An Israeli Nonaggression Pact with Sympathetic Arab States Would Be an Important Step on the Road to Peace

Dec. 10 2019

Reportedly, Israel has begun negotiations, mediated by the U.S., to establish a nonaggression pact with Oman, the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, and Morocco. This would bring the hardly secret but still covert ties between these countries and Jerusalem into the open. Without involving a complete normalization of diplomatic relations, such a pact would nevertheless constitute a move in that direction. Yoni Ben Menachem comments:

The proposed agreement includes maintaining friendly ties between Israel and these Arab countries based on UN treaties and international law, and the adoption of steps required to prevent hostile actions such as the threat of war or terror activities, violence, or incitement.

The Palestinian Authority is very angry about the Gulf States’ policy of establishing relations with Israel before a permanent settlement has been reached between Israel and the Palestinians. . . . But Israel’s attempt to advance a non-aggression agreement with four Arab countries is significant. This message should filter through to the Arab world and to the Palestinians who seek to block the normalization of relations with Israel.

Israel’s policy of breaking the linkage established by the Palestinians between normalizing relations with Israel and the Israel-Palestinian peace process is correct. The Palestinian problem no longer leads the Arab countries’ list of priorities. The Iranian danger has overtaken it, and in any case, the Palestinian arena is divided between the Gaza Strip and the West Bank, with the Palestinian leadership unable to reach a national agreement that would allow serious negotiations with Israel with results binding upon all Palestinians.

Read more at Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs

More about: Bahrain, Israel diplomacy, Israel-Arab relations, Morocco, Oman, United Arab Emirates

Expand Gaza into Sinai

Feb. 11 2025

Calling the proposal to depopulate Gaza completely (if temporarily) “unworkable,” Peter Berkowitz makes the case for a similar, but more feasible, plan:

The United States along with Saudi Arabia and the UAE should persuade Egypt by means of generous financial inducements to open the sparsely populated ten-to-fifteen miles of Sinai adjacent to Gaza to Palestinians seeking a fresh start and better life. Egypt would not absorb Gazans and make them citizens but rather move Gaza’s border . . . westward into Sinai. Fences would be erected along the new border. The Israel Defense Force would maintain border security on the Gaza-extension side, Egyptian forces on the other. Egypt might lease the land to the Palestinians for 75 years.

The Sinai option does not involve forced transfer of civilian populations, which the international laws of war bar. As the United States, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and other partners build temporary dwellings and then apartment buildings and towns, they would provide bus service to the Gaza-extension. Palestinian families that choose to make the short trip would receive a key to a new residence and, say, $10,000.

The Sinai option is flawed. . . . Then again, all conventional options for rehabilitating and governing Gaza are terrible.

Read more at RealClear Politics

More about: Donald Trump, Egypt, Gaza Strip, Sinai Peninsula