How should we conceive of the Abraham Accords? The
signing of the Accords amid much fanfare in Washington September 2020 was seen by their
supporters as vindication of a new
regional order, underpinned by the Trump Administration, that, behind the
scenes, had proceeded through a hidden evolutionary process since at least
2006. It also vindicated Binyamin Netanyahu’s “outside- in approach” to the
issue of Palestine, an issue that could be pushed to the margins, a problem to
be managed rather than solved.
In May 2021, the violence in Gaza, Jerusalem and
within Israel itself challenged this
narrative. Resolution of the conflict (the symbolism of Hamas firing rockets
toward Jerusalem in defence of the holy sanctuary) underscored the view that
(1) peace has to be achieved with, rather than from the Palestinians and (2)
the UAE and other Gulf Monarchies
exercised little influence over the scope and scale of the fighting,
suggesting that as a mechanism for recasting
regional security relationships, the Abraham Accords are in fact ephemeral.
But the Accords were NOT broken. While surprising
perhaps, their resilience as a new form of security architecture can
been attributed to five key elements:
1) They were never presented by the Gulf
Monarchies as the panacea to the Israel-Palestine conflict. They are not peace treaties but
‘Normalisation’ accords.
2) The Accords are a Strategic Choice
for the Emiratis and Bahrainis that saw
them as strengthening security and economic ties to Israel. They never were
determined by the Israel-Palestine
conflict although Netanyahu’s threat of
unilateral annexation allowed
them to come out of the ‘closet.’
3) Israel and the UAE sees the
Accords as reflecting their own wider
security, notably over Iran AND economic
integration. On 1 April 2021 they signed
a Free trade deal, covering everything from customs, services,
procurement policy and intellectual property rights. Ninety-five percent of
trade will be exempt from tariffs. Trade by
August 2020 was already $1.4 billion (up from just $200m in 2020) and
Mubadala SWF has a 22 per cent stake in Israel’s Tamar gas field and invested
$100m in 6 Israeli venture capital firms. Equally, while Abraham Accords
have grabbed the ‘headlines’ for
the Israeli government, the East
Mediterranean Gas Forum too represents an evolving coalition where economic
drivers are enforcing security integration between Israel, Cyprus, Greece,
France, Egypt and Italy overt gas is produced and transported.
4) The psychological, as well as
political acceptance among Arab elites not just of Israel’s right to exist
within secure boundaries but acknowledging the historic legitimacy of Jewish
claims to the land, claims that 1) challenge the narrative of Zionism as a
Colonial project and 2) implicit acceptance that this places such rights on a
par with the Palestinians which has implications for issues related to the ‘right
of return’ etc. This is implicit within the Abraham Accords. It is a huge boon
for the Israelis and should not be underestimated.
5) To the above must be added the shared
concerns over the position of the United States. As Martin Indyk, former US
Ambassador to Israel noted, Washington’s “local partners will have to come to
understand their role in an American-supported, rather than American-led
regional order.” In
2021, Israel came u=inter the US Central Command, and participated in military
exercises under its umbrella with Bahrain and the UAE in November 20201.
Therefore, the broad question this workshop will seek
to explore is the intellectual coherence of the Abraham Accords as a security
hub. By exploring the history of Israel’s relations with the Gulf monarchies,
and critically examining the current trajectory and type of relations that have
evolved from the Accords, the workshop will examine the extent to which
interests can become norms that, overtime , can be institutionalised within an
agreed security framework.
More broadly, the workshop therefore looks to explore
what factors have shaped the security architecture between Israel and the Gulf
monarchies by examining the evolution,
contemporary manifestation, economic reach and political influence of the
relationships as a form of Regional
Security Complex. While the Copenhagen School writers emphasised adjacency and
proximity as key drivers of RCTs, the Abraham Accords suggest geographical
proximity alone needs to be reimagined. Indeed, if a security complex is
defined by the level of securitization that results from the scope and
proximity of the interactions between its actors, the Abraham Accords highlight
the process of at least partial de-securitization. The normalisation agreement
between the UAE and Israel has in effect created a security hub (community)
defined by amity (rather than enmity) and around which relations with other
Gulf states have become mediated.
Higher education (HE) systems
in the Gulf region have played a fundamental role in the advancement and
development of their people. HE systems in the Gulf region have been
characterized by their responsiveness to the needs of their peoples and
governments, supporting the growth and development of their countries. These
systems have also been responsive to the rapid global changes. In 2015, the
emergence of the Global Sustainable Development Agenda 2030, with its 17
specific Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) resulted in the call for
governments around the world to work to achieve sustainable development and
combat climate change. Moreover,
climate change, which threatens both human beings and the planet, has also been
under the microscope with great focus from international organizations and
governments.
In terms of education generally and HE specifically,
there has recently been a greater focus on concepts related to issues of
climate change and sustainability in the form of sustainability education, environmental
education, education for sustainable development, and climate change education. Accordingly, HE
systems in the Gulf region are now orienting themselves to contribute to the
SDG agenda. It is expected that HE systems in the Gulf region will work side-by-side
with other systems in activating their role in achieving sustainability and
combatting climate change.
However, this is no easy task. Gulf countries’ rapid
economic development has been largely due to carbon-intensive resource
extraction (Al-Badi & AlMubarak, 2019; Salahuddin, Gow & Ozturk, 2015).
Studies have found that the per capita oil and gas consumption, and carbon
emissions in the Gulf region is “uniquely high” among countries in the region
(Hertog and Luciani, 2009). Although governments in the region have all now
committed to carbon neutrality and shifting to sustainable sources of energy
production, leaders have also doubled down on oil production in the wake of the
Russian invasion of Ukraine.
Additionally, the concept of sustainability remains
abstract, complex, and multidimensional (Ceulemans et al., 2015; Waas et al.,
2011). As an emergent global model, meanings and practices associated with
advancing sustainable development vary significantly (Williams &
Millington, 2004). Sustainability has become a buzzword that is used by
policymakers, scholars, scientists, journalists, and the public alike, due to
its impact and significance. Scholars have worried that this will increasingly
result in “greenwashing” – meaning commitments to sustainability that are not
substantiated by action. These concepts have received significant attention
from HE researchers globally but less so in the Gulf region.
With this in mind, this workshop will ask: how
are HE systems in the Gulf region at national, regional, and global levels
addressing these issues and having an impact on the movement towards
sustainability and climate change action? At an institutional level, what roles
are universities in the Gulf acting to support their nations and governments in
this movement? There is no doubt that HE systems in the region have been
entrusted to play a transformative role in sustainability and climate change.
This workshop comes as an initiative to map the current efforts and trigger
future work, calling for more future-oriented planning for HE systems in the
Gulf region and their institutions.