerns and economic interests of all regional actors, including Iran.
The continued development of economic ties between Israel and its Arab partners, particularly in areas like technology, renewable energy, and tourism, remains crucial. These economic benefits provide a vested interest in maintaining stability. Ultimately, the long-term success of the Abraham Accords hinges on building a more inclusive regional security architecture, one that addresses the legitimate concerns of all stakeholders and reduces the potential for miscalculation and escalation in strategically vital areas like the Strait of Hormuz.
Source: Analysis based on publicly available information regarding maritime security in the Strait of Hormuz, regional geopolitics, and reporting from Reuters, Associated Press, and the Financial Times as of February 2024.
