The Israel deal may give the UAE a boost – but it doesn’t bring us any closer to peace in the Middle East

The new agreement is good for all the political leaders involved, including Donald Trump, but answers few of the bigger questions

If you want a prime example of having your cake and eating it on the international stage, look no further than Israel’s deal to normalise relations with the UAE.

It is historic, but also shows Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu’s ability to recycle the fading policy of annexation of parts of the West Bank into a victory that will forever change power dynamics in the Middle East. However, is one crucial word in the new deal.

The normalisation of relations comes in exchange for the "suspension" of Netanyahu’s plans to annexe lands in the occupied West Bank. The UAE have suggested that is "suspension" will last a while, however Netanyahu has said he is still committed to the idea. There's the cake, and we can expect Netanyahu to try and eat it.

For a long time, the region didn’t have a change in a positive direction. President Donald Trump, whose administration brokered the deal, deserves kudos for a rare foreign policy win.

Both Netanyahu and Trump should be very grateful for the Abu Dhabi Crown Prince Mohamed bin Zayed (MBZ) for extending a hand to both leaders that helps elevate them out of domestic political wreckage. Both are in trouble at home and were desperate for such a political boost.

The UAE is a winner too. This deal is the biggest PR coup in Washington throughout the Gulf Emirate’s history. Regardless of the name of the next president, MBZ has become the new Anwar Sadat – the former president of Egypt – of the region. Sadat moves to make peace with Israel earned him praise among US evangelicals. The UAE will likely have access to US advanced military hardware that may have been restricted before, as well as an unprecedented prestige among the Republicans and the Democrats alike.

The deal will also perhaps shape the conditions for the UAE to have a place on the table of any new nuclear deal with Iran, after being sidelined entirely by the Obama administration during the negotiations in 2015.

The deal is expected to serve as a massive boost for the UAE’s regional ambitions. The Emiratis will likely be an accepted arbiter by the Israelis for future peace talks. In the long-term, if someone like Mohammed Dahlan - who has lived in the UAE since 2011 – succeeds Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas, then we might see Palestinian leadership accept them too.

And If the recently developed warmth in relations with Iran goes unabated, the UAE might be the new mediator between Iran and the US (a role Oman has always occupied), as well as the facilitator of Israel’s ultimate dream to sign a similar deal with Saudi Arabia.

But does all this mean there is a prospect of real peace for the region? No.

This deal is unlikely to trigger a dramatic shift in the status quo. Diplomatic relations and full normalisation with Israel have always been conditional, in the hearts and minds of the majority of Arab citizens, with reaching a final agreement over a Palestinian state and not with the UAE, a country that has never been at war with Israel.

Does the shared statement announcing the new deal speak about either the right for the Palestinian refugees to return to their towns and villages or the UN Security Council resolutions about it? No.

After the White House announcement, Speaker of the House of Representatives Nancy Pelosi issued a statement calling for the end of the annexation plans and emphasising the need for a two-state solution. And EU foreign policy chief Josep Borrell tweeted: “Suspending annexation is a positive step, plans should now be abandoned altogether. The EU hopes for resumed Israeli-Palestinian negotiations on a two-state solution based on international agreed parameters.”

Was there any mention of the two states solution, with East Jerusalem as the capital of the state of Palestine? No.

Does the statement on the deal even include any legal commitment biding Israel to its promise to block the annexation of parts of the West Bank? No.

Then I see no “peace” in this deal. On the contrary, it may do exactly the opposite.

The new agreement might have the potential to empower, not isolate, extremists in Iran, Turkey to get behind the Palestinians.

The Camp David peace agreement with Egypt in 1978, and the Wadi Araba peace treaty with Jordan in 1994, the only past agreements in the Arab world to normalise relations with Israel, were the same. It cannot be said that either deal dramatically reduced the number of extremist groups supporting the Palestinians.

And striking deals with Israel that would eventually isolate the Palestinians further, overlook their rights, and reward Israel’s occupation - illegal under international law - will only make things worse.

Other Arab countries are expected to follow suit and sign similar deals with Israel. While the UAE felt necessary to include the suspension of annexation as an incentive to avoid criticism from across the region (which has come from some quarters anyway), others may not feel eager to search for any justifications.

President Trump has previously moved the US embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem – handing Netanayu a political win – and nothing happened. He then dropped the ball on the relaunch of peace talks by trying to coerce the Palestinians to accept his peace plan, and again there has been little reaction beyond the initial outrage.

The emphasis in the Arab countries close to signing normalisation deals with Israel is that widespread protests that have swept Arab cities during the Intifada and successive Israeli wars on the Gaza Strip will not be seen again anytime soon.

But this could be a miscalculation. The relatively quiet reaction from young men and women in the region to this deal is, I believe, thanks to momentary change in their priorities, with many countries facing their own crises at the moment. But this should not be taken as a profound transformation in the mood of Arab youth mood or that they have lost faith in the Palestinian cause.

Many of them, I’ve spoken to, think that the UAE-Israel normalisation deal is a by product of the region’s misery, not peace and prosperity as the Trump administration promotes. As Michael Hanna, a senior fellow at the Century Foundation, tweeted: “You cannot construct real people to people relations on the basis of such cynicism.”

Cultural normalisation is the key. Arabs should be able to visit Israel, and Israeli citizens should be able to walk down the streets of every Arab city and absorb Arab culture. But this has to follow the freedom of the Palestinians to live in their home towns and villages without having to worry about checkpoints and the threat of arbitrary arrest, or above all, the annexation of their land.

Nothing is for sure about this deal, except that the historical concept of Israel as a small state isolated and surrounded by unfriendly countries is over. But at what cost for the Palestinians?