Initially intended to propose concrete measures to put an end to the particularly deadly Israeli military operations against Gaza, the emergency meeting of the Arab League and the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) ended with a rather mixed result.
Unity in words, divisions in deeds? Arab and Muslim leaders met in Riyadh on Saturday, November 11 for a joint summit of the Arab League and the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation.
It was notable that Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi accepted the invitation, appearing alongside Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman for the first time since the two countries reconciled in March.
Illusions of unity, concrete divisions
In a joint statement at the end of the event, they condemned the “barbaric” actions of Israeli forces in Gaza. The declaration also called for an end to the siege of Gaza and the introduction of humanitarian aid. In particular, the countries called on the international community to halt arms exports to Israel and to work for a political solution to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict.
Finally, they rejected Israel’s claims that it was acting in “self-defence” and demanded that the UN Security Council adopt “a decisive and binding resolution” to put an end to Israel’s “aggression.” The same applies to any future political resolution of the conflict that would keep Gaza separate from the Israeli-occupied West Bank.
Nevertheless, the promises of unity seem to have ended with this communiqué. As far as the response on the ground is concerned, the summit brought regional divisions into sharper focus, while certain countries, such as Lebanon and Syria, fear that they too will be sucked into the conflict.
The leaders present at the summit refused to approve punitive economic and political measures against Israel for its actions in the Gaza Strip against Hamas. In fact, two divergent trends emerged from the summit.
Washington’s Allies Moderation
The first came from Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates, among others – in other words, from Arab countries close to Washington. Some of them, like Manama and Abu Dhabi, had already signed normalization agreements with the Jewish state. Others, like Riyadh, seemed to be engaged in a similar process before the war broke out.
Some of the countries in this group vetoed the main measures proposed during the summit to take concrete action. These included a ban on the use of US military bases in Arab countries to supply Israel with arms and munitions, and a freeze on Arab countries’ diplomatic, economic, security and military relations with Israel.
Threats to use the oil and economic capacities of the summit participants to put pressure on Western countries, mirroring the measures taken by Riyadh during the 1973 Yom Kippur War, were also put on the table.
However, the leaders of these countries were keen to strongly condemn the actions of the Israeli army. Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, the de facto leader of Saudi Arabia, who before the war was considering establishing formal diplomatic ties with Tel Aviv, declared at the summit that he “held the (Israeli) occupation authorities responsible for the crimes committed against the Palestinian people.”
According to The New Arab, these measures were proposed and approved by 11 Arab countries: Palestine, Syria, Algeria, Tunisia, Iraq, Lebanon, Kuwait, Qatar, Oman, Libya and Yemen.
Iranian Axis Back in Favour
Of all these countries, those forming the Moumanaa axis, led by Tehran, seem to have been the most incisive. And with good reason: the Riyadh summit has given them a new lease of life within regional institutions.
Syria is a prime example of this. In his speech, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, who was participating for the first time since 2011 to an Arab summit, called for action rather than words in the face of the war between Israel and Hamas.
“If we do not have real tools to exert pressure, any measure we take or any speech we make is meaningless,” declared Mr. Assad, adding that no Middle Eastern country should engage in a “political process” with Israel, including the development of economic relations, until a lasting ceasefire has been agreed.
He urged the Middle East community to oppose what he called “Zionist ferocity and massacres.”
“Thirty-two years of failed peace, the only result of which has been that the entity has become more aggressive and the Palestinian situation has become more unjust, more oppressive and more miserable,” he added.
The Syrian President was thus making his grand return to the regional stage, taking advantage of the situation to ride the wave of sympathy for the suffering endured by the Palestinian population.
Tehran Shows Off
But beyond Damascus, it was above all the Islamic Republic of Iran that was the most vindictive towards Israel. Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi, making his first trip to Saudi Arabia since the two countries rekindled ties in March, said that Islamic nations should designate the Israeli army as a “terrorist organization” for its conduct in Gaza.
In his speech, Mr. Raisi also called on Muslim countries to be prepared to “arm the Palestinians” if Israel’s “war crimes” continued.
“Now that international organizations have become useless, we must play a role,” he added, urging Muslim countries to “sever all political and economic relations” with Israel, which Iran does not recognize. He also called for “a trade boycott against the Zionist regime, particularly in the energy sector.”
Ebrahim Raisi again accused the United States of being Israel’s “main partner” “in these crimes.” “America has in fact entered directly into the war by sending ships” to the eastern Mediterranean, he said.
As a reminder, Iran supports Hamas, but also the Lebanese Hezbollah and the Houthi rebels in Yemen, who are raising fears of an extension of the conflict. In this context, the statements made by the representative of the mullahs’ regime at the summit are less about easing tensions than about adding fuel to the fire.
