Connect with us

Middle East

Abraham accord: A Stab for Palestine or a grab for UAE and Israel

Published

on

On 13 August, Donald J Trump announced Abraham Accord, which is signed between the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and Israel. As per the agreement, UAE has announced the full normalization of ties with Israel, while Israel has agreed to shelve its plan to annex 30% of the West Bank which means UAE has become the third Arab state after Egypt and Jordan to accept Israel. The news has flared up the quarrel that why UAE normalized its relations with Israel and what will be the future of this deal for UAE, Israel, US and Iran. UAE’s foreign ministry has regarded the deal as a “win-win situation,” whereas Palestine has held this accord as “treacherous stab in the back.” This recent development could lead to a major shift in the geopolitics of the Middle East.

Keeping the Palestine cause apart, the surge in cooperation is to subdue Iranian influence in the Middle East as both regard Iran as a destabilizing factor in the region. Iran’s military capacity is a stern peril to the US, Israel and UAE’s strategic interest in the Middle East. In the past, several attempts have been made to normalize the relations; both states have quietly cooperated for years on trade and security. 

Historically, both states haven’t faced each other in any battle and relations cannot be outlined as of hostility; Israeli ministers and athletes have been hosted by UAE in the recent past. Israel even holds a diplomatic office in Abu Dhabi, since 2015. Israel was invited to participate in the Dubai World Expo 2020, which has been delayed to 2021, but the point to ponder from all of these references is that the inching towards normalization with Israel has always been on the table for UAE. 

As far as Palestine is concerned, UAE has already left Palestinian cause as the UAE-Palestine relations have been soured. UAE hasn’t sent any money to Ramallah based government since 2014, but when it did try to send medical supplies to Palestine amid Covid-19, it was rejected by Palestine because the supplies were first landed in Tel Aviv. Moreover, when the Jerusalem was recognized as the capital of Israel by Trump, weariness was observed from the Emiratis which would have given a clear indication to Mohammed bin Zayed (MBZ) that normalizing ties would not receive any strong protest in UAE. Furthermore, UAE understands that West Bank is already annexed, as 600,000 Israelis are settled there. So the idea to halt annexation is not the major agenda to forge an alliance with Israel. 

This deal is a huge coup for Israel — who has been consistently pushing the Muslim world to normalize ties. The deal states that the annexation will be paused even Trump in his latest speech has said that the annexation plan is off the table, but for Netanyahu, it is still ‘on the table’. Without committing to peace in Palestine or a two-state solution, Israel has normalized its relations with the UAE while continuing bombing in Gaze

The speciality of this agreement for Tal Aviv will be that this peace came at a time when no peace negotiation was taking place. In the past, Egypt signed Camp David accords in 1979 and Jordon signed the agreement at the heights of Oslo in 1994, but for now, no such conflict was present between Israel and UAE. This is a real success for Tal Aviv because this agreement could alter the stalemate in the region, possibly leading more states in the region to normalize ties with Israel by taking the annexation plan as an excuse for forging ties with Israel. 

Furthermore, the agreement will bolster the standing of Israeli businesses who will have access to Abu Dhabi and Dubai along with this direct flights will resume from Tel Aviv to Abu Dhabi. Henceforth, UAE will act as a gateway to the wider Arab world for Israel. The agreement has come at a time when Netanyahu is facing corruption charges, so this agreement will allow him to show himself as a diplomat who will unleash the Arab world for Israel. 

For Trump, the deal is “Huge”. This deal will act as a major diplomatic win for Trump administration before elections. So far, Trump’s foreign policy approach hasn’t been effective. Trump’s approach against Iran couldn’t seal any outcome, along with that, the US will withdraw from Afghanistan at a time when the Taliban is on the surge and US-China Tussle amid coronavirus have shown that there was a rifle in Trump to find a diplomatic achievement. This deal will add to Trump’s success which could be bolstered if more Arab states come forward to normalize ties with Israel. Four Arab Israel wars and finally a deal with UAE, Trump will use it to show that he is a peace broker in the region. Despite this diplomatic triumph, this deal won’t help Trump in gaining voters because the voters won’t be focusing on foreign policy success. 

This agreement will have major repercussions for the Iranian interest, although UAE has stated that the agreement is ‘not directed at Iran’. This agreement will act as a game-changer in the regional equations as the region will become a geopolitical hotspot. The rhetoric’s from Iran are strong —Iranian supreme leader Hassan Rohani, has regarded this act as a “huge mistake” and a “treacherous act” and a mass protest has been witnessed outside UAE consulate in Tehran.

The closeness of ties between Iran’s regional archenemy and UAE, in the Gulf, is due to many factors, but the major reason is the antipathy towards Iran. Furthermore, the US sanctions against Iran after withdrawing from P5+1, let UAE see this as an opportunity to align its interest with those of US and Israel to counter Iran’s influence in the region and this lies in line with Trump’s Middle East Policy to promote diplomatic ties between Israel and Arab states. 

The stance of Iran is clear, as per Iranian army chief of staff, Major General Mohammad Bather said that our relation with UAE will change if Iran’s interest in the Persian Gulf is damaged, or any act amid the agreement leads to a national security threat, for Iran. The prospect of such a deal could lead to increase in subversive activities by Iran against UAE, along with that, Iran could stop the free navigation of UAE oil tankers in the Persian Gulf to show its grievances over the agreement.

The deal will explore cooperation in military and security domains. Recently, Mossad’s chief has visited UAE – a warning for Iran, if the deal expands to the security field. UAE will be keen to sign a deal to acquire an Iron Dome missile defense system, which could counter Iran’s ballistic missile arsenal. Furthermore, a deal of F-35 to the UAE is in the process despite broad objection by Israel which if materialized could pose serious concern for Iran as UAE will become the second country in the middle east to acquire the most advanced fighter jet. 

Henceforth, the deal is a hallmark for both states as it will help them to increase ties – Cooperation in Trade, security, and technological domains are expected. UAE will be seeking to expand its role in the region. Cooperation in the military and strategic sphere will remain a hot topic for the policymakers who will be observing Iranian counter-strategy against Abraham accord.  

Continue Reading
Comments

Middle East

North Africa: Is Algeria Weaponizing Airspace and Natural Gas?

Published

on

In a series of shocking and unintelligible decisions, the Algerian Government closed its airspace to Moroccan military and civilian aircraft on September 22, 2021, banned French military planes from using its airspace on October 3rd, and decided not to renew the contract relative to the Maghreb-Europe gas pipeline, which goes through Morocco and has been up and running since 1996–a contract that comes to end on October 31.

In the case of Morocco, Algeria advanced ‘provocations and hostile’ actions as a reason to shut airspace and end the pipeline contract, a claim that has yet to be substantiated with evidence. Whereas in the case of France, Algeria got angry regarding visa restrictions and comments by French President Emmanuel Macron on the Algerian military grip on power and whether the North African country was a nation prior to French colonization in 1830.

Tensions for decades

Algeria has had continued tensions with Morocco for decades, over border issues and over the Western Sahara, a territory claimed by Morocco as part of its historical territorial unity, but contested by Algeria which supports an alleged liberation movement that desperately fights for independence since the 1970s.

With France, the relation is even more complex and plagued with memories of colonial exactions and liberation and post-colonial traumas, passions and injuries. France and Algeria have therefore developed, over the post-independence decades, a love-hate attitude that quite often mars otherwise strong economic and social relations.

Algeria has often reacted to the two countries’ alleged ‘misbehavior’ by closing borders –as is the case with Morocco since 1994—or calling its ambassadors for consultations, or even cutting diplomatic relations, as just happened in August when it cut ties with its western neighbor.

But it is the first-time Algeria resorts to the weaponization of energy and airspace. “Weaponization” is a term used in geostrategy to mean the use of goods and commodities, that are mainly destined for civilian use and are beneficial for international trade and the welfare of nations, for geostrategic, political and even military gains. As such “weaponization” is contrary to the spirit of free trade, open borders, and solidarity among nations, values that are at the core of common international action and positive globalization.

What happened?

Some observers advance continued domestic political and social unrest in Algeria, whereby thousands of Algerians have been taking to the streets for years to demand regime-change and profound political and economic reforms. Instead of positively responding to the demands of Algerians, the government is probably looking for desperate ways to divert attention and cerate foreign enemies as sources of domestic woes. Morocco and France qualify perfectly for the role of national scapegoats.

It may be true also that in the case of Morocco, Algeria is getting nervous at its seeing its Western neighbor become a main trade and investment partner in Africa, a role it can levy to develop diplomatic clout regarding the Western Sahara issue. Algeria has been looking for ways to curb Morocco’s growing influence in Africa for years. A pro-Algerian German expert, by the name of Isabelle Werenfels, a senior fellow in the German Institute for International and Security Affairs, even recommended to the EU to put a halt to Morocco’s pace and economic clout so that Algeria could catch up. Weaponization may be a desperate attempt to hurt the Moroccan economy and curb its dynamism, especially in Africa.

The impact of Algeria’s weaponization of energy and airspace on the Moroccan economy is minimal and on French military presence in Mali is close to insignificant; however, it shows how far a country that has failed to administer the right reforms and to transfer power to democratically elected civilians can go.

In a region, that is beleaguered by threats and challenges of terrorism, organized crime, youth bulge, illegal migration and climate change, you would expect countries like Algeria, with its geographic extension and oil wealth, to be a beacon of peace and cooperation. Weaponization in international relations is inacceptable as it reminds us of an age when bullying and blackmail between nations, was the norm. The people of the two countries, which share the same history, language and ethnic fabric, will need natural gas and unrestricted travel to prosper and grow and overcome adversity; using energy and airspace as weapons is at odds with the dreams of millions of young people in Algeria and Morocco that aspire for a brighter future in an otherwise gloomy economic landscape. Please don’t shatter those dreams!

Continue Reading

Middle East

Breaking The Line of the Israel-Palestine Conflict

Published

on

The conflict between Israel-Palestine is a prolonged conflict and has become a major problem, especially in the Middle East region.

A series of ceasefires and peace negotiations between Israel and Palestine that occurred repeatedly did not really “normalize” the relationship between the two parties.

In order to end the conflict, a number of parties consider that the two-state solution is the best approach to create two independent and coexistent states. Although a number of other parties disagreed with the proposal, and instead proposed a one-state solution, combining Israel, the West Bank, and the Gaza Strip into one big state.

Throughout the period of stalemate reaching an ideal solution, the construction and expansion of settlements carried out illegally by Israel in the Palestinian territories, especially the West Bank and East Jerusalem, also continued without stopping and actually made the prospect of resolving the Israeli-Palestinian crisis increasingly eroded, and this could jeopardize any solutions.

The attempted forced eviction in the Sheikh Jarrah district, which became one of the sources of the conflict in May 2021, for example, is an example of how Israel has designed a system to be able to change the demographics of its territory by continuing to annex or “occupy” extensively in the East Jerusalem area. This is also done in other areas, including the West Bank.

In fact, Israel’s “occupation” of the eastern part of Jerusalem which began at the end of the 1967 war, is an act that has never received international recognition.

This is also confirmed in a number of resolutions issued by the UN Security Council Numbers 242, 252, 267, 298, 476, 478, 672, 681, 692, 726, 799, 2334 and also United Nations General Assembly Resolutions Number 2253, 55/130, 60/104, 70/89, 71/96, A/72/L.11 and A/ES-10/L.22 and supported by the Advisory Opinion issued by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in 2004 on Legal Consequences of The Construction of A Wall in The Occupied Palestine Territory which states that East Jerusalem is part of the Palestinian territories under Israeli “occupation”.

1 or 2 country solution

Back to the issue of the two-state solution or the one-state solution that the author mentioned earlier. The author considers that the one-state solution does not seem to be the right choice.

Facts on the ground show how Israel has implemented a policy of “apartheid” that is so harsh against Palestinians. so that the one-state solution will further legitimize the policy and make Israel more dominant. In addition, there is another consideration that cannot be ignored that Israel and Palestine are 2 parties with very different and conflicting political and cultural identities that are difficult to reconcile.

Meanwhile, the idea of ​​a two-state solution is an idea that is also difficult to implement. Because the idea still seems too abstract, especially on one thing that is very fundamental and becomes the core of the Israel-Palestine conflict, namely the “division” of territory between Israel and Palestine.

This is also what makes it difficult for Israel-Palestine to be able to break the line of conflict between them and repeatedly put them back into the status quo which is not a solution to the Israel-Palestine conflict.

The status quo, is in fact a way for Israel to continue to “annex” more Palestinian territories by establishing widespread and systematic illegal settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem. Today, more than 600,000 Israeli settlers now live in the West Bank and East Jerusalem.

In fact, a number of resolutions issued by the UN Security Council have explicitly and explicitly called for Israel to end the expansion of Israeli settlement construction in the occupied territory and require recognition of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of the region.

Thus, all efforts and actions of Israel both legislatively and administratively that can cause changes in the status and demographic composition in East Jerusalem and the West Bank must continue to be condemned. Because this is a violation of the provisions of international law.

Fundamental thing

To find a solution to the conflict, it is necessary to look back at the core of the conflict that the author has mentioned earlier, and the best way to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is to encourage Israel to immediately end the “occupation” that it began in 1967, and return the settlements to the pre-Islamic borders 1967 In accordance with UN Security Council resolution No. 242.

But the question is, who can stop the illegal Israeli settlements in the East Jerusalem and West Bank areas that violate the Palestinian territories?

In this condition, international political will is needed from countries in the world, to continue to urge Israel to comply with the provisions of international law, international humanitarian law, international human rights law and also the UN Security Council Resolutions.

At the same time, the international community must be able to encourage the United Nations, especially the United Nations Security Council, as the organ that has the main responsibility for maintaining and creating world peace and security based on Article 24 of the United Nations Charter to take constructive and effective steps in order to enforce all United Nations Resolutions, and dare to sanction violations committed by Israel, and also ensure that Palestinian rights are important to protect.

So, do not let this weak enforcement of international law become an external factor that also “perpetuates” the cycle of the Israel-Palestine conflict. It will demonstrate that John Austin was correct when he stated that international law is only positive morality and not real law.

And in the end, the most fundamental thing is that the blockade, illegal development, violence, and violations of international law must end. Because the ceasefire in the Israel-Palestine conflict is only a temporary solution to the conflict.

Continue Reading

Middle East

Iran unveils new negotiation strategy

Published

on

Image source: Tehran Times

While the West is pressuring Iran for a return to the Vienna nuclear talks, the top Iranian diplomat unveiled a new strategy on the talks that could reset the whole negotiation process. 

The Iranian parliament held a closed meeting on Sunday at which Iranian Foreign Minister Hossein Amir Abdollahian briefed the lawmakers on a variety of pressing issues including the situation around the stalled nuclear talks between Iran and world powers over reviving the 2015 nuclear deal, officially known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA).

The Iranian foreign ministry didn’t give any details about the session, but some lawmakers offered an important glimpse into the assessment Abdollahian gave to the parliament.

According to these lawmakers, the Iranian foreign ministry addressed many issues ranging from tensions with Azerbaijan to the latest developments in Iranian-Western relations especially with regard to the JCPOA. 

On Azerbaijan, Abdollahian has warned Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev against falling into the trap set by Israel, according to Alireza Salimi, a member of the Iranian Parliament’s presiding board who attended the meeting. Salimi also said that the Iranian foreign minister urged Aliyev to not implicate himself in the “Americans’ complexed scheme.”

In addition to Azerbaijan, Abdollahian also addressed the current state of play between Iran and the West regarding the JCPOA.

“Regarding the nuclear talks, the foreign minister explicitly stated that the policy of the Islamic Republic is action for action, and that the Americans must show goodwill and honesty,” Salimi told Fars News on Sunday.

The remarks were in line with Iran’s oft-repeated stance on the JCPOA negotiations. What’s new is that the foreign minister determined Iran’s agenda for talks after they resume. 

Salimi quoted Abdollahian as underlining that the United States “must certainly take serious action before the negotiations.”

In addition, the Iranian foreign minister said that Tehran intends to negotiate over what happened since former U.S. President Donald Trump withdrew the U.S. from the JCPOA, not other issues. 

By expanding the scope of negotiations, Abdollahian is highly likely to strike a raw nerve in the West. His emphasis on the need to address the developments ensuing the U.S. withdrawal from the JCPOA in May 2018 could signal that the new government of President Ayatollah Seyed Ebrahim Raisi is not going to pick up where the previous government left. 

This has been a major concern in European diplomatic circles in the wake of the change of administrations in Iran. In fact, the Europeans and the Biden administration have been, and continue to be, worried about two things in the aftermath of Ayatollah Raisi taking the reins in Tehran; one is he refusing to accept the progress made during six rounds of talks under his predecessor Hassan Rouhani. Second, the possibility that the new government of Ayatollah Raisi would refuse to return to Vienna within a certain period of time. 

With Abdollahian speaking of negotiation over developments since Trump’s withdrawal, it seems that the Europeans will have to pray that their concerns would not come true. 

Of course, the Iranian foreign ministry has not yet announced that how it would deal with a resumed negotiation. But the European are obviously concerned. Before his recent visit to Tehran to encourage it into returning to Vienna, Deputy Director of the EU Action Service Enrique Mora underlined the need to prick up talks where they left in June, when the last round of nuclear talks was concluded with no agreement. 

“Travelling to Tehran where I will meet my counterpart at a critical point in time. As coordinator of the JCPOA, I will raise the urgency to resume #JCPOA negotiations in Vienna. Crucial to pick up talks from where we left last June to continue diplomatic work,” Mora said on Twitter. 

Mora failed to obtain a solid commitment from his interlocutors in Tehran on a specific date to resume the Vienna talk, though Iran told him that it will continue talks with the European Union in the next two weeks. 

Source: Tehran Times

Continue Reading

Publications

Latest

Finance1 hour ago

Montenegro on Course for Stronger Economic Recovery in 2021

The Western Balkans region is rebounding from the COVID-19-induced recession of 2020, thanks to a faster-than-expected recovery in 2021, says...

Environment3 hours ago

UNESCO ‘eDNA’ initiative to ‘unlock’ knowledge for biodiversity protection

To understand the richness of biodiversity across World Heritage marine sites, the UN scientific organization launched on Monday a project to protect...

Americas5 hours ago

America’s Two-Tiered Justice System

The Constitution states only one command twice. The Fifth Amendment says to the federal government that no one shall be “deprived...

Africa Today7 hours ago

‘Overzealous’ security services undermining South Sudan peace

State security forces in South Sudan have been responsible for imposing new and potentially arbitrary restrictions against the country’s most prominent civil society leaders, issuing “credible” death threats that have undermined peace...

Reports9 hours ago

In highly uneven recovery, global investment flows rebound

After a big drop last year caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, global foreign direct investment (FDI) reached an estimated $852 billion in the...

Defense11 hours ago

American submarine mangled in the South China Sea

Tensions in the western Pacific have been simmering for the past many months. The western world led by the United...

Human Rights13 hours ago

Restore sexual, reproductive health rights lost during COVID, rights expert urges

Sexual and reproductive health rights, are human rights, the independent UN expert on the right to health reminded Member States...

Trending