On 15 September 2020 the United Arab Emirates (UAE), Israel and Bahrain signed the Abraham Accords: Two separate agreements that will see the establishment of diplomatic relations between Israel and the two Gulf-states respectively, as well as future co-operation in various fields, ranging from trade to technology to tourism.
Apart from detailing a so-called ‘normalization’ of relations between Israel and the UAE and Bahrain, the text of the Abraham Accords pertain to peace in the region, with particular reference made to the conflict between Israel and Palestine.
Both agreements promise a continuation of efforts to achieve a “just”, “comprehensive”, “realistic” and “enduring” resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. However, the agreement between Israel and the UAE “recalls” specifically US President Trump’s Vision for Peace in the Middle East.[1]
Unveiled in January 2020, Trump’s plan for the region was neither just nor realistic and could only be considered comprehensive and enduring for the damage it would do to Palestinian hopes of attaining a viable state.
The plan, which would see Israel declare sovereignty over roughly 30% of the West Bank and leave the Palestinians with a fragmented territory, was flatly rejected by Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, stating that it would make “Swiss cheese” of Palestine and finally “put an end to the Question of Palestine”.[2]
Trump’s vision was also rejected by Jordan’s King Abdullah II for the proposed annexation of the Jordan Valley by Israel and the negative impacts the annexation of the West Bank would have on the two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
Any annexation of Palestinian or Jordanian land was also opposed by the vast majority of the international community, including the European Union, the United Kingdom, the United Nations and the Arab League, with each recognizing it as a contravention of international law, including United Nations resolutions 3314, the Fourth Geneva conventions and the Oslo Accords.[3] [4] [5]
Ultimately, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was unable to go ahead with his annexation due to international and domestic opposition, his ongoing trial for charges of corruption, and the start of the Corona-virus pandemic. However, Netanyahu has far from abandoned his plans for the West Bank, insisting that the annexation is still “on the table” after agreeing to only delay his annexation plan as part of the normalization deal with the UAE. [6]
The Abraham Accords should be understood as diplomacy on the part of Netanyahu in order to gather enough support to eventually push through the annexation of the West Bank. Indeed, when the EU and UK (who had previously opposed any annexation) announced their support for the normalization deals, they also welcomed Netanyahu’s decision to “suspend” his plan for the West Bank; not abandon it, but merely put it on hold.[7] [8]
Although both the EU and UK referenced commitments to international law and a negotiated settlement between the Israelis and Palestinians, the fact that they are talking about annexation at all is a win for Netanyahu. That is to say, despite any normalization of relations between Israel and any other state, the international community should be focusing its efforts at getting Israel to fulfill its commitment to ending its occupation of the West Bank, an occupation that has been going on for decades and which in itself is an effective annexation of Palestinian land.
* * * * *
To positively reference President Trump’s Vision for Peace in the Abraham Accords and link it to further efforts to attain peace in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict allows the idea of annexation to persist and with that the ultimate threat to Palestinian self-determination still looms. To be clear, the annexation would be a grave violation of international law and a people’s rights.
Interestingly, the agreement signed between Israel and the UAE actually invokes the United Nations’ “principles of international law” when it comes to relations between the two signatories, stressing the need for negotiations should any dispute arise. In light of this, the two parties would do better to respect UN Security Council Resolution 2334, passed in 2016, which states, “it [the UN] will not recognize any changes to the 4 June 1967 lines, including with regard to Jerusalem, other than those agreed by the parties through negotiations”[9]
When rejecting the Trump-Netanyahu annexation plan back in January 2020, Palestinian President Abbas suggested “holding an international peace conference under the auspices of the Middle East Quartet, which includes the United States, Russia, the European Union and the United Nations, and the permanent member states of the Security Council, in the presence of Palestine and Israel.” [10] This has to be the way forward, not the now-decades-long-dynamic of unrealistic and unacceptable US-sponsored initiatives drawn up in collaboration with Israel and lacking any Palestinian representation.
Footnotes
[1] The full texts of the Abraham Accords can be accessed by the below links:
The Abraham Accords Declaration:
https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/the-abraham-accords-declaration/
Abraham Accords Peace Agreement: Treaty of Peace, Diplomatic Relations and Full Normalization Between the United Arab Emirates and the State of Israel:
Abraham Accords: Declaration of Peace, Cooperation, and Constructive Diplomatic and Friendly Relations:
[2] https://twitter.com/Palestine_UN/status/1227262359175081986
[3] Definition of Aggression, United Nations General Assembly Resolution 3314 (XXIX)
“(a) The invasion or attack by the armed forces of a State of the territory of another State, or any military occupation, however temporary, resulting from such invasion or attack, or any annexation by the use of force of the territory of another State or part thereof,”
http://hrlibrary.umn.edu/instree/GAres3314.html
[4] The Fourth Geneva Conventions regarding the occupation of territories
[5] The Oslo Accords, Article 31
“7. Neither side shall initiate or take any step that will change the status of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip pending the outcome of the permanent status negotiations.”
“8. The two Parties view the West Bank and the Gaza Strip as a single territorial unit, the integrity and status of which will be preserved during the interim period.”
[6] https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2020/8/13/netanyahu-says-west-bank-annexation-plans-still-on-the-table
[7] https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2020/08/15/declaration-by-the-high-representative-on-behalf-of-european-union-on-the-announcement-of-a-normalisation-of-relations-between-israel-and-the-uae/
[8] https://in.reuters.com/article/us-israel-emirates-britain/uks-johnson-welcomes-deal-to-normalise-israel-uae-relations-idUSKCN2592KK
[9] United Nations Security Council Resolution 2334 (2016)
Underlines that it will not recognize any changes to the 4 June 1967 lines, including with regard to Jerusalem, other than those agreed by the parties through negotiations;
[10] https://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2020/02/palestinian-abbas-conference-peace-process-israel.html
peaceinthestreets 
[…] the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Morocco and, unofficially, Saudi Arabia, in fact amount to a normalization through diplomacy of Israel’s annexation of the West Bank. A fact that seems to have resonated with Israeli extremists during their demonstrations in […]
LikeLike