Don’t expect UAE- style warmth with Sudan
“The enthusiasm for this peace agreement among our peoples is enormous,” Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said at Ben- Gurion Airport on Tuesday, welcoming the first formal ministerial delegation from the United Arab Emirates. “It’s real, it’s broad, it’s deep.”
And this is not just Netanyahu engaging in rhetorical hyperbole.
Since the Abraham Accords were announced in Washington in August, relations between the two countries have taken off. Among the four agreements signed on Tuesday was one that will allow the nationals of each country to visit the other without needing a visa – Israel does not have a similar agreement with either Jordan and Egypt, the two Arab countries on its immediate borders with whom it has long standing peace agreements.
The UAE- Israel peace accord has already given birth to agreements on daily flights, academic exchanges, business ties, two- way investment opportunities, cultural programs and people- to- people ties. And that has all created momentum and a sense that this peace accord is significantly different than those with Jordan or Egypt. And one reason why is because this accord is taking hold not only among the Emirate ruling class, but also among the business sector and the people.
A major reason why Israel’s peace with Jordan and Egypt has remained so cold over the decades is that these accords were largely agreements signed by leaders that remained at the governmental and security levels and never filtered down. Neither the Egyptian nor Jordanian governments did anything to promote the idea of peace with Israel among their people. If anything, the opposite was true.
The current UAE government is taking a fundamentally different approach, and instead of signing an agreement – and then keeping Israel at arm’s length – has signed an agreement which includes practical steps to encourage tourism, business and people- to- people contact, showing a willingness to embrace Israel.
The announcement of more than two dozen direct flights between the countries per week – once the coronavirus resides – is a good indication of that.
A peace of a rather different sort, however, seems to be lurking around the corner with Sudan.
ON MONDAY, the US reached a deal with Sudan to remove it from its list of state sponsors of terrorism. A condition for removal from this list – which cut Sudan off from financial markets and made it difficult for the struggling east African country to get international aid – was that Sudan will pay $ 335 million to compensate victims of al- Qaeda attacks on United States targets
from 1998- 2000.
Removal from this list also paves the way for the establishment of ties between Israel and Sudan, as Khartoum has made this a condition of such a move. It is no coincidence that the ties will likely be established this week, since this will be waived – just two weeks before the US presidential election – as a significant foreign policy achievement for US President Donald Trump.
Sudan, long identified in the Israel- Arab conflict as the host of the Khartoum conference in 1967 after the Six Day War that gave the world the “Three No’s” – no to recognition, negotiation or peace with Israel – has consistently been among Israel’s most bitter antagonists in the Arab world. And this tone
has steadily been pounded into the population.
In 2013, Sudan’s now- deposed dictator Omar al- Bashir vowed that his country would never normalize relations with the “Zionist enemy.”
While Israel’s new diplomatic relations with the UAE and Bahrain flow in large part from a desire to form a new Middle East coalition to face the threat coming from Iran and Turkey, relations with Sudan – when they will be announced – are coming from a different place: first and foremost from pressure and a degree of arm- twisting from the US and the UAE.
The UAE, which, through its financial support has won a great deal of influence inside
Sudan, would like to see the establishment of Sudan- Israel ties lead to a“domino” effect across Africa’s Sahel and Maghreb regions, with other countries such as Mali, Niger, Morocco and Mauritania – where the UAE also has a significant footprint – following suit.
For those following the path of the Sudanese decision to normalize ties with Israel over the last few months, it has not been painless or accompanied by a groundswell of local enthusiasm.
In fact, a meeting Netanyahu held in January in Uganda with Abdel Fattah al- Burhan, the military head of the joint civilian- military body that has governed Sudan since Bashir’s overthrow last year, triggered protests inside the country, and was condemned by some of the same groups which led widespread protests against Bashir.
And in August, when a spokesman for the Sudanese Foreign Ministry said Khartoum was looking forward to a peace agreement with Israel, he was unceremoniously sacked.
Following Bashir’s three- decade long dictatorship, Sudan is currently being governed jointly by military and civilian leaders in a Sovereign Council, headed by the military’s al- Burhan, and a cabinet, led by civilian Prime Minister Abdalla Hamdok.
While Burhan has backed ties with Israel – he is strongly supported by the UAE and Saudi Arabia – Hamdok has been far more reticent. One reason given for his reticence is that ties with Israel – controversial in Sudan – will be used by Islamists and others inside the country keen on derailing the process toward national reconciliation.
And here is where the contrast between the UAE’s peace treaty with Israel and that which is likely to emerge with Sudan is most pronounced. While peace with Israel has popular legitimacy in the UAE, Sudan appears as if it is being dragged to the altar by the US and the UAE. In that case, the peace is likely to remain only at the governmental and security levels, casting into stark relief what seems to be emerging between Israel and the UAE.