Three years on from Abraham Accords, is a bigger prize in sight for Israel?
The Abraham Accords, when they were signed three years ago today, were a major step forward for peace in the Middle East.
For the first time, four Arab countries – the United Arab Emirates & Bahrain initially, followed shortly after by Morocco and Sudan – agreed to recognise Israel and work together for mutual diplomatic, security and economic benefit.
The success of the Accords has been chequered – new direct air routes have opened up and brought some investment and tourism benefits, academic partnerships have been established, and the earthquake in Morocco last weekend saw the Israeli government immediately offer military search and rescue support to one of their new allies.
There have been bumps along the road though – Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has had a number of invitations to the UAE cancelled this year because of Emirati anger over Israeli force inside Jerusalem’s Al Aqsa Mosque, and many people hoped the pace of mutual benefits would have been faster than the reality.
An Israeli settlement in the West Bank
But now there is a bigger prize looming into focus: a deal with Saudi Arabia.
Alongside the judicial reforms and violence in The West Bank, the diplomatic goings-on between Washington, Jerusalem and Riyadh is now one of the most discussed issues in Israeli media.
A normalisation agreement with one of the major powers in the Middle East would eclipse the Abraham Accords and Mr Netanyahu has made no secret of his desperation for a deal.
“Our hand is extended to all Arab States and certainly to Saudi Arabia which is vitally important,” he told me in an interview earlier this year.
“We have great opportunities to advance the peace in our region, peace between our two countries, the wellbeing of our peoples. I think it would change history.”
Diplomatic wheels are spinning
Whether a deal is close, or even possible, depends on who you speak to, but what isn’t in doubt is that the diplomatic wheels are spinning and there appears to be a desire on all sides to achieve something.
Just last week a senior US delegation travelled to Riyadh for talks on the deal, and they were joined by Hussein al Sheikh, a major figure in the PLO and close ally of Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas.
Separately, the US Secretary of State Antony Blinken held calls this month with Abbas and Mr Netanyahu, and on Air Force One, en route to Delhi for the G20, US National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan told reporters there is “still work to do” but revealed that “many of the elements of a pathway to normalisation are now on the table”.
A demonstration against Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu and his nationalist coalition government’s judicial overhaul, in Jerusalem
More important than the deal itself will be the content of any agreement. Riyadh’s demands reportedly include US help to develop a civilian nuclear programme, delivery of advanced US weaponry and a NATO-style military pact with the US, whereby Washington would commit to defending Saudi Arabia if it was attacked.
In return, Washington is hoping that Saudi Arabia will dampen its growing diplomatic ties with China and Russia and help counter the threat from Iran.
Israel might want a similar pact with its American allies but will view a peace deal with Saudi Arabia as a significant step in strengthening its own security, even though there are already concerns in Jerusalem that a civil nuclear deal for Saudi Arabia will spark a nuclear arms race in the region.
Like the Abraham Accords, it would open up investment and trade opportunities between two of the leading economies in the region, and increase recognition in the Arab world of Israel as a legitimate state.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Controversial Saudi prince to visit UK
What a deal could mean for Palestine
The big outstanding question is what a deal might mean for Palestinians. Unlike the Abraham Accords, the Palestinian government has chosen to engage in the process this time in the hope of securing their own future.
Ramallah wants “irreversible” steps to advance its ambitions for statehood, according to reports, which would likely include US-backing to recognise a Palestinian state at the United Nations.
The US is encouraging Ramallah to focus its demands on Israel, rather than Washington, and has suggested the idea of transferring parts of Area C in the West Bank (currently under Israeli control) to Area A (under Palestinian control) or Area B (under joint control). It’s unclear how realistic or possible this would be, such is the large presence of Israeli settlements and military zones covering that land.
Either way, speaking to the Pod Save The World podcast a few days ago, Mr Blinken confirmed that “if this process is to move forward, the Palestinian piece is going to be very important,” to the US and Saudis, even if Israel will be hesitant.
The desire for a deal, from all sides, is one thing but there are some obvious and not inconsiderable obstacles standing in the way of an agreement.
Read more on Sky News:
Israel’s Supreme Court to hear challenge against government’s judicial reforms
Spain’s women footballers call off strike after deal reached in pay row
Any deal would require the support of two-thirds of the US Senate and a significant number of senators, particularly Democrats, would likely oppose concessions to Saudi Arabia because of concerns over the country’s human rights record, notably the war in Yemen and the 2018 killing of Washington Post journalist Jamal Khashoggi.
Other politicians are likely to resist any commitment that might risk dragging the US military back into the Middle East.
Mr Netanyahu’s right-wing nationalist partners in the coalition have already said they will oppose anything that gives concessions to the Palestinians, and so the embattled prime minister will have to look to opposition leaders to get the deal through the Knesset. It might be that the price of the deal is a collapse of the Israeli government and even the end of Mr Netanyahu’s time as prime minister.
After seeing his domestic opinion polls plummet this year however, and having been on the receiving end of criticism from world leaders, including President Joe Biden, for his attempts to ram through wide-ranging and controversial judicial reforms, it might be a last act of sacrifice he is will to gamble in order to save his legacy.
“It would be a quantum leap forward,” he told me in June. It certainly would be, but how far is Bibi willing to jump to get it over the line?
Volodymyr Zelenskyy says two Chinese citizens have been captured while fighting in eastern Ukraine.
He said his forces had fought six Chinese soldiers and two of them had been taken prisoner. He added he had ordered officials to obtain an explanation from Beijing.
“We have information that there are many more Chinese citizens in the occupier’s units than just two. We are now finding out all the facts,” he added.
As it happened: Zelenskyy demands reaction from US
China is an ally of Russia and has been accused of helping its war in Ukraine, though Beijing has repeatedly denied allegations that it has supplied Kremlin forces with weapons.
“Russia’s involvement of China in this war in Europe, directly or indirectly, is a clear signal that Putin is going to do anything but end the war,” Mr Zelenskyy said. “He is looking for ways to continue the war.”
Mr Zelenskyy described China as having joined Russia’s war against Ukraine and said he expected the US to react.
There was no immediate comment from China.
How many Chinese are actually fighting for Russia?
Were they volunteers – or mercenaries – who had signed up to fight in the Russian army on their own?
Alternatively, does the Chinese government sanction their involvement – or even encourage it? That would make the situation far more serious.
The capture of these Chinese nationals in Donetsk begs another question – how many Chinese are actually fighting for Russia? In his written post on social media platform Telegram, Volodymyr Zelenskyy said “there are many more Chinese citizens” other than these two.
Still, the Ukrainian president works hard to suggest the Chinese, officially at least, are blameless.
“Russia’s involvement of China in this war… is a clear signal that [Russian President Vladimir] Putin is going to do anything but end the war,” he writes on Telegram.
This is a generous interpretation of China’s approach to the conflict, which is quite openly contradictory.
Fighters of various nationalities have joined Russia’s army during the war, often in return for promises of large sums of money. This does not represent official interventions by their home countries.
North Korea has also sent thousands of its troops to support Russia.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
‘This could be very, very embarrassing for China’
After Mr Zelenskyy’s announcement, the Ukrainian foreign minister said he had summoned China’s diplomat for an explanation, saying on social media the presence of Chinese citizens in Russia puts Beijing’s stance for peace into question.
Read more from Sky News:
Zelenskyy makes dig at US over response to Russian attack
Serious questions raised by captured Chinese national in Ukraine
Ukraine in Belgorod, almost out of Kursk
Last night, Mr Zelenskyy confirmed for the first time that Ukrainian forces are active in Russia’s Belgorod region.
He described the actions as “just”, adding: “war must return to where it came from”.
Meanwhile, regional governor Alexander Khinshtein said Russian forces are on the verge of reclaiming Kursk, months after Ukraine’s surprise incursion.
He claimed Russian forces had seized the settlement of Guyevo. Russian state news agency TASS said only two more settlements are left to recapture – Gornal and Oleshnya – to retake the entire region.
World
What we learn from video of captured Chinese national in Ukraine – and the serious questions it raises
In a carefully written post on social media platform Telegram, Volodymyr Zelenskyy accused the Russian army of deploying Chinese citizens on the battlefield in eastern Ukraine.
What about the proof? Well, the Ukrainian president says his security services captured two people from China in the Donetsk region – along with identity documents, personal data and their bank cards.
Follow latest: Zelenskyy demands reaction from US
A video of a man in military fatigues who had been captured by Ukraine was pinned to the bottom of the statement.
We get snippets of a conversation where the alleged combatant seems to be talking about the events that led to his capture.
“When we arrived at the place… and then my commander.” The man gestures at the floor and ceiling, making shooting noises. “I was also injured.”
Volodymyr Zelenskyy uploaded a video appearing to show a Chinese citizen in military uniform in Ukrainian custody
These details will make it difficult for the Chinese government to deny the incident out of hand, although they are highly unlikely to supply additional information.
Important details like, who are they? What function(s) do they fulfil in Ukraine’s occupied territories?
Were they volunteers – or mercenaries – who had signed up to fight in the Russian army on their own?
Alternatively, does the Chinese government sanction their involvement – or even encourage it?
That would make the situation far more serious.
Read more:
Zelenskyy makes dig at US over response to Russian attack
What China could do next as Trump’s tariff war ramps up
The capture of these Chinese nationals in Donetsk begs another question – how many Chinese are actually fighting for Russia? In his post, Mr Zelenskyy said “there are many more Chinese citizens” other than these two.
Still, the Ukrainian president works hard to suggest the Chinese, officially at least, are blameless.
“Russia’s involvement of China in this war… is a clear signal that [Russian President Vladimir] Putin is going to do anything but end the war,” he writes on Telegram.
This is a generous interpretation of China’s approach to the conflict, which is quite openly contradictory.
On one hand, Chinese President Xi Jinping describes China as a neutral party to the conflict, while simultaneously offering Mr Putin long-term political and economic support.
In fact, he described their partnership as a “no limits” one in a phone call with Mr Putin on the third anniversary of Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine.
Mr Zelenskyy then, is making a point with this post – but he does not want to make the situation any worse.
The severity cannot be overstated, if an additional 50% tariffs are levied on all Chinese goods it will decimate trade between the world’s two biggest economies.
Remember, 50% would sit on top of what is already on the table: 34% announced last week, 20% announced at the start of US President Donald Trump’s term, and some additional tariffs left over from his first term in office.
In total, it means all Chinese goods would face tariffs of over 100%, some as high as 120%.
It’s a price that makes any trade almost impossible.
China is really the only nation in the world at the moment that is choosing to take a stand.
While others are publicly making concessions and sending delegations to negotiate, China has clearly calculated that not being seen to be bullied is worth the cost that retaliation will bring.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Tariffs: Xi hits back at Trump
The real question, though, is if the US does indeed impose this extra 50% tomorrow, what could or would China do next?
It has said it will “fight to the end”, but what does that mean?
In reality, there are few good options.
There are some obvious measures that China will almost certainly enact.
👉 Follow Trump 100 on your podcast app 👈
Further export controls on rare earth minerals (crucial for the development of high-tech products) are one example. China controls a huge proportion of the world’s supply, but the US would likely find workarounds in time.
Hiking tariffs on high-impact US products such as agricultural goods is another option, but there is only so far this could go.
The potentially more impactful options have significant drawbacks for Beijing.
It could, for instance, target high-profile American companies such as Apple and Tesla, but this isn’t ideal at a time when China is trying to attract more foreign investment, and some devaluation of the currency is possible, but it would also come with adverse effects.
Other options are more political and come with the risk of escalation beyond the economic arena.
In an opinion piece this morning, the editor of Xinhua, China’s state news agency, speculated that China could cease all cooperation with the US on the war against fentanyl.
Read more from Sky News:
Baby girl becomes first child in UK to be born from womb transplant
March hottest on record in Europe and by some margin
This has been a major political issue for Mr Trump, and it’s hard to see it would not constitute some sort of red line for him.
Other options touted include banning the import of American films, or perhaps calling for the Chinese public to boycott all American products.
Anything like this comes with a sense that the world’s two most powerful superpowers might be teetering on the edge of not just a total economic decoupling, but cultural separation too.
There is understandably serious nervousness about how that could spiral and the precedent it sets.
-
Sports2 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports1 year agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports1 year agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports2 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports4 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Environment2 years agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Environment2 years agoGame-changing Lectric XPedition launched as affordable electric cargo bike
-
Business3 years agoBank of England’s extraordinary response to government policy is almost unthinkable | Ed Conway