World attention turned to the recent Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) summit in Al Ula, Saudi Arabia. The Al Ula agreement has been signed, ushering in the end of the rift between the Arab Quartet and Qatar.
Many analysts and experts have made judgments and sought to draw up a kind of inventory of winners and losers over the past four years. Others have looked at the reasons for doing so. However, as a matter of historical truth, there is no permanent disagreement in international relations.
Each disagreement is followed by reconciliation, agreement, or understanding. Even great wars and international conflicts have led to negotiations and arrangements on mutually acceptable formulas, so that the interests of nations can evolve as desired. Admittedly, the conflict between the boycotting four and Qatar had to end someday.
After all, its causes can be managed through politics and diplomatic agility. Beyond that, there were many common bonds that made reconciliation possible once some conditions were met. The regional and international reception of the Al Ula agreement revealed everyone’s desire to turn the page of antagonism, preserve the unity of the GCC countries and move forward.
Any disagreement between states in the region is ultimately a nuisance and an obstacle to the interests of the other parties. For another thing, there are beneficiaries, as is the case in this dispute with regional hegemonic powers such as Turkey and Iran, which wanted to feed, prolong and even perpetuate it. What matters to all now is that the page is turned.
There would be a “new beginning for the GCC to keep external threats out of the Gulf fold,” said Adel Al Jubeir, Saudi Arabia’s Minister of State for Foreign Affairs. In a recent television interview, UAE Foreign Minister of State Anwar Gargash addressed relevant points that many wonder about, such as demands in the the Arab Quartet’s Qatar boycott declaration.
“This was the maximum negotiating position at that time,” he said, expressing satisfaction with the results achieved so far. It is not so much a matter of achieving a number of demands as of developing and changing attitudes. Negotiating and arbitrating such sticky multilateral disputes is not child’s play.
Making demands is a common tradition that sets a bargainable ceiling and is subject to the terms of negotiation, the priorities of each party, and the room for manoeuvre available to negotiators and mediators. Plainly, a lot of things go through mediation.
Often, agreements reached behind the scenes are not disclosed in order to favour conciliation over other considerations. Keeping exchanges confidential, experience confirms, ensures successful and effective mediation, especially in this very matter.
The latter is particularly sensitive because of its wide media coverage, the sensitivity and specificity of the connection between both sides in the dispute, and previous experiences that weigh on their relations and make wisdom and time imperative. Remarks by His Excellency Anwar Gargash have made clear a key detail.
“What we have reached today are the broad lines that frame relations between GCC countries, and with reference to Egypt, between members of the Arab League.” This is one of the staples for unblocking and ending a conflict in all objectivity.
It was not so much about meeting conditions as it was about working out relations within clear and agreed-upon frameworks, as some practices might always disappear under one agreement only to make way for others, and so on.
The solution is to find clear and robust common ground, regardless of practices and behaviours, although it is highly desirable to give up the methods at the root of the dispute in order to end it. I would argue that the most important thing is to build on what has been done and look to the future.
In an agreement that unites GCC nations, there are no losers. Everybody wins. That’s what matters, no matter what the premises, circumstances or backroom deal is.
Uniting against external threats and relieving the climate manipulated by some regional parties is a major strategic gain for regional security and stability. In view of what has been announced so far, we, as observers, can only welcome what has happened and support this step in the common interest of Gulf and Arab countries.
We must count on our leaders’ wisdom and concern for the interests of our nations. Any end to an inter-Arab conflict is a step forward, contrary to the wishes of our countries’ adversaries.
What interests us is not the terms of the agreement or the application of conditions, but real changes in Qatar’s behavior, out of a sincere and serious desire to learn from the recent past, turn this conflict around and close the page on it.
