Faisal J. Abbas
There were a hectic but fruitful few days in Riyadh this week when the World Economic Forum held a Special Meeting in the Kingdom for the first time. It was important not only because Saudi Arabia metaphorically “brought the mountain to Mohammed,” and not only because of the A-list policymakers, thought leaders and business executives who were there — but also because of its timing. The forum took place a few days after the eighth anniversary of the launch of Vision 2030, and what those in attendance witnessed was a coming of age, a revelation of what the new Saudi Arabia stands for.
What they saw, heard and experienced was the emergence of a new force — a force for good, prosperity and inclusion. This force has now created, as described by one of my colleagues who attended a number of forum sessions both on and off the record, the Middle East’s “1989 moment.” That year was a tumultuous one, beginning with the collapse of communism in eastern Europe, ending with the overthrow of dictatorship in Romania, and leading two years later to the implosion of the Soviet Union. It is fascinating that 35 years after the fall of the Berlin Wall, we are witnessing an equally important moment — a fork in the road, where many are now going to have to choose which route to take.
As US Secretary of State Antony Blinken said last week at his meeting with GCC ministers: “There are really two paths forward for the region as a whole: one driven with division and destruction … the other, greater integration, greater security, greater peace.” He could not have been more accurate, and there could not be a better time or another chance for stakeholders to make the right decision.
The US, despite being the world’s superpower, has clearly made a choice. We have come along way from the hostile rhetoric that marked the beginning of the Biden administration to public reassurances last week that a Saudi-US security pact was “very, very close.” The past four years have also been an opportunity for both sides to reflect and see how multifaceted the relationship is, and could be. Apart from military deals, everything from space exploration to Saudi-American nuclear cooperation is up for grabs. This perhaps has been helped by repeated assurances from Saudi officials that our partners in the US will always be given priority, but also a US realization that the Kingdom has other options — and lots of them — for military, technology and business deals.
Interestingly, it seems more likely that a US-Saudi treaty might still proceed even without progress on the Saudi-Israeli front, which has a Palestinian aspect that must be respected.
Israel also has a choice to make. As New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman put it, the choice is between Riyadh and Rafah. The first, he writes “has a much bigger payoff at the end than the road to Rafah, which will be a dead end in every sense of the term.”
There were public reassurances by several Saudi officials at last week’s forum that the Kingdom’s offer to put its weight behind Israel’s integration with the Arab and Muslim world was on the table. The ask? “A credible, irreversible path to a Palestinian state,” as Foreign Minister Prince Faisal bin Farhan said.
In other words, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has a personal choice to make: one is to accept a two-state solution (although nobody said implementing that will be straightforward, and many details will need to be ironed out later) and permanently end the Arab-Israeli conflict.
The other is to be remembered for, and face the consequences of, being a war criminal. With so many countries around the world unilaterally recognizing Palestine, Netanyahu will only add to Israel’s isolation if he doesn’t accept the genuine offer to climb down from the tree he ascended since Oct. 7. His declaration this week that an Israeli ground offensive in Rafah would go ahead with or without a ceasefire in Gaza did not send a reassuring message — but then again, that is his choice to make.
Hamas, too, has a choice. It must decide — “and decide quickly whether to accept the extraordinarily generous offer of a ceasefire,” as Blinken put it in Riyadh last week. Hamas would be wise to play ball: there are 1.5 million more Palestinian civilians at risk in Rafah, the Qatari mediators in Cairo have shown clear signs of frustration, and time is on Israel’s side.
Why doesn’t the Kingdom apply more pressure on the Palestinians? Well, for the same reason the US can’t apply more pressure on Israel. At the end of the day, you can take the horse to water, but you can’t make it drink. Moreover, what remains to be done after the Arab-Islamic summit in Riyadh last November at which everyone — including Iran —committed to a declaration calling for a two-state solution? That was a huge step, given that for over 40 years Tehran’s declared position was to not even recognize Israel.
Confounding the many cynics who criticized the Saudi-Iranian detente of March 2023, that declaration was one of the benefits of the working relationship between Riyadh and Tehran. Nevertheless, Vision 2030 and the Revolution of 1979 are not compatible, and also create two paths for regional forces to choose from. The positive outcome of the Beijing detente is that, at least for now, it is a matter of “each to their own” rather than a permanent standoff between the two countries. Indeed, this was always the Kingdom’s position: what changed was that Iran decided to make the choice to extend its hand and commit to non-aggression and respect for national sovereignty.
Will we see a fully integrated, prosperous Middle East? Will it become the “New Europe,” as Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman once said? Well, the vision is there – now it is just a matter of choices … and consequences.
