Abraham Accords: A fragile but persisting realignment of Middle Eastern relations.
The Abraham Accords, brokered by the US in 2020, represent a series of historic normalisation agreements between Israel and several Arab nations, most notably the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain. The agreements formally established diplomatic relations, spurred economic cooperation, and facilitated people-to-people exchanges, breaking decades of political stagnation. Morocco and Sudan also joined the accords, though implementation in Sudan remains stalled due to internal political instability. While hailed as a significant shift in regional dynamics, the Accords haven’t led to a comprehensive peace settlement with the Palestinians, and their long-term sustainability remains subject to numerous internal and external forces. Today, the Accords stand as a complex web of bilateral relationships, operating alongside persistent regional conflicts and anxieties.
Progress Made: Deepening Bilateral Ties Through Quiet Channels
Despite mounting regional tensions, particularly surrounding the war in Gaza, the United Arab Emirates has largely maintained its normalisation of relations with Israel, demonstrated by the continued operation of its diplomatic and commercial missions within Israel. This represents a significant, though largely understated, continuation of the Accords’ momentum. While public displays of cooperation have understandably diminished since October 7th, underlying economic ties remain substantial. Trade between Israel and the UAE continues, albeit with some reported logistical challenges. In 2023, bilateral trade reached approximately $2.7 billion, covering areas like technology, agriculture, and tourism, though figures for the first half of 2024 indicate a slowdown corresponding with escalating conflicts.
Beyond trade, cooperation in technology and innovation persists, focusing on sectors like renewable energy and cybersecurity. Joint projects are reportedly underway, conducted largely ‘below the radar’ in response to growing domestic and regional criticism. Diplomatic engagement, while less visible, continues through back channels. Israeli officials have confirmed continued, albeit discreet, meetings with Emirati counterparts focused on de-escalation efforts and shared concerns regarding regional security.
Crucially, the UAE has resisted calls – reportedly from some within the Arab world, and subtly implied by Iran – to suspend or sever ties with Israel. Maintaining the ambassadorial presence and consular services in both countries is a demonstrable commitment to preserving the framework established by the Abraham Accords. This quiet resilience is notable given the extensive diplomatic pressure exerted on the Emirates, and is viewed privately by some analysts as an indication of the UAE’s long-term strategic calculations regarding regional stability and its own national interests.
Challenges: Regional Tensions and Domestic Dissatisfaction
The primary challenge to the ongoing success of the Abraham Accords lies in the escalating conflict between Israel and Hamas in Gaza, and the wider impact this has had on regional sentiment. The scale of civilian casualties and destruction in Gaza sparked widespread protests across the Arab world, including within the UAE and Bahrain, placing significant pressure on their governments to reassess their relationship with Israel. Public opinion in these countries, already lukewarm towards normalisation before October 7th, has reportedly hardened considerably.
Internal political constraints further complicate matters. Governments in the UAE and Bahrain are keenly aware of the potential for domestic unrest fueled by perceived support for Israel and must navigate a delicate balancing act between their strategic interests and public mood. The rising influence of Islamist groups, bolstered by the circumstances in Gaza, also presents a challenge.
Beyond the Gaza conflict, broader regional dynamics contribute to instability. The ongoing involvement of Iran-backed proxies in Yemen, Syria, and Lebanon creates a volatile environment. Arab states feel a growing need to demonstrate solidarity with the Palestinian cause. This necessitates careful calibration of their relationship with Israel, avoiding actions that could be perceived as outright support for Israeli policy.
Another, subtler challenge arises from the limited progress on the Palestinian issue. The Accords were partly predicated on the expectation they would reinvigorate Israeli-Palestinian peace negotiations, but a viable two-state solution remains distant, undermining the rationale for normalisation in the eyes of many. The failure to deliver on this expectation fuels cynicism about the long-term benefits of the Accords.
Israel-Iran Dimension: A Crucible of Normalisation
The fraught relationship between Israel and Iran casts a long shadow over the Abraham Accords. The UAE, and other Gulf states, share Israel’s concern regarding Iran’s regional ambitions and its nuclear programme. This shared threat perception was a significant motivator behind the initial impetus for normalisation. However, the intensification of the conflict in Gaza, and the increased operational capacity of Iran-backed proxies, has subtly altered the dynamic.
Iran has consistently presented the Abraham Accords as a betrayal of Palestinian interests, and has actively sought to undermine them through diplomatic pressure and, allegedly, support for groups opposing normalisation. The recent escalation has provided Iran with an opportunity to amplify this message and to position itself as a champion of the Palestinian cause. Israel, in turn, views Iran as the core instigator of regional instability and a threat to its security, further solidifying its alliance with states that share its concerns, including the UAE.
The ongoing tensions mean that while the UAE still prioritises a stable regional order – one where Iran’s influence is contained – it must also carefully manage its relationship with Israel to avoid being perceived as complicit in actions that exacerbate regional conflict. The UAE’s continued, low-profile engagement with Israel, despite the criticisms, is a reflection of this precarious balancing act; a need to maintain a security partnership whilst acknowledging and responding to Arab public sentiment.
Path Forward: Pragmatism and Incrementalism
The future of the Abraham Accords hinges on a cautious and pragmatic approach. A swift and comprehensive resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict seems unlikely in the short term. Therefore, realistic progress will necessitate a focus on incremental steps to manage tensions and preserve the existing framework of normalisation.
Continued, discreet diplomatic engagement between Israel and Arab states – particularly the UAE – is crucial. This includes focusing on areas of mutual interest, such as regional security, counter-terrorism, and economic cooperation, while avoiding public displays that could inflame tensions. Expanding economic ties, focusing on sectors that have limited political sensitivity, is also likely to continue.
A key challenge will be to demonstrate the tangible benefits of normalisation to the Palestinian people. Increased humanitarian aid, economic investment, and support for Palestinian institutions could help to mitigate the criticism levelled at the Accords. However, any progress on this front requires a shift in Israeli policy towards the occupied territories.
Ultimately, the sustainability of the Abraham Accords depends on addressing the underlying causes of regional instability and achieving a long-term solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. In the interim, quiet diplomacy, unwavering commitment to de-escalation, and a dose of realism will be essential to prevent the fragile framework from unraveling.
Source attribution: This report is based on analysis of the reporting surrounding the Abraham Accords, regional diplomatic sources and analysis of the publicly available information pertaining to the relationship between Israel and the UAE, as evidenced by the title “Quiet diplomacy holds: Israel keeps UAE missions open despite warnings”. It draws upon previously reported material from news outlets such as Reuters, the Associated Press, and the Times of Israel, coupled with expert commentary on Middle Eastern politics.