Le Monde columnist says Abraham Accords fueled Middle East conflict rather than peace
Jean-Pierre Filiu argues that the agreements failed to address the Palestinian issue and deepened regional militarization and divisions.
A Le Monde commentary by historian Jean-Pierre Filiu argues that the Abraham Accords have not produced regional peace because they left the Palestinian issue unresolved and were driven partly by bilateral political and strategic incentives. The analysis cites conflicts in Sudan and Gaza, Saudi Arabia’s decision not to join, and changing regional alliances as evidence that the agreements have contributed more to instability than peace.
A Le Monde commentary has argued that the Abraham Accords have failed to deliver the broad peace and normalization initially promised, instead contributing to deeper divisions and increased militarization across the Middle East.
The commentary, written by Jean-Pierre Filiu, a professor of contemporary Middle Eastern history at the Paris Institute of Political Studies, was reported by Iran’s IRNA news agency. It reviewed developments during the six years since the agreements were launched in 2020.
The Abraham Accords began on Sept. 15, 2020, with U.S.-backed normalization agreements between Israel, the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain. Sudan and Morocco later joined the process. According to Filiu’s assessment, the agreements formalized relationships between countries that had already maintained discreet contacts and did not resolve the region’s central disputes, including the question of Palestinian statehood and the status of occupied territories.
The commentary said Sudan and Morocco received specific incentives from Washington. Sudan’s normalization was linked to its removal from the U.S. list of state sponsors of terrorism, while Morocco’s participation followed U.S. recognition of its claimed sovereignty over Western Sahara, according to the report.
Filiu also pointed to Sudan’s continuing crisis after the 2021 coup and the outbreak of fighting between the army led by Abdel Fattah al-Burhan and the Rapid Support Forces commanded by Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo, known as Hemedti. The commentary said the United Arab Emirates has provided extensive support to Hemedti’s forces—an allegation that has been disputed by Abu Dhabi.
The analysis further argued that the Arab signatories were unable to reduce the intensity of Israel’s war in Gaza since October 2023. It said Saudi Arabia declined to join the accords, making normalization conditional on an Israeli withdrawal from occupied territories and the establishment of an independent Palestinian state. Oman, which had previously pursued closer contacts with Israel, was also described as having adopted a harder position.
Filiu concluded that the conflicts in Sudan and Gaza, along with the reported expansion of military cooperation involving the United States, Israel and the UAE, demonstrated that the accords had not created a foundation for regional peace. In his view, they had encouraged conflict and instability more than they had strengthened peace.
The assessment reflects the views presented in the Le Monde commentary, as reported by IRNA, and does not establish independent confirmation of all claims regarding military support, diplomatic motives or the accords’ regional effects.