What is Hezbollah’s role in mounting tension in Lebanon

Tension has spiked in Lebanon as Justice Tarek Bitar, who is leading the investigation into the 2020 Beirut Port blast, issues charges and warrants against a number of high-ranking officials, including Hezbollah allies. It is necessary to understand what the Israeli and western media is saying 

Bitar is the second judge to run the judicial investigation into the explosion, in which more than 200 people were killed and thousands wounded after a large amount of ammonium nitrate improperly stored at the port caught fire and detonated in one of the largest nonnuclear explosions in human history.

The first judge, Fadi Sawan, was removed from the case on charges of “legitimate suspicion” over his neutrality, due to the fact his home was damaged in the blast. Sawan was removed after a request from two of the officials he charged, MP Ali Hassan Khalil and MP Ghazi Zaiter, both Hezbollah allies.

Bitar followed in Sawan’s footsteps and issued charges against a number of officials, including Khalil, Zaiter, former public works minister Youssef Fenianos, and former prime minister Hassan Diab, among others. Most have refused to show up for questioning.

The case has already been suspended three times under Bitar due to allegations of bias filed by the charged officials, with the latest suspension coming on Tuesday.

In order to understand why Hezbollah may be hesitant for an investigation to progress, it’s important to understand the background of the explosion itself.

The ammonium nitrate in question was carried by the Rhosus, whose declared destination was Mozambique. Investigative journalist Feras Hatoum found the ship was owned by a shell company linked to Syrian-Russian businessmen sanctioned by the US for acting on behalf of the Syrian government. At least until shortly before it arrived in Beirut, the ship was owned by an individual linked to a bank accused of dealing with Hezbollah and the Syrian government.

When the ship arrived, it was deemed at risk of sinking, and the chemicals were removed and stored at the port in an unsafe way.

Human Rights Watch (HRW) found that multiple Lebanese officials were, at minimum, criminally negligent in their handling of the weapons-grade ammonium nitrate. The report found some officials foresaw the deadly risks and accepted them. Officials also repeatedly failed to accurately disclose the dangers posed by the chemicals.

The HRW report listed officials who were aware of the dangers, including President Michel Aoun, Diab and Khalil. The report additionally mentioned that at least four people who had knowledge about the chemicals or the explosion have died in suspicious circumstances.

An FBI probe found the amount of ammonium nitrate that exploded at the port was only a fifth of the amount that arrived on the Rhosus, raising questions of where the rest had gone.

The links of the possible owners of the Rhosus to Hezbollah and the fact the chemicals were weapons grade and had largely been siphoned away from the port by the time of the explosion, among other factors, caused HRW and many others in Lebanon and around the world to question whether the chemicals were actually meant for Mozambique, or had been meant to arrive in Lebanon all along.

Hezbollah also has a strong hold over Lebanon’s ports, with many relevant officials coming from either Hezbollah or its allies. Even if the movement did not purposefully import the ammonium nitrate, it or its allies may still be found responsible for the explosion due to negligence.

These details may be behind the decision to charge the Hezbollah-affiliated officials, although at least one Hezbollah opponent has been charged as well.

Hezbollah has expressed outrage at the charges and is demanding Bitar be removed. Recently, rhetoric against Bitar has escalated, with Hezbollah members and allies threatening to leave the government and even use force to get Bitar off the case.

Hezbollah Secretary-General Hassan Nasrallah attacked Bitar on Monday, saying the judge is using the case for political goals and does not want to reach the truth about the explosion. Nasrallah also questioned why Bitar questioned only certain ministers and not others.

Hezbollah security official Wafiq Safa reportedly threatened Bitar in September, saying the movement would remove Bitar by force if the judge displeases them.

“We have had enough of you. We will go to the end of the legal path, and if that does not work, we will remove you by force,” said Safa to Bitar, according to Edmond Sassine, a journalist with Lebanon’s LBCI news.

Safa was sanctioned by the US Treasury in 2019 for exploiting Lebanon’s ports and borders to smuggle illegal drugs and weapons into Beirut and facilitate travel on behalf of Hezbollah.

Khalil told the Hezbollah-affiliated Al-Mayadeen TV on Tuesday that Bitar’s investigation “is unlawful and surpasses many of the protocols that must be followed.” The MP additionally claimed that the judge had met with a foreign delegation minutes after issuing the arrest warrant for Khalil, implying influence by foreign powers.

The MP warned there would be a “political escalation, and perhaps [an escalation] of another kind,” adding that “all possibilities are open,” including taking to the streets.

Khalil claimed the investigation may be part of a regional and internal plan to try to “change balances,” and that he had information that indicates that the investigation has a goal for a certain political group “at the behest of external parties.” On Wednesday, Hassan Fadlallah, a Hezbollah-affiliated MP, outright accused the US of interfering in the investigation.

The secretary-general of the Lebanese Parliament announced on Wednesday that all the measures taken by Bitar against presidents, ministers and deputies were considered an infringement of powers.

Sources from Hezbollah and the Marada movement told the Lebanese Al-Jadeed TV news that Bitar was preparing to accuse Hezbollah directly of responsibility for the explosion. The sources added that if Bitar is not removed, they will leave the government.

Hezbollah’s fight against Bitar may impact its relationship with Aoun as well, with Al-Jadeed reporting Aoun stormed out of a meeting on Tuesday, expressing anger at Hezbollah’s threats of force. Aoun reportedly has insisted on a separation of powers and refused to interfere in the judiciary.

The head of Lebanon’s Kataeb Party, Sami Gemayel, on Wednesday asked the government of Lebanon not to “bow to Hezbollah’s intimidation.”

Samir Gaegea, a Christian opponent of Hezbollah, called on the “free people of Lebanon” to prepare for a peaceful general strike if Bitar’s opponents attempt to impose their will by force. While Gaegea stressed his statement was not a threat, he added he would never accept a “certain reality” being imposed by force.

The families of the blast victims warned against replacing or intimidating Bitar, “no matter how high the threat level,” telling officials to “keep their hands off the judiciary.”

Former MP Mustapha Allouch warned on Wednesday, in an interview with Voice of Lebanon that an international investigation is needed, and that the current situation is repeating the situation of the assassination of former prime minister Rafik Hariri, as Hezbollah feels the threads of the investigation pointing at it.

All of these factors are leading to concerns that Lebanon’s newly formed government may already be on the brink of collapse, which would leave the country leaderless yet again as it deals with an ongoing economic crisis.

Concerns are rising that the tensions could explode into violence, especially if Hezbollah continues to obstruct the investigation or tries to use force to remove Bitar.

Lebanon is set to hold elections in the spring, although there are concerns they could be delayed. The elections will pose yet another test for the country in crisis, as it will face the opportunity to elect new leaders.

Lebanon will also be faced with the challenge of keeping the elections safe and unaffected by corruption amid an increasingly charged environment that will likely only get tenser as elections near.

Firefight racks Beirut after Hezbollah demonstration attacked

Gunmen opened fire on a Hezbollah-organized demonstration on Thursday in the Lebanese capital killing at least six people and raising the specter of renewed violence and revenge attacks across the city. 

The brazen assault on Lebanon’s most powerful party, both militarily and politically, represented a dangerous escalation in a country that has been teetering on the edge of collapse for the past year.

Hezbollah, which held the demonstration to call for the removal of the judge investigating a blast that tore through Beirut last year, has accused the rival Lebanese Forces, a right-wing Christian movement, for the attack, setting up a showdown between the two heavily armed groups.

Hezbollah and its ally the Amal Movement said its supporters “faced an armed aggression by groups from the Lebanese Forces party which had spread out in nearby neighborhoods and on building rooftops, and started its direct sniping operations to purposefully kill.”

After hours of shooting and rocket propelled grenades, which spread from the Tayyooneh roundabout — a fault line during the civil war decades ago — to several other parts of the city, the normally traffic-choked streets were eerily quiet, save for the distant sound of ambulances.

The Red Cross, which sent teams to the scene, said six people were killed and more than 30 wounded. It was the fiercest clash in the city since 2008, when tensions between the US-backed government and Hezbollah escalated into pitched street battles in which dozens died.

While the Lebanese Forces did not claim the attack, Imad Wakim, a lawmaker for the group, said in a tweet that the confrontation is not between parties or sects but “between Hezbollah and what is left of free Lebanese from all sects, preserving what has remained of government institutions.”

Schools were evacuated as panicked parents flocked to pick up their children. Local media reported that residents on buildings’ higher floors were descending to avoid gunshots targeting the snipers believed to be on the rooftops. Many families were evacuated from buildings in the area by the army and the Lebanese Red Cross. 

The demonstration had been originally to protest Judge Tarek Bitar after Lebanon’s highest court rejected a petition to replace him. He is the second judge to lead the investigation in the face of formidable opposition by various political parties in Lebanon, including Hezbollah.

In its joint statement, Hezbollah and Amal called on authorities to “arrest those who caused the killing operations whose names are known, and the aggressors who ran this purposeful operation from black rooms.”

During a news conference from the airport, US Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs Victoria Nuland expressed condolences for the day’s events, and said of the blast investigation that “terrorists and thieves have robbed (the Lebanese) of hope for far too long.”

She announced a US$67 million aid for the army, which has been struggling to weather the economic crisis that has ravaged Lebanon in the past two years.

Local television channels stressed a need for de-escalation to avoid a repetition of the civil war that destroyed much of the country between 1975 and 1990. Residential streets and the area around the Palace of Justice, where the protest was based, were stained with blood and littered with shell casings and shattered glass.

Calls for vengeance filled the air at al-Sahel hospital, just 10 minutes from the heart of the clashes, and the air was heavy with anger. Tall bearded men in baseball caps and with Kalashnikov assault rifles slung across their bodies cried freely outside the ER, clutching each other’s shoulders. Many yelled about fighting back.

Lebanon’s politics is characterized by a tense power sharing agreement between its many communities that has left decision-making deadlocked while the economy and basic infrastructure has gradually deteriorated.

The system has also meant that any serious investigations, such as the one into the August 4, 2020, blast, which killed more than 200 people and devastated large portions of the capital, tend to go nowhere if they threatens the powers that be.

Bitar is the second judge assigned to the probe. Throughout his investigation, the first judge, Fadi Sawan, had focused on a question that has gripped much of Lebanon: Who was responsible for allowing 2,750 tons of ammonium nitrate to be stored haphazardly in a warehouse, alongside fireworks and paint thinners, on the edge of a crowded city?

After trying to interrogate powerful former ministers and political leaders, Sawan was removed and replaced by Bitar. But he also struggled to break through Lebanon’s culture of corruption and political influence that prevented the law from holding anyone of consequence accountable.

Government documents reviewed by The Post earlier this year showed that officials were well aware of the dangers posed by the large chemical stockpile long before last year. The documents revealed that responsibility for the ammonium nitrate was for years passed among different public and private entities, including the Ministry of Public Works and Transport, the judiciary, the army and even a private explosives company.

Bitar faced backlash after he issued an arrest warrant Tuesday for Amal movement member and former finance minister Ali Hassan Khalil. In an interview the same day, Khalil said, “I am proud to be part of a political movement, that I am a soldier in the Amal movement.”

A cabinet meeting was canceled Wednesday after Hezbollah demanded urgent government action against the judge. A Hezbollah-allied minister threatened that he and other cabinet members would stage a walkout if Bitar was not removed. Thursday’s protest was part of the party’s pressure campaign against the judge.

Cyclone closes one of the world’s busiest ports

The number of vessels waiting to enter one of the world's busiest ports has jumped to the most since August this, threatening to further snarl global supply chains strained by a surge in consumer demand for everything from cars to computers.

China's Yantian port in Shenzhen suspended pickup and drop-off of containers as tropical cyclone Kompasu approached the nation's southern coastline. The number of ships waiting outside the port rose to 67, the most since August 26, according to shipping data compiled by Bloomberg.

Located near China's tech capital of Shenzhen and the manufacturing belt of the Pearl River Delta, Yantian is one of the world's busiest ports, with a cargo throughput of 13.34 million twenty-foot equivalent units in 2020, according to figures from the Shenzhen Transportation Bureau. It typically serves about 100 ships a week.

Kompasu is the second tropical storm to affect southern China in the last few days, after Lionrock brought flooding to some low-lying areas of Hong Kong over the weekend. The damage from Kompasu could be more severe based on its current track and intensity forecasts, Bloomberg Intelligence analyst Steven Lam wrote in a note on Monday, October 11, 2021.

Bottlenecks at container terminals around the world have added to pressure on supply chains already struggling to keep up with demand. Covid-19 outbreaks at ports, along with shortages in shipping containers and labour have exacerbated the problem, with China - the world's biggest manufacturer - seeing a number of port disruptions this year.

The country has a zero-tolerance approach to the coronavirus, and has shut down port operations on single cases in the past. An outbreak at Yantian in June this year saw it closed, resulting in falling volumes as far away as the Port of Los Angeles. The Ningbo-Zhoushan port shut for two weeks in August because of a Delta variant infection.

Weather has also played havoc, with Shanghai's container port, the world's biggest, halting some operations last month amid a typhoon.

 

United States annoyed at growing Chinese investment in Israel

Reportedly, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken plans to warn Israel against continued Chinese investments in the country's infrastructure and hi-tech industry when he meets Foreign Minister Yair Lapid in Washington on Wednesday.

"We will be candid with our Israeli friends over risks to our shared national security interests that come with close cooperation with China," a senior State Department official told reporters during a briefing ahead of the meeting.

Blinken is also expected to meet Emirati Foreign Minister Sheikh Abdullah Bin Zayed Al Nahyan on Wednesday.

The US has been concerned about the UAE's use of Chinese Huawei Technologies in its communication system in light of its pending sale of advanced F-35 fighter jets to the Emirates, but when speaking of China it focused only on its concern with Israel.

The highlight of the day is expected to be a trilateral meeting Blinken will host with the two foreign ministers that is designed to highlight the success of the Abraham Accords, brokered by the former administration.

The accords allowed Israel to normalize ties with the UAE, Bahrain, Morocco and Sudan last year, of which ties with the Emirates are the most advanced.

At the trilateral, Israel and the UAE are expected to announce two new working groups, one on religious coexistence and another that would focus on water and energy.

But the range of the topics that will be brought up in all meetings are fairly wide and include China, Iran, Syria, Yemen, Lebanon, Gaza and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Lapid, in his public comments in Washington on Tuesday focused on the strong US-Israel bilateral ties and the special relationship Israel has with America and the Biden administration.

Though, US officials echoed those same sentiments at the briefing, they also discussed topics of discord in the relationship.

Biden administration officials had spoken about China with National Security Advisor Eyal Hulata when he was in Washington earlier this month.

But State Department senior officials remained vague on Tuesday with respect to their specific concerns on China.

"The US views China as a competitor that challenges the existing international rules-based order; our relationship with China will be competitive when it should be," the official stated.

On Iran, a senior State Department official said that Washington's main objective at this time is the revival of the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, known as the Iran deal, which Israel has traditionally opposed. 

Both the US and Israel are joined in their opposition to a nuclear Iran but have differed about how best to achieve that objective.

Lapid said on Tuesday that Iran was one of the major focal points of his Washington trip.

On the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, the senior State Department officials said that at Wednesday's meetings, Blinken will "reaffirm our belief" in the benefits of a two-state solution. He will also express his appreciation for "Minister Lapid's recent, strong statement condemning settler violence in the West Bank."

The Israeli government is split on how best to approach the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, with Prime Minister Naftali Bennett opposing a two-state resolution to the conflict while Lapid has supported it.

But Lapid's visions of the borders of those two states differ from those envisioned by the Biden administration, which has not advanced a peace process. The senior State Department officials did not mention any movement on that front, except for stating that "we seek to advance it when we can, as best as we can."

An official said that the accords are not a substitute for the two-state solutions and suggested that these could be used to push for progress toward a resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

"We hope that normalization can be leveraged to advance progress on the Israeli-Palestinian track," the official said.

An official also spoke of the Biden administration's commitment to maintaining Israel's qualitative edge and its support for supplemental funding for the defensive Iron Dome system it provides Israel to protect Israeli citizens against Hamas rockets.

The officials repeated their opposition to Israeli settlement activity and the Palestinian Authority's monthly stipends to terrorists and their families.   

Separately, during Lapid's trip, Foreign Ministry Director-General Alon Ushpiz will meet with Deputy Secretary of State Wendy Sherman.

Challenges facing US Defense Strategy

The Pentagon has begun the process of developing a strategy to meet the congressional requirement for a National Defense Strategy (NDS) report in 2022. The defense strategy is likely to expand upon the 2018 strategy, which identified China and Russia as peer competitors and assigned highest priority to deterring adventurism on the part of both states. 

China’s increasingly aggressive stance against Taiwan — notably, its recent four-day surge of nearly 150 combat aircraft into the island’s air defense identification zone, as well as the expansion of its conventional and strategic nuclear forces — underscores the ongoing need for maintaining a credible deterrent against Beijing. Similarly, Russia’s continuing pressure on Ukraine, its ceaseless efforts to employ cyber to disrupt American political and economic activity, and its military modernization programs justify the priority that the 2022 NDS, like its immediate predecessor, is likely to assign to deterring Moscow’s aggressiveness.

China and Russia do not constitute the entirety of American security concerns, even if they represent the most demanding threats that American forces might have to confront. North Korea is a rogue nuclear power that can threaten its neighbors and the American homeland. Iran is poised to develop its own nuclear capability while continuing its disruptive efforts throughout the Middle East and its own efforts to fight the West in cyberspace. Washington may wish to ratchet down its Middle East military profile, but unless Iran terminates its nuclear program and ceases to undermine the stability of regional states, American withdrawal from the region will be easier said than done.  

While American forces may have departed from Afghanistan, there is little indication that Taliban government will do anything to prevent terrorists from once again using that country as a base for attacks on Western, and especially American, targets and persons. If dealing with these challenges were not enough, the Biden administration has added both climate change and fighting pandemics as two additional threats that the Department of Defense (DOD), like the government as a whole, must face for the foreseeable future.

Strategies represent the employment of means to stated ends. Yet the administration’s future budgets, which would provide the financial sources to acquire means for coping with the array of challenges that it has identified, are unlikely to grow much beyond that which it proposed for fiscal year 2022. That budget calls for a small decline in real terms over the previous year’s budget. Indeed, even if congressional appropriations would increase FY 2022 spending levels by some $24 billion, there is no indication that the Biden administration would maintain the trajectory of that increase over the next several budget years.

In light of the administration’s reluctance to increase defense spending to any significant degree — which itself is rather puzzling given its willingness to spend trillions of dollars on domestic progress — one might have expected it to mandate a cutback in the forces and capabilities that currently are targeted against the lower priority but still potent threats that it has identified. This does not appear to be the case. The FY 2022 budget and the proposed congressional adds-ons both continue to preserve far too many of what have come to be called “legacy programs” — that is, weapons systems whose utility was greatest over the past two decades, but whose value in confronting the challenges posed by China, in particular, is questionable at best. 

Future budget requests, and likely congressional appropriations, no doubt will incorporate many cutting-edge technologies such as artificial intelligence and systems that incorporate machine learning. Nevertheless, the expansion of these and other capabilities to meet future threats will be constrained not only by relatively flat top-line budgets but by ongoing, real-cost growth for both military personnel and operations and maintenance. The combined squeeze on defense modernization would render it highly unlikely that Washington credibly could deter China and Russia simultaneously, or indeed, any combination of the threats it might face. 

If Biden administration remains determined to put a cap on defense spending, yet wishes to pursue all of its priorities while minimizing to the degree possible the risk to meeting its security objectives, it will have to take far more seriously the need for allies and partners. With few notable exceptions such as the United Kingdom, Australia and Japan, Washington has not done enough to convince its other allies and partners that their economic interests — especially involving China and Russia — simply do not outweigh the threats that these states pose to their security.   

Part of its problem is that, in the past, Washington often did little more than pay lip service to the importance of allied contributions to the defense of common interests. The time has come to take allies and partners far more seriously, to expand its reliance on their military capabilities, to be more open to sharing technological breakthroughs, and indeed, to improve the balance of military trade that currently overwhelmingly favors the United States. Without its allies and partners, America no longer can be certain that it would prevail in a future conflict — especially if, as may well be the case, it will simultaneously have to face more than one adversary in more than one theater. 

Biden faces stiff challenges

Doubts are clouding the horizon on every topic for US President Joe Biden as he nears the anniversary of his election. On Capitol Hill, the push for the two bills at the heart of his legislative agenda is in peril. 

The economy appears broadly on a path to recovery, but optimism was shaken by another poor jobs report on last Friday. Inflation lurks in the background, too. Along with this the dangers of the winter months are looming.

A little progress was made on the nation’s debt ceiling and avoiding the financial earthquake that would have resulted had the US neared default in mid-October. The temporary fix agreed between Senate Majority Leader Charles Schumer and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell means the fight will be waged all over again in early December.

A Quinnipiac University poll released last Wednesday indicates Biden’s  fall to easily the lowest mark of his presidency, with 53% of registered voters disapproving of his job performance and only 40% approving.

An Economist-YouGov survey conducted in first week of October was not quite as bad, but it still made for discomforting reading for Democrats. 48% of respondents disapproved of Biden’s actions, and 42% approved. 

There are even worries that Democrats could suffer an embarrassing loss in Virginia’s gubernatorial race early next month. 

Democrats see the turbulent waters surrounding Biden and they look with trepidation toward next year’s midterm elections. The party that holds the White House almost always loses ground in the first midterms of a president’s tenure. Democrats are defending a tiny majority in the House and a 50-50 split in the Senate, where they hold the majority only through Vice President Harris’s deciding vote.

Republican strategist Dan Judy asserted that “the bloom is off the Joe Biden rose” after about nine months in power.

Biden got bad news on the economy on Friday, when new data from the Labor Department showed just 194,000 jobs had been added in September — the lowest monthly figure since December.

The divisions between progressives and their more conservative colleagues in the Democratic Party are on stark display. Biden faces a delicate task in trying to reconcile the ambitions of progressives like Sen. Bernie Sanders and much of the rest of the party, with two skeptical Senate holdouts, Sens. Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema.

The rhetoric across the Democratic trenches has become angrier in recent weeks; even as most in the party admit failure to reach a deal would be a political disaster.

“It is important for the president to be able to rally his side,” said Murray. “But I also think it is important to demonstrate that government is capable of working, of delivering results. 

“I think there is a broad cynicism that exists in the American public that government doesn’t do anything,” he added. “To the extent that the Biden administration can show we are delivering results, I think that is very important.”

Any number of these events could break in Biden’s favor, reversing the slide he has endured since the chaotic US withdrawal from Afghanistan, but right now, he faces stiff challenges.

Biden administration shows little progress with Abraham Accords on first anniversary

According to certain reports Biden administration has made little progress in advancing normalization agreements between Israel and Arab and Muslim-majority countries more than one year since they were first established under the Trump administration.

Supporters of the agreements, ‘The Abraham Accords’ say President Joe Biden is missing a key opportunity on an issue that enjoys rare bipartisan support in a polarized and hyper-partisan Congress.

They add that the President can reap tangible successes in the Middle East, including on improving conditions for Palestinians, while taking ownership of a Trump foreign policy success.

The stalled progress is likely to give ammo to Republicans ahead of the 2022 and 2024 elections, who seek to skewer the Biden administration over its policy of rapprochement with Iran and reestablishing ties with the Palestinians that were severed under Trump.

Biden administration has also come under fire for appearing to fail to defend Kurdish Iraqis who were condemned, and reportedly physically threatened, for calling to normalize ties with Israel.

“It is beyond unexplainable that the Biden administration is distancing America from this noble effort of the Iraqi people to normalize relations with Israel. We should pray for their efforts, not shun them,” former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo tweeted in response to a statement by the US-led coalition to defeat ISIS that denied knowledge of the calls for normalization.

Pompeo, one of the architects of the accords and a potential 2024 Republican presidential candidate, will be in Jerusalem next week to celebrate their one-year anniversary with Israeli officials. 

Also in attendance will be Trump's son-in-law and former special adviser Jared Kushner, who was integral in shaping the deal, along with former US Ambassador to Israel David Friedman, who will be inaugurating the “Friedman Center for Peace through Strength” to coincide with the celebrations.

The Abraham Accords were first announced in August 2020 as a breakthrough in normalization between Israel and the United Arab Emirates, marking the first Arab country to establish relations with Israel in more than two decades, since Jordan in 1994.

Bahrain was the second country to sign on to the deals followed by pronouncements from Sudan and Morocco to deepen ties with Israel.

“I have to say that it exceeded my expectations,” Ghaith al-Omari, a senior fellow with the Washington Institute who served as an adviser on Palestinian negotiations between 1999 and 2001, said of the success of the accords.   

“Relations are going strong, embassies are being formally established, economic relations are just only growing … certainly we’re seeing a momentum," he added.

While the trigger for the UAE recognizing Israel was an effort to preserve Palestinian national aspirations — securing a commitment by Israel to halt plans for annexation green-lighted by the Trump administration — al-Omari said that the deepening ties with Abu Dhabi and the subsequent agreements with Bahrain, Sudan and Morocco show how far the Palestinian issue has fallen from the agenda of Arab and Muslim countries.

“In the end it’s invalidated the old paradigm that Israeli peace with the Arabs has to go first with the Palestinian track. These are all transformations,” he said.

Yet including issues related to the Palestinians with prospective Abraham Accord partners could present an opportunity for the Biden administration to secure a key signatory like Saudi Arabia, and move forward its commitments to improving the situation for Palestinians in general, said Michael Koplow, Policy Director of the Israel Policy Forum, a research and policy advocacy organization.

Saudi Arabia, which the Trump administration touted as being close to signing on to the accords, has resisted so far, insisting that normalization with Israel is contingent on Palestinian statehood.

“If countries that normalize with Israel keep this in mind,” Koplow continued. “To say to Israelis, ‘listen there are things [with the Palestinians] that make it harder for us to normalize, and if you stop some of these things, then more agreements can be had’ — that’s a model that we’ve seen work once already and I think it's likely to keep on going.”

The Israel Relations Normalization Act of 2021, sponsored by Rep. Brad Schneider in the House and Sen. Rob Portman in the Senate, calls for the State Department to assess how the Abraham Accords “advance prospects for peace between Israelis and Palestinians.”

“The Biden administration has been tepid — to be charitable — on moving forward,” Koplow said. “One challenge is that the model that the Trump administration developed is simply not wise for the United States.”

The Trump administration came under intense scrutiny by both Republicans and Democrats over the basis of the agreements reached with the UAE, Sudan and Morocco.

This included selling F-35 advanced fighter jets and other military sales to Abu Dhabi, removing Sudan from the State Sponsor of Terrorism List, and recognizing Morocco’s claim to the contested territory of Western Sahara.

While the Biden team has allowed the F-35 sale to proceed, it has done little to address the status of Western Sahara for Morocco, or Sudan’s role in the Abraham Accords, which has yet to officially sign the agreement.

While Biden has put forth the possibility of a Washington visit for Sudan’s Prime Minister Abdallah Hamdok — raised during a call with national security adviser Jake Sullivan — a high level Sudanese diplomat said they are waiting for the official invitation.

Bonnie Glick, who served as Deputy Administrator of the US Agency for International Development during the Trump administration, called finalizing Sudan’s participation as a “low-hanging-fruit opportunity to have an impact on a Muslim country that needs our help.”

“Sudan probably took the biggest risk of any country that’s signed on to the accords. This is a brand-new government that came to power by toppling an Islamist autocracy,” she said.

“You have a military government that’s trying to transition to a civilian government, and they took a calculated risk and said, ‘We’re going to sign the Abraham Accords.’ And since the Biden administration came in, there has been silence on the Sudan component in particular.”

Biden officials say they are engaged in efforts to expand the accords by adding in new countries. Secretary of State Antony Blinken last month hosted a Zoom call with his counterparts in Israel, the UAE, Bahrain and Morocco celebrating the one-year anniversary of the accords.

“This administration will continue to build on the successful efforts of the last administration to keep normalization marching forward,” Blinken said.

But al-Omari, of the Washington Institute, criticized this event as “muted.”

“It is a fact that the Biden administration has not been, very robustly, involved in building on these accords,” he said.

Despite the absence of the Biden administration, ties are deepening between Israel and Gulf states, largely an outgrowth of more than a decade of secret ties over concerns of Iran’s ambitions in the region and, following normalization, excitement over increased economic opportunities and security initiatives.

Israel is touting as a landmark achievement its pavilion in Dubai at the World Expo; direct flights and exchanges of hundreds of thousands of its citizens with the UAE; and raising the possibility that Oman could be the next country to join the accords.

“We have, I believe, created a change of dynamics and a change of attitude in the Middle East and in the region,” Eliav Benjamin, Head of the Bureau of the Middle East and Peace Process Division at the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs, said in a briefing with reporters Wednesday.

This paradigm shift between Israel and its neighbors, Benjamin continued, is about “being much more pragmatic and practical on dealing with issues that we have at hand.”