Thomas Graham is a Policy Fellow of The Pinsker Centre, a campus-based think tank which facilitates discussion on global affairs and free speech. The views in this article are the author's own.
The Gulf Arab rapprochement with Israel is a litmus test for the geopolitical changes happening within the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) area. The signing of the Abraham Accords on 15 September 2020 saw the normalisation of relations between Israel, the USA, Bahrain and the UAE, and marks the latest round of diplomatic engagements oriented towards the attainment of cooperation, peace and stability in a region long affected by conflict. These nations have shown willingness to put aside ethnic, religious and historical differences to advance bilateral economic development, security cooperation and technological innovation.
The formalisation of security and technological cooperation between signatory countries spells bad news for nefarious actors, namely Islamic extremists in the MENA region. Groups such as Hamas, Hezbollah, Muslim Brotherhood and Islamic Jihad, backed by Iranian military and financial support, are likely to find it increasingly challenging to attack and intimidate the citizens of signatory countries. Through information and technology sharing, countries can strengthen their prevention and response to the violence committed by these mobile and concealed terrorist groups, who target Muslims, Jews and Christians alike.
That said, the Abraham Accords also point towards an increasingly bifurcated Middle Eastern geopolitical scenario. On one side, there are countries which are becoming more committed to secular liberalism and international cooperation, including Bahrain and the UAE. On the other, Iranian aligned actors pursuant of political Islam through violent means, such as Hamas and Hezbollah, and countries with rivalries towards Saudi Arabia and/or Israel, for example, Qatar, who experienced a diplomatic crisis when Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and the UAE cut ties in 2017 for harbouring Muslim Brotherhood extremists.
A novel lens through which to analyse this political landscape is reporting from government-funded media outlets in the Middle East and Iran. Coverage of Arab-Israeli normalisation by Al Jazeera, influenced by the State of Qatar, attempts to argue the limited scope of the Accords and frames them as a betrayal of Palestinians by their 'Arab brethren'. In a similarly critical narrative, the Islamic Republic News Agency (IRNA), controlled by the Ayatollah's government, states that the UAE has 'bowed down to Israel' through normalisation and has echoed the rhetorically charged sentiment that the 'Zionist regime' is responsible for the 'slaughter of Palestinians'.
In contrast, Gulf Arab nations such as Saudi Arabia and the UAE have portrayed normalisation more positively. Al Arabiya, a Saudi influenced news agency, has emphasised the willingness of both Israel and the UAE to incorporate other Arab countries into the Accords and highlights the bilateral economic growth between them since normalisation. This perspective is intriguing due to signals from the Saudi leadership that their country is not ready to join the Accords, but one that nonetheless attempts to illustrate normalisation as a good diplomatic option for Arab nations. Khaleej Times, a news agency influenced by the UAE, provides the most positive outlook on the Accords. It argues that normalisation is based on 'peace, tolerance and dialogue' between Israel and the UAE, also emphasising the bilateral 'prosperity and stability' that extensive trade agreements have brought to these countries. Hence, the UAE and Saudi Arabia, two ideologically similar allies who oppose the expansion of political Islam in the MENA region, portray Gulf Arab-Israeli normalisation as a positive for signatory countries.
In light of these narratives, it is possible to identify a mirroring between the foreign policy objectives of countries and their respective media agendas. Iran (IRNA) and Qatar (Al Jazeera) pursue a critical perspective of the Abraham Accords, since rapprochement so far has, and will continue to, strengthen their geopolitical rivals in economic, diplomatic and military sectors. This antipathy towards Iranian aligned actors is reflected in the words of Yosef Al Otaiba, the UAE ambassador to the US, who claimed that he desired a Middle East which would be:
"More secular, stable, prosperous, empowered, strong government […] What we have seen Qatar do for the last 10 to 15 years is support groups like the Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas, Taliban, Islamist militias in Syria, Islamist militias in Libya – exactly the opposite direction we think our region needs to go."
In short, through the media lens, it seems that there is an Israeli-Saudi nexus content with the increased cooperation precipitated by the Accords, while the opposite is expressed by the Iranian nexus.
Media narratives reflect the ongoing shift in the balance of power in the MENA area, one which is increasingly likely to see religiously moderate countries cooperate in a united front against religious extremists supported by Iran. If successful, this collaboration can lead to a progressive pushback against terrorist groups in control of neighbouring territories, such as the Houthis in Yemen, Shiite militias in Iraq and Hezbollah in Lebanon, with prospects of stability, peace and civilian safety on the horizon.
Image Credit: https://www.commdiginews.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/trump-abrahams-accord.jpg
No comments:
Post a Comment