Peace Agreements and Normalization in the Middle East

Against the backdrop of a war that has now lasted more than a year and a half, the Arab peace states remain committed to the agreements and to the vision of normalization with Israel. However, there is growing concern that the continuation of Israel’s current policy will cause multidimensional damage to the relations between the sides

The reduction of tensions and the deepening of cooperation between the countries of the region continue—while at the same time, the war in Israel is increasing its isolation. How should Israel act to get out of this complex situation?

By participating in halting the Iranian attack on Israel, Jordan sought to defend its sovereignty against the growing attempts of subversion that the kingdom has been facing since October 7. How can Jerusalem and Amman turn this shared challenge into an opportunity to repair their relations?

The ultimate goal of the founders of the Zionist movement was to establish a sustainable Jewish state, and upon its establishment, to persuade the Arabs to agree to end the conflict by building an insurmountable military “iron wall.” This strategy was realized in 1967. Prior to the Six-Day War, Israel did not have the bargaining chips that could be traded for Arab recognition of its right to exist, but the conquest of the territories during the war created this option. Nevertheless, Israel continued to emphasize military force and “security lines” as its security concept. With the exception of the peace agreements with Egypt and Jordan, Israel refused to make use of the political option, and efforts to settle the conflict have remained incomplete for various reasons. Against this backdrop and given new emerging threats, the persistent reliance on military force while ignoring the diplomatic channel, especially the Arab Peace Initiative that strives to end the conflict, is leading Israel into a military dead end, and it could pay a heavy price for this in the future.