Lessons learned from Israeli-Arab normalization

The list of global conflicts seems endless. Tensions in the South China Sea. Violence between Turkey and armed Kurdish groups. India and Pakistan. The Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. And that’s just a sampling.

This year’s UN General Assembly opens today (September 14) and its annual high-level debate session is scheduled for next week, when leaders from around the world have time to the world stage for debating peace, opportunities and grievances. Many analysts have criticized the UN for doing just that: arguing for days, weeks and years without taking concrete actions that lead to peace.

Bahrain’s Foreign Minister Abdullatif Al Zayani, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, US President Donald Trump and United Arab Emirates (UAE) Foreign Minister Abdullah bin Zayed , participate in the signing of the Abraham Accords, normalizing relations between Israel and some of its middle EAS (credit): REUTERS / TOM BRENNER)

The vision of it all begs the question: what did the United Nations, often seemingly trapped in the moving sands of resolving difficult global conflicts, learn from the large-scale Israeli-Arab / Muslim normalization that has recently taken place? was it considered unthinkable? What parts of the workforce for more comprehensive cooperation in the Middle East (economic benefits, uniting against a common enemy, leveraging cooperation with a world power, pooling limited resources) can be used by the UN to reduce disputes around the world? It is an issue that apparently few have thought much about, even those who practice the art of conflict resolution.

“I should think about it,” said Mitch Fifield, the Australian ambassador to the UN.

“I am not sure I have an answer to this particular question,” said Ukrainian Ambassador Sergiy Kyslytsya.

In fact, Israeli Foreign Ministry spokesman Lior Haiat told The Media Line that he does not know a diplomat from around the world who has contacted his Israeli counterpart and sought advice on the agreements. Abraham.

“I don’t know of any similar dialogue, but one of the things I’ve learned in 20 years of diplomacy is that every conflict is different and trying to apply a solution to another problem doesn’t always work. Every conflict has its own problems. The last year we came up with a way to create a new reality, with others it might not be the way to resolve their conflicts, ”said Haiat.

“I will add that I do not think that a forced solution is ever a long-term solution. The international community does not always know or take into account all aspects of a particular conflict and is often more interested in finding a quick solution, ”he said. He added that the countries involved in the Abraham Accords were better aware of their own circumstances and were able to find ways to move forward outside their own interests, rather than those of the UN.

It seemed that most of those involved in Monday’s event felt that the spirit of Abraham’s agreements should be used more as a good-feeling story, as inspiration for anything that is possible, rather than as a plan to resolve disputes.

“We thought it was important to take a moment and mark these agreements, because I think agreements like this need encouragement. And when governments get around the table and negotiate some of these really difficult issues, I think we find that progress can be made, ”Lana Nusseibeh, the UAE ambassador to the UN, told The Media Line.

“So that’s what the agreements mean to us, and I hope that on the UN world stage, in the week of high-level, we will see countries come together to face the most difficult challenges they face. today the international community, ”he said. .

Haiat added that the international community should seek agreements not only because of the change they have brought about in the Middle East, but also because of how it positively affects other regions.

“This is what our diplomats do best: talk. We want to spread this change in the Middle East. And the first thing we ask other countries to do is to support it, to talk about it, about the importance of this change for the stability of our own region, which has all kinds of positive global ramifications, ”said Haiat.

Another consensus consensus among countries sharing the stage on Monday is that peace must come from within, rather than be imposed by the international community on warring nations.

“First of all, these agreements of the Abraham Accords create impetus and it is up to our leaders and our people to work on this and build to establish peace, and also to bring hope and end all kinds of extremism and war. Our region has suffered greatly from past wars. Now we must work for a very warm peace: peace of heart, tranquility. And may the next generation of our region deserve to live together – all people – in peace, cooperation, harmony and prosperity, “Omar Hilale, Morocco’s ambassador to the UN, told The Media Line.

In fact, Israel, which has often faced immense UN pressure to make policy changes to find solutions to conflicts with its neighbors, noted that one only has to look at Abraham’s agreements to realize that it’s best when bodies like the UN stay out of the equation.

“I believe that other nations of the world can learn that the only way forward is through a process of reconciliation between the two peoples. You can’t come from outside and force a decision on any nation. Therefore, any UN intervention is not necessary. It will not help. It is counterproductive. Mainly, that’s what the UN does, ”Gilad Erdan, Israel’s ambassador to the UN and the United States, told The Media Line.

“Here’s the perfect example of how our nations … we built it from the bottom up. Our relationships, we started to encourage and work with each other and that made it easier for leaders to make the right decisions. And even the above [US] the UN administration, along with the Biden administration, helped us nurture and work together. Luckily they didn’t try to force anything on any of us. And these are also my expectations for the UN, for the Secretary-General and for all member states: don’t try to force anything on Israel, ”Erdan said.

The US Ambassador, Linda Thomas-Greenfield, addresses the United Nations Security Council on the situation in Afghanistan at the United Nations in New York City, New York, USA, on 16 August 2021. (Credit: ANDREW KELLY / REUTERS)

U.S. Ambassador to the UN Linda Thomas-Greenfield sent a hopeful message at Monday’s event that the Abraham Accords model could be used with good effect elsewhere.

“I am determined to explore how we can translate these agreements into progress within the United Nations system. Events like this point us in the right direction, ”he said from the podium.

But, apparently like most attendees, so far little has been thought, a year after an innovative agreement changed the face of one of the most contentious regions in the world, to the lessons it can teach the rest of the world. .