Debate: The geopolitical implications of the Abraham Accords in the Middle East region
Date: TUESDAY, 24 NOVEMBER 2020
Speaker: Josep Borrell Fontelles
Language: EN

Our role is to continue reaching out to the parties in the region. Yesterday in my conversation with Minister Ashkenazi, when the Foreign Affairs Minister of the Palestinian Authority came to the Foreign Affairs Council, we encouraged both to re-engage and have also signalled our willingness to move ahead in our bilateral relations with both. We continue thinking that a two-state solution is the only viable – difficult, but the only viable – solution, and a lot of work is still required in order to bring, at the same time, security to Israel, freedom to the Palestinians, and peace and stability to the region as a whole. These deals and the normalisation of their relations have to be considered in the complex reality of the zone. Well, the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain have never been, technically, at war with Israel, so to call that a peace agreement without having had a war may be an exaggeration. But as I said, in any case it’s a positive approach that reflects a somewhat transactional rather than transformative approach, and it has to be understood in the context of the growing strategic rivalry between the Emirates and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and Turkey, and the wider tension in the Eastern Mediterranean, and maybe this strategy will reflect a deeper polarisation in the Arab world, where mostly Sunni Arab states consider Iran, along with political Islam, as the more serious threats in the region and are thus likely to engage in a deeper cooperation with Israel. In this context, a new regional paradigm has been emerging, where a peace deal is no longer a precondition to normalisation, and both the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and the Emirates have developed a narrative which describes normalisation as a driver in the Israeli-Arab confidence-building process, creating a more conducive environment for a two-state solution. On the other hand, it is clear that this normalisation comes after other strategic considerations, such as gaining military (F-35 fighters for the Emirates) or economic advantages, economic deals with the Emirates and Bahrain, or for Sudan, a major gain to get out of its international isolation by being taken off the list of state sponsors of terrorism, which is a major win for Sudan. Its economy is on the verge of collapse and badly needs outside investment. All these things, for sure, have been taken into consideration in these kinds of agreements. About the demolition by Israel of Palestinian structures: yesterday I had the opportunity, as I said, to talk about it with the Foreign Affairs Minister of Israel. For sure I didn’t convince him, and he didn’t convince me with their arguments and reasons, but we have reiterated that we consider these activities illegal from the point of view of international law. We reiterated our call on Israel to halt such demolitions. This confirms a regrettable trend of confiscation and demolition since the beginning of the year, which constitutes, for sure, an impediment towards the two-state solution but also to the improvement of the bilateral relations between the European Union and Israel. I am working on the prospects of holding again meetings of the Association Council that has not met in the last eight years, but for many Member States, these kinds of activities – demolitions, settlements – are strong impediments to this meeting taking place. Israel knows very well the position of the European Union, and I reiterated it yesterday in my talk with the Foreign Affairs Minister.