Analysis: Middle East Accords are Contingent on Regime Stability

Ambassador (ret.) Yoram Ettinger, in an analytical piece, argues that political accords in the non-democratic Middle East are not anchored in legal structures but are instead contingent upon foundational Islamic precepts and the longevity of specific regimes. He contends that these agreements are inherently tenuous and often treated as temporary truces, citing the 628 AD Treaty of Hudaybiyyah as a historical paradigm for agreements that are revocable when the balance of power shifts. Ettinger points to various historical examples, including the Iran-Iraq Algiers Agreement, the collapse of the Lebanese National Pact, and political shifts in Libya and Yemen, to illustrate that regional agreements often fail when regimes are toppled or policies change. The analysis expresses skepticism regarding the long-term durability of Israel's peace treaties with Egypt and Jordan, suggesting that internal societal factors and the potential for regime change pose significant risks. Ettinger concludes that Western attempts to negotiate with entities like the Iranian regime or militant groups often overlook the ideological mandates that prioritize religious and political objectives over diplomatic commitments.