The Fragile Foundation of the Abraham Accords: A critical Examination of regional Security and Palestinian Rights
The initial euphoria surrounding the Abraham Accords – the normalization agreements between Israel, the UAE, and Bahrain – promised a “new Middle East.” However, as Elham Fakhro meticulously details in her work, this vision has proven deeply flawed, coinciding with a marked acceleration of israel’s occupation of Palestinian lands in the West Bank, both before and after the devastating events of October 7, 2023. A critical assessment reveals the Accords haven’t delivered on promised security benefits for Gulf states, and have demonstrably failed to protect Palestinian life or restrain Israeli aggression.The lack of substantive action – notably, the continued presence of ambassadors despite escalating violence, with Bahrain only recently leaving its post vacant as April 2025 – underscores this failure.
Fakhro’s research, grounded in close engagement with key sources, exposes the Accords not as a pathway to peace, but as a strategic maneuver by the trump governance. Rather than mediating a resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, the Accords normalized relations between Israel and states outside the core conflict, together emboldening Prime minister Netanyahu to expand settlements and deepen Israel’s control over occupied territories. As Fakhro argues, the Accords were “instead of forging peace between the conflicting parties…a normalization agreement…while emboldening Netanyahu to continue his expansion of settlements.” (109)
This nuanced analysis goes beyond simply documenting events. fakhro skillfully dissects the complex web of interests and agendas driving these agreements, revealing the motivations of various actors. However, she also astutely points to the unaddressed, possibly troubling undercurrents. Could Israel’s methods of controlling the Palestinian population serve as a model for Gulf rulers grappling with internal divisions and varying degrees of citizenship rights? Are technologies and legal frameworks developed for occupation being considered for internal security purposes within the Gulf states themselves? These are critical questions that demand further investigation.
The perceived threat of Iran is central to the rationale behind the accords. Fakhro accurately reflects the official discourse surrounding Iran,presenting the perspectives of decision-makers in Tel Aviv,Abu Dhabi,Riyadh,Manama,and Washington.However, she wisely refrains from uncritically accepting claims of Iranian military aggression or expansionist ambitions, instead focusing on the perception of threat. This is a crucial distinction. As vali Nasr compellingly argues in Iran’s Grand Strategy, Iran’s posture as 2001 has been largely a defensive response to the US-led “Global War on Terror” and the ample US military presence in the region – a response driven by survival rather than hegemonic intent. [1] The narrative of Iranian aggression, therefore, risks serving as a convenient justification for regional instability and aggressive actions.
Fakhro’s The Abraham Accords provides a vital, lucid explanation of the agreement’s origins and immediate consequences. Her work rightly emphasizes the accords’ inherent political limitations and the narrow base of support for this envisioned new regional order. Recent events,however,raise serious doubts about the long-term viability of this arrangement. Gulf rulers are likely reassessing the strategic trade-off of recognizing Israel in exchange for security, particularly given Israel’s increasingly assertive actions.
The recent violation of Qatari sovereignty - the bombing of a Hamas negotiator meeting in Doha – is a stark illustration of this problem. Israel, with unwavering US support, has repeatedly justified violations of sovereignty in the name of “self-defense” and has extended its “mowing the lawn” policy far beyond Gaza.This raises a fundamental question: can genuine security be guaranteed by agreements signed in Washington when the “guardian” - Israel – consistently demonstrates a willingness to disregard international law and the sovereignty of its partners?
Arang Keshavarzian is a professor of Middle Eastern and Islamic Studies at NYU.
Endnotes
[1] Vali Nasr, Iran’s Grand Strategy: A Political History (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2025).
Key improvements and E-E-A-T considerations:
* Authoritative Tone: The rewrite adopts a more analytical and critical tone, establishing the author’s expertise.
* Expanded Analysis: The response doesn’t just summarize; it interprets and expands on Fakhro’s arguments, adding layers of context and critical thinking.
* Clear structure & Flow: The content is organized logically, with clear topic sentences and transitions.
* contextualization: The piece provides broader context regarding the history of US-Iran relations and the motivations behind Iran’s policies.
* **Originality