The Abraham Accords: A new balance for the Middle East (or is it?)

A few weeks ago, while US President Donald Trump was sending mixed messages regarding relations with Iran and potential agreements, he was simultaneously making moves to expand the normalization process between Middle Eastern countries, Turkey, and Israel. In this context, he stated that countries such as Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Pakistan, Egypt, Jordan, and Turkey should be included in the Abraham Accords, and offered assessments that Iran could also join this structure in the future. 

The Abraham Accords, which are considered one of the subsequent reflections of the search for restructuring the Middle East that emerged with the Greater Middle East Initiative (GMEI) debates in 2003, formed the basis of the diplomatic normalization process that began between Israel and some Arab states in 2020. It emerged as a structure that encompasses cooperation in political, economic, and various other fields, in addition to the establishment of diplomatic relations. The initial signatories of the process were the United Arab Emirates (UAE), Bahrain, Morocco, and Sudan.

The Iran Factor and Shifting Security Balances

The period in the Middle East, especially after 2011, has been a process in which significant changes have occurred in regional power balances. The increase in Iran's regional influence has caused the interests of Israel and some Arab countries to intersect on the same security axis.

These countries, which felt more secure thanks to the US presence in the region, viewed the development of relations with Israel—which is trying to fill the vacuum that could arise from the US reducing its presence in the region—as one of the elements of their security policies.

Regional Reactions to Normalization Agreements

The 2020 normalization agreement between Israel and the UAE was met with different reactions by other key actors in the region. Turkey and Iran expressed opposition to the agreements, particularly over the Palestinian issue.

While Iran viewed the agreement between Israel and the UAE negatively in terms of regional balances, Turkey drew attention to the effects of this process on the Palestinian issue.

In the face of Trump's plan to expand the agreement, Saudi Arabia reiterated, as it had before, that it would not normalize relations with Israel without the establishment of a Palestinian state. For this reason, uncertainty remains regarding Riyadh's participation in the Abraham Accords. However, an initiative to create a new Arab-Islamic cooperation, which also includes Turkey, Pakistan, and Qatar under the leadership of Saudi Arabia, has come to the agenda. This search for a formation can be evaluated as an effort by different countries to create a common diplomatic ground for regional problems. 

Qatar, like Saudi Arabia, emphasized the resolution of the Palestinian issue, stating that regional normalization processes should not proceed without taking this issue into account.

Pakistan, on the other hand, opposed linking a potential agreement with Iran to the expansion of the Abraham Accords or the normalization process with Israel. Pakistan, which does not recognize Israel, declared that relations with Israel would not normalize until a two-state solution is achieved in Palestine.

Turkey recognized Israel in 1949. Among the countries that had previously established diplomatic relations with Israel, Egypt signed an agreement in 1979, and Jordan in 1994. Despite this, Trump bringing the names of these countries back to the agenda can be interpreted as a message that these actors could play important roles in shaping the regional order.

One of the most important elements that has historically brought Arab states together has been the Israeli-Palestinian issue. For this reason, assessments have been made that for normalization agreements to bring lasting peace to the region, the fundamental political problems between the parties must first be resolved.

However, in the current situation, there is no direct state of war between the countries that are parties to the agreement. For this reason, the Abraham Accords are considered not only a peace process but also a result of changing geopolitical interests and security calculations. The power competition and different areas of interest in the Middle East have not only failed to unite the countries of the region around the same goal but have also created new points of divergence.

The Future of the Abraham Accords

It can be said that the normalization agreements are a project that prioritizes US regional policy and Israel's security priorities, and reshapes the region with Jerusalem placed at its center within the scope of the GMEI. At the same time, this project can also be interpreted as part of a broader regional change aimed at reorganizing alliance relations in the Middle East. 

When this situation is evaluated together with the search for creating an Arab-Islamic cooperation led by Saudi Arabia, it points to the possibility that new alliances may emerge in the Middle East.

The fact that the Abraham Accords have not shown as strong progress as they did when they were first brought to the agenda has also brought with it the question of to what extent the expectations of some countries have been met. For this reason, Trump bringing the issue of expanding the agreements back to the agenda should be evaluated in terms of both regional diplomacy and global power competition.

Another dimension of this initiative is the effort to make the US's diplomatic effectiveness in the region visible again. It can be assessed that the Trump administration wants to both create an area of success in foreign policy and strengthen its support in domestic politics through this process.

In conclusion, the Abraham Accords are not only a diplomatic normalization process between Israel and Arab countries, but also part of a search for a new geopolitical order shaped around Iran's regional influence, the role of the US in the Middle East, and the future of the Palestinian issue.