Casting a glance over proceedings, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu declared to the U.N. General Assembly on Friday, a delectable morsel of anticipatory news, as Israel, he said, was teetering on the brink of a historic milestone: a peace treaty with Saudi Arabia. The soil of ascendance and entrenchment does seem hard to navigate, with the ultimate pathway to this would-be peace accord remaining rather opaque.
With steadfast optimism diffusing through the entirety of his address, which unfolded over the span of a quarter of an hour, Netanyahu utiltyzed once more, the tool of visual references, unveiling side-by-side maps that displayed Israel’s initial solitude in 1948 and its recent rapprochement with six countries, four of which have reciprocated the sentiment in 2020 via the famed Abraham Accords.
“The Abraham Accords indeed signaled the birth of a novel era of tranquility, however, the tantalising promise of an even more impressive turning point seems imminent, a groundbreaking peace agreement between Israel and Saudi Arabia”, Netanyahu professed. “A contract of peace between Israel and Saudi Arabia would essentially be the master crafter of a new Middle East.”
However, the road to this breakthrough is neither short nor smooth. Formidable deterrents, such as Saudi Arabia’s insistance on advancements towards the establishment of a Palestinian state, stand in the way. This is proving to be a significant pill for Netanyahu’s government to swallow, with its deeply religious and nationalistic tendencies setting an unyielding precedence.
Further, Saudi Arabia wishes to consolidate a defensive alliance with the United States and desires guidance in erecting their civilian nuclear apparatus, stoking concerns of a potential arms contention with Iran.
Sharing his insights with Fox News in the past week, Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman affirmed that the two nations are inching closer towards cementing an agreement, although he refrained from delving into the specifics of the American-steered negotiations or delineating the demands of the Palestinians.
Netanyahu conveyed his belief that the Palestinians would stand to gain notably from a more expansive peace contract, stating, “Their participation should definitely be a part of the proceedings, but it should not have the capacity to stall the process.” Over a decade has passed since the collapse of peace negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians, setting the stage for heightened tensions and violent encounters between the two factions.
President Mahmoud Abbas of Palestine, who also spoke during the General Assembly on Thursday, chose not to directly touch upon the push to broker a normalization treaty between Israel and Saudi Arabia. Backtracking to the heart of the long-standing Israeli-Palestinian strife, he reinforced the integral role of the Palestinian side, that has been further exacerbated since the Abraham Accords were signed.
Chiding those who harbor the belief that peace can be won in the Middle East without granting the Palestinian people their full, rightful national entitlements, Abbas emphatically stated, “They are greatly mistaken.”
The General Assembly tends to serve Netanyahu as a backdrop for the expression of blunt criticism against enemies of Israel.
Netanyahu’s discourse wasn’t devoid of familiar criticisms against Iran, which Israel perceives as an existential threat. The table was set with discussions on Iran’s crackdown on public protests, its provision of attack drones to Russia for operations in Ukraine, and the unwelcome military activities it purports throughout the Middle East.
Netanyahu amplified his calls for stringent sanctions targeting Iran’s nuclear program, which has made discernible advancements since the US bid farewell to a preeminent agreement with Iran and other global powers, an agreement to which Israel was resolutely averse.
Ebrahim Raisi, Iran’s President, also a participant at the General Assembly, sounded a plea for the U.S. to lift sanctions, providing the groundwork for it to reenter the nuclear deal. While the U.S. and others reckon that Iran was running a clandestine weapons program until 2003, Iran maintains that its nuclear program operates faithfully within the realm of peaceful objectives.
On that note, with a sense of ambiguity hanging in the air, Netanyahu demanded that Iran be presented with “a credible nuclear threat.” The use of the word nuclear instead of military was quickly mitigated, subsequent to a clarification issued by Netanyahu’s office. Faced with the prospect of Iran acquiring nuclear weapons, Israel, a suspected holder of a tonne of nuclear weapons itself, has reiterated its openness to all possible counter measures against Iran.
