The Palestinian-Saudi agreement: “From A to z”

I am writing this article that presents the story of the Saudi-Palestinian agreement from “A to Z” and I hope that the information contained in it, although it is based on several informed media and political sources, is incorrect, or lacks accuracy. Because if it is true, it means that Saudi normalization is coming. It has begun and could reach its final stop quickly, or after a while, and that there is more than one Palestinian cover for it, even though it does not include ending the occupation or a Palestinian state.

Many months ago, Palestinian-Saudi discussions began in which President Mahmoud Abbas participated in his visit to Saudi Arabia last April, in which Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman asked the authority to present a vision for preserving the “two-state solution” and “preserving the chances for peace.” By opening a political horizon, in addition to other discussions in which a Palestinian delegation headed by Hussein Al-Sheikh participated, who met with Nayef Al-Sudairi, the Saudi ambassador to Jordan, several times, before and after his appointment as ambassador to Palestine and a non-resident consul in Jerusalem.

The whole matter was crowned with meetings held by a Palestinian delegation that visited Saudi Arabia in early last September, to outline the points of agreement that the discussions concluded. This was done and it was agreed to consider the Palestinian paper as a reference for both parties.

High expectations and huge disappointment

The Palestinian leadership has begun discussions with the Saudi leadership on a high note. I believed that normalizing an Arab country with the status and importance of Saudi Arabia must provide a great opportunity for the deal being discussed to include an important Palestinian component, especially since the ruler of Riyadh chose to have the Palestinians participate in what he intends to do, and he wants their support. Given the importance of this in marketing the Saudi-American deal, which is being discussed under American sponsorship.

Based on high expectations, the Palestinian side put forward the need for the Arab Peace Initiative to be the basis for dealing with the Palestinian issue. But the surprise was that the Saudi side was looking out for its interests, focusing on its demands for the advanced nuclear reactor, the joint defense treaty, and advanced weapons, and did not put the Palestinian issue among its priorities, as evidenced by the fact that it agreed to let the initiative be the basis of the ongoing process, but with a “simple” amendment. “Turn the situation upside down; He considered that the Arab initiative should not be the starting point, but rather the final goal that work is being done to achieve. As Abdul Rahman Al-Rashed said in his recent article “The Saudi-Israeli Negotiation” published in Asharq Al-Awsat newspaper: “The Saudi path may not achieve a Palestinian state, because like all bilateral agreements, it will be based on bilateral interests as they were.” Likewise, a famous analyst supporting the Saudi position said. That the Arab initiative can be achieved within 5, 10 or 15 years.

The Saudis based their previous position on a Palestinian assessment previously mentioned in the Palestinian paper submitted to them about the difficulty of reaching a final solution, especially on the issues of the state, Jerusalem, and refugees, stressing the need to exploit the current opportunity, by improving resources and living conditions. This is because the current Israeli government cannot agree to the Arab initiative nor the two-state solution.

Yes, it's not realistic to start from here; But this cannot be justified, even though if it happened, it would destroy the discussions from the first meeting due to the Israeli government’s refusal. Is the ceiling what the Kahanist government accepts? The official leadership’s position is also very weak because it deals with the recent Israeli governments within a low ceiling, which is economic peace, without a political dimension, to the point that an official in it said that the authority is ready to stop its unilateral steps (which are intended to internationalize, resort to international courts, and adopt peaceful resistance) if Israel stopped its unilateral steps!!

Transitional settlement - Oslo 2

Therefore, the miserable way out, according to informed sources, which was agreed upon by the Palestinian and Saudi sides was to agree to present “acceptable, realistic demands” that are achievable, and to demand a new three-year transitional settlement (Oslo 2), during which the positive atmosphere necessary to implement the Arab initiative would be created. Focusing on implementing 14 Israeli commitments in the Oslo Accords that were not implemented, such as (the third pulse: stopping settlement, not building new settlement outposts, not legitimizing existing outposts, and many points in the Paris Economic Protocol that were not implemented, and respecting the prestige of the authority, especially by not storming designated cities) A), It is assumed that it is completely under its control, and the prisoners detained before Oslo, etc. are released.

It is noteworthy that the Saudi side also called on the authority, according to the sources, to make new concessions, by submitting specific proposals clarifying what is meant by stopping settlement, and what can be converted from Areas (C) to Areas (A), and saw that the appropriate mechanism to implement what was agreed upon between Riyadh and Ram God is building on the Sharm El-Sheikh and Aqaba agreements to agree on security arrangements and the new transitional phase with the presence of international guarantors, and this requires holding new meetings. Lowering the ceiling from the beginning pushes the Netanyahu government to more extremism.

Failed American-Palestinian talks

In order to complete the picture, in addition to the Saudi-Palestinian discussions, American-Palestinian discussions took place in Ramallah, Amman, and Saudi Arabia itself, in which (information needs to be confirmed) the Palestinian delegation and Barbara Leaf participated in the meetings in Amman and Cairo, and President Joe Biden’s senior advisor, Brett McGurk, in Saudi Arabia. The American position stated the necessity of presenting “realistic” Palestinian demands to the Saudis and Americans in order to contribute to reaching a Saudi-Israeli agreement.

For example, there were Palestinian requests not to use the veto in the Security Council to prevent the state from obtaining full membership, to open the PLO office in Washington, to remove it from the terrorist list, and to open the American consulate in Jerusalem, which means the American beginning to recognize the Palestinian state and provide aid. Directly to the Authority, and pressuring Israel to stop financial sanctions on the Authority, and others.

The American response to these requests was completely negative. Recognition of the state - according to the Americans - is a step that must be agreed upon through negotiation, and it is not a starting point, but rather an ending point. As for the issue of aid, opening the organization’s office, and removing it from the terrorist list, it requires changing American laws, and this takes time. When the Biden administration committed to urging donor countries to continue to support the Palestinian Authority, and to resume support from those countries that stopped it, such as Saudi Arabia; The Saudi response was that we are not a charity, and we will not provide blank aid, and any aid that will come will be huge, but in the context of a political process that begins after normalization.

Perhaps the news of Saudi support for the authority in the amount of 170 million dollars (less than the amount given to the Ronaldo player), including 70 million for security and 100 million for the authority’s budget, is the first relief, and a reward for the positive position of the authority regarding the efforts made for Saudi normalization. What is required of them is not only non-rejection, but rather support and even participation.

As for the other points, they will come later or be implemented. For example, the Palestinian office currently located in the US Embassy is separate from it and reports directly to the US State Department.

Conclusion: The ruler of Riyadh clarified his position in his interview with Fox News, that the Palestinian issue is important, but he limited the matter to talking about improving the conditions of the Palestinians, and did not mention the peace initiative, the Palestinian state, or anything else, and when the Saudi Foreign Minister and Ambassador Al-Sudairi mentioned the initiative And the state, this is within the understanding that we presented above.

Riyadh agreed to Trump's deal

If we go back a few years, we remember that Riyadh agreed to the Trump deal and became angry with the Palestinian President because he opposed it, and stopped the aid it provided to the Authority. This is a very bad deal that was not approved by the Israeli government, and it is less bad than what is proposed now, as it is a state in which Palestinian and borders, even in form, while what is proposed is an attempt to revive Oslo through a transitional settlement, ignoring that the old transitional settlement has lasted until now for more than thirty years, and the data and conditions were better than they are now and did not lead to a state. Rather, the possibility of achieving it has become further and more difficult, if not over. .

Also, the Abrahamic Accords cannot be signed without a Saudi green light, and the gradual Saudi normalization that is taking place clearly indicates where things are going, such as: opening the airspace, and the visit of the Ministers of Tourism and Communications.

Saudi Arabia’s approval of the economic corridor is no less important than normalization, and it indicates Saudi bias in a project that could negatively affect the Chinese “Belt and Road” project, and in Egypt, Lebanon, Syria, Turkey, Iran, and Russia.

The above does not mean that the path to normalization is clear. Rather, the Saudi demands, especially with regard to full-cycle uranium enrichment, have several forms under discussion, to ensure that a Saudi nuclear bomb is not produced, and there are also several formulas for the defense treaty, ranging from the NATO formula to the Bahrain treaty, and so on. Between them are the Korea-Japan treaties, and one of the proposed solutions that Netanyahu referred to is for Saudi normalization to take place in a gradual manner. First, a framework agreement (declaration of principles) will be agreed upon until the American, Saudi and Israeli situation matures to conclude a peace treaty and exchange ambassadors. This is confirmed by the statement of John Kirby, spokesman for the US National Security Council, that the discussions aimed at normalizing relations between Israel and Saudi Arabia have reached a political framework. for a future agreement; The two parties have established a basic structure for what can be moved towards, and everyone must make concessions. Because the agreement is complicated, and this is what Reuters indicated, which showed the progress in the discussions, and confirmed that the discussions are now dependent on the defense agreement.

The hypocrisy of many writers and analysts

I know that criticizing Saudi Arabia is not an easy matter, and it has a price, so we see some commentators who were famous for their harsh criticism of Riyadh’s policy are now being objective, and are talking about two possibilities in explaining the Saudi position: The first is that Saudi Arabia’s flexibility is nothing but a maneuver, and it cannot make a deal. The possibility of it playing a leadership role in the region and the world is weakening, and the other is that Saudi Arabia has made up its mind, and research is underway about the price, timing, and details, and that what it has done in playing on the eastern and western camps is nothing but a tactic to achieve the best possible deal that consolidates the historical alignment.

The decline in the Palestinian and Saudi positions has occurred, and Riyadh’s urging of the Palestinians to seize the opportunity of Biden’s term has great significance, whether the deal is completed or not, and what was presented in the discussions will be the starting point for any future discussions.

I finish what I started and hope that Saudi Arabia will not pursue normalization at the expense of its expected role, and at the expense of the Palestinian cause by claiming that a Palestinian state will come later. That is, do not conclude the deal at such a low price, especially since Israel is in its weakest state, and Netanyahu in particular is in the weakest moments of his life, and America is no longer the sole master of the land. Even talk about stopping issuing new decisions to expand settlement, even if Netanyahu agrees to it, has no meaning. His government has approved the construction of 50,000 settlement units in Jerusalem and the West Bank, and there is no need to issue new settlement decisions. Likewise, there is no meaning in requesting the transfer of part of Areas (C) to (A) or from (B) to (A). Because there is no longer any difference between these areas permitted by the occupation forces since Operation Defensive Shield until now.

Whoever wants the peace initiative, despite the recognition of the settler colonial entity over 88% of Palestine and the two-state solution, must unite and strengthen the Palestinian position, by giving priority to ending the division and restoring unity, and adopting a realistic program, but not surrendering to reality, but rather seeking to Change it, establish good governance that combats corruption, approve elections at all levels on a regular and regular basis, collect Palestinian, Arab and international power and pressure, and employ them to create new facts on the ground and change the balance of power; Where Palestinian rights impose themselves on the occupying state, whether through negotiations or without them.

What is surprising is the writings of writers, intellectuals, and journalists who criticize the Palestinian leadership, praise or avoid any criticism of the Saudi position, and some of them justify this by saying that all rights belong to the Palestinian leadership, and it actually bears responsibility, but it would not have reached what it has achieved had it not been for the fact that the Arab regime had collapsed and continued. And his authoritarian countries are pushed to this path; Until he blames her and shirks his responsibilities, and what she could lead to.

A new Palestinian leadership abandons the political solution

Now, what is required is a new Palestinian leadership or the current leadership being more and more subjugated so that it does not propose a political solution or say a word about national rights, but rather deals only with humanitarian and livelihood issues, such as work permits, unification, economic projects...etc. This same thing was proposed by Netanyahu and called it “economic peace,” and other Israelis call it “peace for peace.” This is the Israeli solution that does not lead to a single democratic state, nor to achieving civil rights, but rather to burying the Palestinian option and paving the way for the next step, which is displacement. More Palestinians to Jordan, Sinai and new countries of asylum.