Abstracts
Experts' Panel on "The Process of Normalization of Relations between Arabs and Israel: Perspectives and Consequences"
One of the constant challenges that Arab states have been facing during the last few decades has been the way they should deal with Israel. Some Arab states consider the Palestine issue and its occupation by the Zionist regime an issue concerning Arabs and a few regard it an Islamic issue. Yet, nearly all Arab states –both those that consider it an Arabic issue and those regarding it an Islamic issue- are of the same opinion about one thing: opposition to Israel and the illegitimacy of occupation of Palestine.
Nevertheless, some Arab states' reconciliation with Israel and their decision to establish relations with this regime were considered as breaking the taboos. The peace treaty signed by Egypt and Israel in Camp David Accords was the first step for this movement; this treaty was known as the exchange of "land for legitimacy" by resistance groups. The Peace Treaty signed in the Arava Valley between Israel was the second step to normalize the relations between Arab states and Israel. The common denominator in the first wave of normalization of relations between Arabs and Israel was that all these Arab states were the occupied Palestine's northern neighbors; the implication of all the peace treaties was legitimization of Israeli rule and its stabilization.
In 2020, the second wave of normalization of relations between Arab states and Israel began. The Abraham Accord was the beginning of this second wave of normalization which ended in the establishment of relations between Israel and the two countries of the United Arab Emirate and Bahrain. Then, Sudan and Morocco transformed their relations with Israel. The second wave of normalization had an entirely different nature from the first wave: none of the Arab states (located in the Persian Gulf region and North Africa) are Palestine's neighbors. The United States of America was the mediator in these treaties; the remarkable aspect in most of these treaties was the opposition to Iran and the axis of resistance.
In light of these events, Tehran Foreign Policy Studies Quarterly held a panel titled "The Process of Normalization of Relations between Arabs and Israel: Perspectives and Consequences" with the experts in foreign policy and international relations in order to deeply study the different aspects of this policy. The experts invited to this panel were as follows: Dr. Mojtaba Amani (the former chief of the Interests Section of the Islamic Republic of Iran in Egypt), Dr. Mojtaba Ferdowsipour (Iran's former ambassador to Jordan), Dr. Mehdi Honarmandzadeh (an expert of West Asia affairs), and Yunes Kolivand (an expert of Syrian affairs).
Key words: Palestine, Israel, normalization of relations, United Arab Emirate, Bahrain
The Regional Order in West Asia; A Study of the Strategic Conflict between the Resistance Axel and the United States of America in Order to Restore Optimal Order
Mehdi Honarmandzadeh – Yunes Kolivand
The historical transformation in the West Asian region indicates that the super powers of the world have repeatedly tried to extend their influence in the region in order to establish the order that works best in their interest. In the last years of the 1980s and after the Islamic Revolution in Iran, a new discourse gradually emerged in West Asia. The axis of resistance, led by the Islamic Republic of Iran, had the justice-seeking and hegemony-fighting discourse and never tolerated the current international liberal order and claimed that the status quo was based on an unjust nature.
On the regional level, the resistance discourse could little by little establish itself as the anti-discourse of the hegemony in the region.
Since the most important principle for the optimal order in the region was considered to be the provision of security for Israel, liberation of the holy Qods and Palestine became the most fundamental principle of optimal order for the resistance in the region. The resistance and the United States of America have had many altercations over the strategy and regional order since the Islamic Revolution in Iran, but the general estimations based on many overt and covert conflicts (such as the eight-year imposed war, the 33-day war, the 22-day war, Islamic awakening, the crisis of the autocratic Islamic government in Iraq and Syria and the recent war in Gaza) all show that the resistance optimal order is developing in the West Asia region. As a result of these changes, the regional order was established by the regional actors in favor of the axis of resistance. The present study aims at investigating the current situation by recounting the evolutionary process of the dominant order in the West Asia region during the contemporary period using a theoretical analysis of the regional order.
Key words: regional order, resistance axel, America, Palestine issue
A Study of the Normalization of relations between the Persian Gulf Countries and the Zionist Regime; A Case Study of United Arab Emirate and Bahrain
Ahmad-Ali Sadeghi
(A researcher of Persian Gulf affairs)
The process of normalization of relations between Arabs and the Zionist regime after the futile fights and conflicts began with the Egypt-Israel Peace Treaty. Jordan was the second country which signed a Peace Treaty with Israel to normalize the relations. Madrid Peace Treaty in the 1990s was a stepping stone for the Zionist regime to begin the secret diplomacy with the Arab countries of the Persian Gulf in two branches of arms and security diplomacy. Gradually, the diplomatic convergences of the Zionist regime and Arabs were formed based on the emergence of the common threat. The covert information, security, arm-dealing cooperation and common political projects in order to oppose the axis of resistance in the West Asia continued for years. The United Arab Emirate, Bahrain and the Zionist regime did whatever they could to weaken the axis of resistance led by the Islamic Republic of Iran; however, after the strategic successes of the axis of resistance, Islamic awakening and all the transformations that followed, they had no choice but to reveal their mutual relations and make them official. This revelation of the relations presents both goals and consequences which the present paper seeks to find.
Key words: the Zionist Regime, the United Arab Emirate, Bahrain, resistance axel
The Study of the Zionist Regime's Strategies in Normalizing Relations with the Arab Countries; Goals and Results
Dr. Ahmad Zare'an
(Assistant Professor in the International Studies Research Center at Imam Hussein Comprehensive University)
The Zionist regime's relations with the Arab countries of the region during the last seven decades can be easily compartmentalized into four distinct periods. Animosity, peace-seeking, covert security and information cooperation, and revealing and extension of both quality and quantity of the relations have been parts of the constant pattern of the Zionist regime's relations with the Arab countries of the region during these four periods of time. During the recent years, influenced by a few factors and circumstances, the Zionist regime tried to seriously continue its quest for normalization of relations with the Arab countries of the region inside the framework of proposals such as "Deal of the Century" (Trump's Middle East Peace Plan) and the "Abraham Accord". Normalization and emergence of actual diplomatic relations with the United Arab Emirate and Bahrain and preparing grounds for normalizing this regime's relations with Oman, Sudan, Morocco and even the Saudi Arabia are signs of development in the Zionist regime's project of normalization of relations with the Arab countries.
Since the normalization of relations between Zionist regime and the Arab countries of the region and their move towards strategic cooperation can well influence the power structure and relations in the region and pose some threats against the Islamic Republic of Iran and the axis of resistance, an urgency is felt to scrutinize Zionist regime's goals of persistently seeking to normalize its relations with the Arab countries of the region and the results stemming from applying this strategy.
The present paper, using the library research method for gathering data and applying the descriptive-analytical approach in finding analysis, is seeking to find the answer to this question: "What are the goals and results of the normalization project in the relations between the Zionist regime and the regional Arab countries?"
The findings of the paper indicate that a few of the Zionist regime's goals in normalizing the relations with the Arab countries include reaching a common understanding of the threat, confronting the common threat (i.e. Iran), and also dealing with the new geopolitical system which is getting formed in favor of the axis of resistance.
The process of normalizing the relations with the Arab countries would help the Zionist regime to have more presence, influence and agency in the security environment around the Islamic Republic of Iran and could also increase the threat levels against the Islamic Republic of Iran.
The favorable results of the process of normalization of relations with the Arab countries for the Zionist regime are as follows:
Enhancing the success rate of the project of making all Iranian issues security issues; boosting the Zionist regime and regional Arab countries' motivation and confidence in dealing with the Islamic Republic of Iran and, consequently, an increase in the level of conflict of these countries with the Islamic Republic of Iran and raising the legitimacy of the Zionist regime in the region.
Key words: the Zionist Regime, Arab countries, normalization of relations, power balance, threat balance
Yemen and Palestine; Common History and Fate
Dr. Habib Abdollah Mohammad al-Ramimah
(A professor of General International Law at Sana'a University)
The Yemeni and Palestinian communities have always had special ties and similarities since the old times. For many years, the United Kingdom was seeking to get a Najdi regime to power in the Arabic Peninsula by supporting Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab, supporting Ad Diriyah Treaty and signing the Treaty of Darin. The Najdi regime which was formed by the English support in the south was after conquering Yemen, yet led to the formation of another regime in the northern part of the peninsula; a regime which had targeted Palestine. Yemen and Palestine continued to have the same fates in the coming years. The Mutawkklite Kingdom of Yemen, the Arabic Republic of Yemen and then the Republic of Yemen were of the most outspoken opponents of the project of dividing Palestine in the United Nations. During the 1960s, Yemen was the arena of conflict between the two groups of Arabic countries le by Egypt and Saudi Arabia; these conflicts continued for years. After the Camp David Treaty was signed by the former Egyptian president, Anwar Sadat, leading to the normalization of their relations with Israel, there emerged a big gap among Arabs which consequently weakened their position in favor of Palestinian ideals. Later, the United States of America replaced the United Kingdom and tried to have the most powerful dominance over the regional countries of the Middle East by expansionist policies. What eventually transformed Yemen was the emergence of Seyyed Hussein Badreddin al-Houthi. Analyzing regional events, he alerted others about the escalation of America's role and the dangers that would follow in Palestine, Yemen and other Islamic countries. Introducing some of Quranic teachings, Badreddin was concerned about both Yemen and Palestine; he connected the two countries again. What is happening in Yemen today is strikingly like what happened in Palestine yesterday since they are both victims of the games played by the United Nations and its members. As Palestine and Yemen are of the same fate, so are Israel and Saudi Arabia.
Key words: Palestine, Yemen, Ansar Allah, Saudi Arabia, Israel
Yemen: The Destructive Black Hole of American Strategies
Naser Ghandil
(Former Lebanese PM and editor in chief of Al-Binaa, the Lebanese newspaper)
As the factors such as an increase in Iran and Hezbollah's capabilities and the formation of Hash al-Sha'bi (Popular Mobilization Forces) in Iraq and resistance forces in Palestine have exponentially increased the power of the axis of resistance, so have the activities of Yemeni forces as strategic added values in the regional equations.
The resistance forces in Syria and Iraq seriously destroyed American strategies and then the Yemeni forces ruined all signs of these strategies. Therefore, we can say what distinguishes Yemen's pattern from other patterns is that the same is practically repeatable in Palestine. It is mainly because the Yemeni people's resistance, despite their scant capacities, against the enemy's invasions and fatal siege was more like a legend than reality.
The Yemeni people could resist against the enemy's capable and professional forces and even ended up taking the initiative; in spite of the enemy's developed military capabilities, the resistance forces in Yemen could show off their deterrent military force by putting the enemy in danger both in the sea and on land. We can therefore claim that Yemen is the destructive black hole for the American strategies.
Key words: Yemen, America, Ansarallah (the Houthi Movement)
Visits: 593
