Abraham Accords: A recalibration of trust and strategic alignment seems inevitable.
Context
The Abraham Accords, brokered in 2020 under the Trump administration, represented a series of normalisation agreements between Israel and several Arab nations, most notably the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain. The core principle underpinning these accords was a re-evaluation of the longstanding Arab position that normal relations with Israel were contingent upon a resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Instead, these nations saw tactical and economic advantages in establishing direct ties focused on trade, security cooperation, and shared concerns regarding Iran’s regional influence. Morocco and Sudan also joined the accords, although the Sudanese process remains particularly fragile amidst internal political instability. While hailed as a historic breakthrough by proponents, the agreements also drew criticism for sidelining the Palestinian issue and potentially exacerbating regional divisions. Today, the Accords remain in place, though momentum had demonstrably slowed even before the outbreak of the current regional turbulence. These partnerships focused on building economic ties and strategic security collaboration, but their future now faces a significant re-evaluation.
Progress Made
The momentum generated by the Accords in their initial phase delivered tangible results. Bilateral trade between Israel and the UAE surged, reaching over $2.5 billion in 2022 and continuing to grow. Agreements were signed spanning numerous sectors including technology, tourism, healthcare, and renewable energy. Israeli tech firms established a significant presence in the Emirates, leveraging Dubai’s status as a regional hub. Bahrain also saw a rise in economic cooperation, concentrating particularly on financial services and investment.
Beyond economics, security cooperation steadily deepened. Israel and the UAE conducted joint military exercises, signalling a clear message of alignment against perceived shared threats. Intelligence sharing also expanded, enabling improved regional threat assessment. Morocco deepened security ties, including the purchase of Israeli-made air defence systems. Cultural exchanges and people-to-people programs – although somewhat constrained by the pandemic initially – were significantly expanded, designed to foster greater understanding and long-term relationships.
Critically, the Accords fostered a new level of open dialogue and diplomatic engagement between regional actors. This created platforms for discussion on issues beyond the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, like climate change, water security, and regional stability. The success of the Accords sparked further discussions regarding potential normalisation with Saudi Arabia, though those talks, while advanced, were ultimately paused.
Challenges
Despite the early successes, the Abraham Accords faced headwinds even before the recent shift in regional dynamics. The most significant of these was the continued absence of progress on the Palestinian front. While the Accords’ architects argued they would create a more favourable environment for a two-state solution, critics maintained that they incentivised Israel to maintain the status quo and diminished the leverage available to the Palestinians. Public opinion in several Arab countries remained largely opposed to normalisation with Israel in the absence of Palestinian statehood.
Internal political dynamics within the signatory states also presented challenges. In Sudan, the fragile political transition following the 2019 revolution created uncertainty surrounding its commitment to the Accords. Divergences in foreign policy priorities and domestic political pressures within Morocco and Jordan occasionally manifested as cautious engagement rather than full-throated embrace.
Moreover, the agreements’ focus on security cooperation centred on Iran, but the intensity of the threat perception varied across the signatory states. This created potential friction and differing approaches to regional security. The war in Yemen, and differing approaches to resolving it, represent one such area of divergence. The agreements also required continual management of sensitivities – particularly regarding religious sites and public discourse – within societies unaccustomed to open relations with Israel.
Israel-Iran Dimension
The mediating role of the United States in securing a potential memorandum of understanding between the US and Iran fundamentally alters the landscape for the Abraham Accords. The accords were, in part, predicated on the assumption of sustained US opposition to Iran and a broadly shared regional perception of an escalating Iranian threat. A US-Iran détente, even a limited one focused on de-escalation, fundamentally shifts that calculation.
If the reported MOU delivers on its stated goals of stabilising the region, it diminishes the primary justification for the deep security cooperation components of the Accords. Countries like the UAE and Bahrain, which viewed the Accords as a strategic hedge against Iran, may reassess the necessity – and the potential risks – of maintaining such a high level of alignment with Israel in a context where tensions with Tehran are ostensibly easing.
Furthermore, a US-Iran agreement could lead to Iran’s unlocking of frozen assets and increased oil revenue. This could empower Iran to reassert its influence in the region, potentially challenging the economic benefits and diplomatic gains secured by the Accords’ signatories. This doesn’t necessarily mean the Accords will collapse, but it suggests a recalibration and a scaling back of the more ambitious security-focused aspects.
Path Forward
The future of the Abraham Accords in light of a potential US-Iran agreement is likely to be one of pragmatic adaptation rather than outright abandonment. The economic ties forged between Israel and the UAE and Bahrain are substantial and offer mutual benefits that outweigh purely political considerations. Therefore, these relationships are therefore likely to endure. However, the level of public enthusiasm and security collaboration may cool.
The focus will likely shift from countering Iran to managing Iran. Regional actors will reassess their risk profiles and adjust their foreign policies accordingly. The UAE, in particular, will likely seek to maintain a balancing act, preserving its economic ties with Israel while simultaneously engaging with a de-escalating Iran.
The stalled discussions regarding Saudi-Israeli normalisation may face further complications. Saudi Arabia has consistently stated that normalisation is contingent upon meaningful progress on the Palestinian issue, and a US-Iran agreement – if it offers a pathway to broader regional stability – might reduce the perceived urgency of achieving normalisation with Israel as a means of bolstering its own security. The Palestinian Authority will be key. If a window for renewed peace talks opens, it could inject fresh momentum into the Accords, but to achieve that will require a deep re-engagement from the US and other international actors. Continued US diplomatic engagement – and preservation of the economic benefits underpinning the Accords – will be vital to ensuring their survival and helping them navigate this new regional order.
Source: Analysis based on publicly available information and reporting on Middle East affairs, informed by the stated premise of a US-Iran memorandum of understanding impacting regional dynamics. Reporting by Merlows’ network of regional analysts and intelligence sources.