Skip to main content

Piece or Peace?


A peace deal is an agreement between nations to stop fighting. Commercial, cultural, economic, and physical types of war should see an end after inking such a deal. In short: stop fighting.

Therefore, one would be confused to hear that the UAE and Israel have normalised relations and are on the road to signing a peace deal. Were the relations strained? Were the two countries fighting? What peace deal are they talking about?

The UAE and Israel have long been cooperating in the realms of business and research. Since the 9/11 attacks, Dubai in particular has been adamant about saving face and improving its cyber-security. A regional partner that is worthy of such cooperation is certainly not Yemen or any regional country engulfed in its own internal crises and commitment to its reputation as the third world. No. Israel proved to be a reliable partner than can deliver.  The cooperation has since grown, with investments taking place and companies established in the business hubs of the rich Emirates. Diplomatic missions followed suit, and relations prospered and flourished.

The latest chapter of neighbourly cooperation was the COVID-19 vaccine research partnership that saw the two nations joining in hands – in public - for the larger good.  Notwithstanding Israel’s demolishment of Palestinian testing centres, medical facilities, and residential houses amidst the international health crisis, and the ongoing starvation of Gazans – these two nations have been praised for trying to save the humanity from the virus.

No one was attacking the UAE for such partnership. It was free to do as it wishes and enter into as many alliances as deemed appropriate, which is the right of any sovereign country. Abu Dhabi has insisted that it has the full right for self-determination and national decision making – forgetting however how it is meddling in Yemen, Libya, and Sudan. So why is it that the UAE decided to formalise the relations? The unholy matrimony was fine; why complicate things and stir Arab sentiments?

 The UAE claimed that this decision will help Palestinians. It will thwart – albeit temporarily- Israel’s decision to annex parts of the West Bank. In other words, the public announcement of “truce” and “normalisation” is a sacrifice made by the Emirates towards fellow Palestinians, whereby this sign of good faith has successfully halted – again temporarily – the brazen, unethical annexation. Both UAE’s Minister of Foreign Affairs and Israel’s Premier reminded the world that the annexation will stop for now. This translates to:

1.       We know the annexation is wrong. If it were right we would have gone through with it anyhow.

2.       We are penalising Palestinians for the decision of Arab countries not to normalise relations with Tel Aviv. The penalty is annexation.

3.       The peace deal drawn is 2002 is void, as the condition of normalising relations only if two states are formed was a bluff.

4.       We think people are idiots and cannot see that the whole point is to support upcoming elections in both the USA and Israel, and market the UAE as an international hub of commerce and technology, or/and a regional player in peaceful mediation that employs culture and business as a road for peace (a much needed approach in all honesty).

Had the UAE simply been honest about why its peaceful relations with Israel would bring benefits to itself and perhaps the region as a whole the injury of the ever-so-indignant Arab community would have been easier to swallow than the accompanying insult. Expecting the gratitude of the Palestinian community for freezing the annexation is an act of shameless absurdity. Ink as many deals as you wish – but please leave the Palestinians out of it.


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Just as Orwell Said

         George Orwell said in his famous book 1984 that “first they steal the words, then they steal the meaning”, accurately foreseeing the political actions of world leaders and their manipulation of public opinion. His words are ever so precise once one examines the vocabulary applied by a number of world leaders when describing the policies and regimes of troubling countries: axis of evil, war on terror, terrorist killers, harbourers of fundamentalism etc. Ironic it is to see how those who were once described to have been allies with Satan himself seem to show good will in a matter of very few years. Iran is one very good example of this. The Persian nation has come out as a winner in the Geneva talks that were held in October, where not only did it get applauded for the concessions it offered, but it also ensured the west’s acceptance of its regional weight. Everyone seems to be more relaxed after the negotiations and ...
3 comments
Read more

Kaftar

Muaawiya Bin Abi Sufyan was the first Umayyad Caliph, who ruled as a just and jovial leader until his death in 683 AD. Known for his sense of humour and his love for women, Abi Sufyan was famous for a story that took place in his own harem. While escorting a woman for the Khorasan region in modern day Iran, a beautiful woman entered the harem and mesmerised the Leader of All Believers. With his pride in his manhood and prowess in the bed arena, Abi Sufyan did not hesitate to engage in a brazen and manly sexual act in front of the Khorasani woman, who was patiently waiting for her turn. After he was done, he turned victoriously to his first concubine and asked her how to say ‘lion' in Persian - in a direct analogy to his sexual performance.  The Khorasani woman, unamused, told him slyly, that lion is kaftar in Persian. The Caliph went back to his Court ever so jubilant and told his subjects – repeatedly – that he was one lucky kaftar. His...
2 comments
Read more

Pan-Arabism vs. Middle Easternism?

             A rab Nationalism, a romantic concept that moved poets to write ballads, intellectuals to preach volumes, activists to passionately organize and the masses to cheer freedom. A concept introduced by students at the American University of Beirut in the last phases of the ageing Ottoman Empire and studied in secret societies. This concept developed and led, under western planning, to the Great Arab Revolt in 1916. The slogans of Arab revival and freedom from Ottoman tyranny swept the Arab nations, where hopes of independence and self-rule were promised by the restoration of Arab control over the area. Then problems arose. Who are Arabs? What is an Aran nation? How does it extend geographically? Is it an area that encompasses people who speak the same language and share the same history? If so, why did the Lebanese Maronites reject the concept of Arab nationalism and insist on a Lebanese identity? Why did the Egyptians hesitate be...
Post a Comment
Read more