When the Abraham Accords were signed between Israel, the United Arab Emirates, and Bahrain in September 2020, almost no one in Britain took any notice. The agreements, mediated by the Trump administration, sought to “encourage efforts to promote interfaith and intercultural dialogue to advance a culture of peace among the three Abrahamic religions”.
The lack of British interest was partly due to the low quality of reporting, analysis, and context in UK media as well as the fact that, for many political commentators and politicians in Britain, the Middle East has tended to be synonymous with the Israel/Palestinian conflict and then, usually for posturing or virtue signalling to particular audiences.
(Of course, had the agreements been achieved by a Democratic presidency, there would have been almost universal clamour by the metropolitan left and their political and media buddies for recognition through such a prestigious award as a Nobel peace prize.)
While progress under the Accords was mainly in areas of business and trade, especially between the UAE and Israel, over 450,000 Israelis visited the UAE (mainly Dubai) between January 2021 and January 2023, something that would have been unthinkable in previous times.
Morocco soon joined the agreement, having had long historic links on a people-to-people basis with Israel (Jews made up over ten per cent of Morocco’s population prior to the establishment of the Israeli state in 1948).
One of the aims of the Trump administration was to widen the membership of the Accords, particularly to include, in the future, Saudi Arabia.
Why does this have direct significance for the situation that we see in the Middle East today, with the horrendous terrorist attacks on Israel being followed by a humanitarian disaster in Gaza? The answer lies largely, though not exclusively, in one word: Iran.
All the participants understood the danger that Iran posed to their security, either directly or through Iran’s proxies. It was one of the driving elements, as well as economic interest, that brought them closer together. When Mohammed bin Salman (MBS), the Saudi Crown Prince, appeared on Fox News in the United States saying that “every day we get closer” (to Israel), many of us felt that Iran was bound to react in a highly negative way.
Why? Because Iran’s leadership, including its supreme leader Ayatollah Khamenei, is deeply, fanatically, anti-Israel. For over 30 years he has been utterly consistent in his obsession about the “purity” of the of the Islamic Revolution, his detestation for America and the West, and his contempt for the very existence of the state of Israel.
If the regime which persecutes its enemies relentlessly, executes gays and other ‘undesirable’ groups and wishes to eliminate the Jewish state altogether sounds distinctly Hitlerian, then it is no coincidence.
Acting through its paid and armed proxies, Hamas, Hezbollah and the Houthis, Iran has sought to export instability to its neighbours in its quest for regional pre-eminence. We must be clear that Iran will stop at nothing to prevent peace and normalisation between Arab states and Israel.
The Houthis have fired missiles into the UAE and Saudi Arabia. Hezbollah has attacked American targets in the region, and now Hamas has unleashed terrorist atrocities for which the Israeli response was predictable and almost certainly factored in by Hamas’ leaders and allies. This week Iran itself has launched missile attacks into Pakistan, Iraq, and Syria, provoking a dangerous retaliation from Islamabad.
After a considerable period when the West’s attitude towards Iran has been one of wishful thinking rather than critical analysis, governments are finally being forced to act after the behaviour of the Iranian-backed Houthis in their attacks on ships in the Red Sea.
While the British Government has correctly made clear that the response of coalition forces to the attacks is a specific response to a specific threat, it is impossible to extricate the Iranian influence from the wider problems in the region and thus, dealing with Iran will have to be part of any wider solution.
Where do we start? Clearly, there needs to be a firm and clear military response to Houthi attacks on international shipping, destroying their logistics and diminishing their military capabilities. Any further attacks must be met with equally strong responses by the coalition that includes not just Britain and the United States but countries such as Bahrain, Australia, Canada, Norway, and the Netherlands. Iran must understand that prosecuting its conflicts through its proxies will be met with the strongest measures.
This resolve from the international community needs to be matched with an equally realistic plan for the future of Gaza. Unless the situation is brought under control, we could see the radicalisation of a whole new generation which will take us not to the future mapped out by the Abraham Accords, but back to 1971 and a decade of hijackings, bombings, and Munich.
We need to set a course for a genuinely long-lasting and deliverable piece. As I said in the House of Commons:
“Peace is not just the absence of war or conflict, but the freedom from the fear of conflict, oppression, or terror. Peace requires mutual respect, freedom from persecution and living without fear of destitution. It comes with self-determination and liberation from arbitrary justice. It needs hope and dignity, and enforceable rights. Only when all the people of the Middle East can achieve all those things can any of us talk about having achieved peace.”
Warm words about the support for a vague two state solution will no longer do. There needs to be a plan for the future of a Palestinian state that guarantees peace and security for Israel at the same time. Arab nations – especially, but not exclusively, Saudi Arabia – need to be part of dealing with extremist groups if we are to see long-term security and stability, and will need also to be involved in establishing a stable form of governance in the Palestinian territories.
This will need to consign to history both the corruption and brutality of Hamas and the ineptitude of the Palestinian Authority. A workable authority needs to be established to give ordinary Palestinians access to the educational, medical, and social services that will provide real hope for the future.
Any security guarantee will need to be underwritten internationally, primarily by the United States and Saudi Arabia, if enough confidence is going to be generated to explore the contentious and difficult options ahead. Israel must understand that a return to the status quo ante is not possible after the events of recent months, and the international community must do more to confront those who wish to see the state of Israel eliminated.
This brings us back to Iran, who let’s remember have supplied Russia with the drones to murder civilians in their illegal invasion of Ukraine. Yet Iran Air, which transported the drones, still operates out of Heathrow; Iranian banks still trade a stones-throw from the Bank of England; and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps is not a proscribed organisation.
Our policy needs to be joined up, realistic and deliverable. The era of wishful thinking, of hoping that Iran will change, must be confined to history, and a timetable for a proper political solution to the Palestinian question put in train, despite the obstacles. We need real international leadership more than ever before. That may be the biggest challenge of all.