Jenin crackdown calls viability of Abraham Accords into question

Israeli officials claim their military operation, which comes against a backdrop of increasing tensions between Palestinians and Israelis, is aimed at targeting Palestinian militants based in the camp who have conducted a series of attacks against Israeli targets in recent months.

To date, at least nine Palestinians have been killed and dozens more injured as the Israelis have deployed drones and helicopter gunships to target suspected strongholds used by the militants.

Israeli officials said they informed the White House before launching the operation, and the Biden administration gave its backing to the Israeli offensive.

"We have seen the reports and are monitoring the situation closely," a White House spokesperson said. "We support Israel's security and right to defend its people against Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad and other terrorist groups."

While the Israelis insist the operation is designed to end Palestinian attacks against Israeli targets, the fact that at least seven people were injured in a car-ramming and stabbing attack in Tel Aviv suggests the opposite is the case, and that the Israeli operation will only succeed in unleashing a new round of conflict between Israelis and Palestinians.

'A new war crime'

The Tel Aviv attack took place after Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas denounced the operation as "a new war crime against our defenceless people", while the Gaza-based militant group Hamas called on young men in the West Bank to join the fighting.

Certainly, with neither side seemingly ready to attempt to de-escalate tensions, the upsurge in violence inevitably raises questions about the future viability of the Abraham Accords.

Even though the Palestinians were deliberately excluded from the negotiations by the Trump administration as it sought to improve relations in the region, there was a tacit understanding that the improvement in relations between Israel and the Arab signatories meant renewed efforts would be made to find a lasting political settlement of the Palestinian issue.

That was certainly the understanding of policymakers in the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Sudan and Morocco who, by signing the Accords in the dying days of the Trump administration, believed that improving ties with Israel would improve the prospects of a lasting peace across the entire region.

This was despite the fact that the Accords contained no provisions to help the Palestinians reach a final status agreement with Israel to advance a two-state solution, and the Trump administration's reluctance to have any meaningful dialogue with Palestinian leaders.

As a consequence, while the initial signing of the Accords led to a short-term improvement in ties between Israel and the Arab world, with Israeli and Arab trade delegations having regular meetings to strengthen commercial ties, it was not long before the positive atmosphere generated by the signing of the agreement gradually began to evaporate, especially after the return to office of Israel's hawkish prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu.

Netanyahu's hardline approach

Netanyahu has devoted most of his political career to blocking the prospect of a lasting peace settlement with the Palestinians, dating back to the Oslo Accords in the 1990s when he emerged as a fierce critic of the agreement struck between then-Israeli prime minister Yitzhak Shamir and Yasser Arafat, the head of the Palestine Liberation Organisation.

Read more: Israel's 'Netanyahuism' runs deeper than judicial reform

When he first became prime minister in 1996, Netanyahu presided over a succession of Israeli governments that actively opposed any Palestinian initiative to establish an independent state.

Moreover, following his success in last year's bitterly contested Israeli elections, Netanyahu demonstrated his determination to resist the Palestinians' quest for statehood by forming the most right-wing and religiously conservative government in Israel's 75-year history.

One of the key pledges of the new Israeli administration was to prioritise settlement expansion in the occupied West Bank, a move that sent an unequivocal message that, so long as Netanyahu remained in office, there was absolutely no chance of any meaningful progress being made on the peace front.

Signatories express discontent

The Netanyahu government's hardline approach to the Palestinian issue has prompted criticism from a number of Arab states, including the UAE, the first signatory to the Accords.

The first indication that all was not well in relations between Israel and its new Arab peace partners came in March when Israel's Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich made inflammatory remarks denying the existence of the Palestinians, claiming their quest for statehood was an "invention" of the previous century.

Jordan responded by summoning Israel's ambassador, while the UAE condemned the comments by saying it "rejected the incitement rhetoric and all practices that contradict moral and human values and principles."

Relations between Israel and the UAE were not helped after Israeli Transport Minister Miri Regev made derogatory comments after visiting Dubai earlier this year, commenting "I don't like that place" and vowing never to return.

Accords appear to be on life support

Now, following the dramatic upsurge of violence in the occupied West Bank town of Jenin, the Abraham Accords now appear to be on life support as the uncompromising tactics adopted by the Israeli Defence Force (IDF) make it even harder for Arab signatories to the agreement to justify maintaining relations with the Jewish state.

Those seeking to maintain the Accords point out that, despite the violence, the agreement has increased trade ties between Israel and the Arab world and a better understanding of their respective regional security concerns.

But it is hard to imagine how such an agreement can continue when the Palestinian people once more find themselves at the mercy of Israel's military might.