European Union think tank seems think the Abraham Accords are a mistake

From the EUISS webpage:

The European Union Institute for Security Studies (EUISS) is the Union’s Agency analysing foreign, security and defence policy issues. Its core mission is to assist the EU and its member states in the implementation of the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP), including the Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) as well as other external action of the Union.  

One would think that the EUISS' analyses would be in line with mainstream EU thinking.

Last year, Algeria hosted a forgettable Arab League summit. The EUISS used this as a springboard to evaluate how well and how poorly the League of Arab States (LAS) does what it was meant to do - avoid intra-Arab wars, for example.

But one of its threads of analysis was quite concerning:

The LAS has lost credibility in recent decades due to the weakness of its institutional mechanisms,and its failure to translate the lofty statements of its leaders into action. The inability to take a united stance on the Palestinian issue, when several Arab leaders decided to normalise relations with Israel, is probably its most profound failure, especially given that an overwhelming majority of 88% of Arab citizens disapprove of their governments’ recognition of Israel, and only 6% accept a formal diplomatic recognition.

 It sure sounds like the EUISS is saying that a unified Arab consensus against even recognizing Israel is far preferable to a situation where some Arab nations establish relations. 

An official EU organization that apparently considers  several Arab states making peace with Israel to be a "profound failure" seems to be a pretty big deal. Does this mean the EU considers earlier peace between Israel and Jordan and Egypt to have been a net negative as well?

In fact, the EUISS site does not have any analysis of the Abraham Accords at all. Even though these agreements have been perhaps the most far-reaching change in the Middle East since the Iranian revolution, they do not merit a single article. 

The longstanding EU position is that the Palestinian issue is the center of any Middle East peace (the "linkage" claim)  and the Abraham Accords showed that this assumption has never been true, and indeed the Arab League was the impediment to peace by pretending that its members were obligated to act as a single anti-Israel bloc instead of in their own self-interests.

In 2020, the EASS  - the diplomatic service of the EU - officially welcomed the normalization agreements  without using the name "Abraham Accords," but then spent more time discussing how a two state solution should be the main goal and blamed only Israel for the lack of progress on that front. Whether it is stated formally or not, the EU position seems to be that Israel has no rights or legitimate claims to the Old City, Area C or any historic Jewish sites outside the Green Line. It appears that the EU regards the Abraham Accords as a net negative because they reduced diplomatic pressure on Israel on ceding its claims and they took the focus away from the "Palestinians are virtuous, Israel is intransigent" mantra that has been its foreign policy towards the conflict since the Palestinian refusal for peace and the second intifada.

(h/t Irene) 

---

---

Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon! Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424.  Read all about it here!