Diplomatic Deadlock: OIC and Arab League’s Stalemate on Israel-Palestine

The current approach of the Arab League to Israel-Palestine issues serves more as a diplomatic veneer rather than a catalyst for meaningful change in the region. The search by some for normalisation of ties with Israel has for the time being prevented a broader barrier to tangible outcomes. 

Arab and Muslim leaders convened an emergency summit to deliberate on Israel’s attack on Gaza after 35 days of ongoing conflict. Their constrained capacity to impact the situation became evident during their recent assembly in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. This event, featuring 57 predominantly Muslim countries from Asia to Africa, placed Riyadh at the center of attention. The Riyadh Summit, while a landmark event, ultimately showcased the complexities and constraints within the Arab League and and Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC). It reflected the ongoing struggle to balance ideological solidarity with pragmatic geopolitics. As the Palestinian-Israeli conflict continues, the effectiveness of these organisations in shaping its trajectory remains to be seen. Their future actions, or inactions, will not only influence the conflict’s resolution but also define the broader regional order in the Middle East.

The Arab world’s hesitation towards military action against Israel is deeply entrenched in the bitter experiences of the 1967 and 1973 wars. These conflicts inflicted not only significant losses on Arab states but also had adverse repercussions on Palestine. Today’s Arab diplomacy, especially evident in the Riyadh Summit, is shaped by these historical scars and the complex relationship with major powers like the United States, which staunchly defends Israel. This context renders military intervention an unlikely option, steering the Arab response towards non-military strategies. Their strategies encompass seeking worldwide support for Palestinian rights, engaging in global dialogues to mitigate tensions, and employing economic measures such as trade negotiations to exert influence.

Iran’s Involvement and Regional Implications

The attendance of Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi at the Riyadh Summit, represents a significant moment in the evolving landscape of Middle Eastern politics. This occurrence is particularly notable considering the backdrop of recent developments in Saudi-Iranian relations, emerging from an agreement brokered by China in March. This agreement concluded a seven-year period of heightened tensions, characterised by indirect confrontations in regional hotspots like Syria and Yemen.

Iran’s role as a supporter of factions such as Hamas in Gaza and Hezbollah in Lebanon against Israel, and its backing of Yemen’s Houthi militias in the face-off with the Saudi-led coalition, has been a cornerstone of its regional policy. However, this visit and the ensuing rapprochement signify a potential shift from confrontation to a more diplomatic engagement. The open declaration of support for the Palestinians by both Iran and Saudi Arabia, highlighted in a phone conversation on 12 October between Ebrahim Raisi and Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, represents a significant development in Middle Eastern diplomacy.

Syria’s Re-emergence and Assad’s Role

Bashar al-Assad’s presence at the summit, following a decade of isolation, is a remarkable turn in Arab diplomacy. His call for Arab unity against “Zionist cruelty and massacres” stands in stark contrast to his government’s actions in the Syrian civil war. Assad’s participation is emblematic of the shifting allegiances and diplomatic recalibrations in the Middle East. This development can be seen as a political revival for Assad, suggesting a gradual shift in the Arab League’s perspective towards his regime, despite the dark legacy of the Syrian catastrophe that has resulted in a tremendous human toll.

At the summit, Assad’s rhetoric, underscoring the necessity of effective leverage over mere talk, aligns with a widely shared sentiment in the Arab world. His call for concrete action suggests a move towards strategies such as imposing economic sanctions, applying diplomatic pressure, and utilising international legal frameworks to ensure accountability for actions in the conflict. This stance indicates a growing impatience with conventional diplomatic methods in dealing with the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and a shift towards more direct and impactful measures.

Aspiration, Division, and Realpolitik at the Riyadh Summit

The summit’s final communique strongly condemned Israel’s actions in Gaza and rejected the notion of self-defense, labelling them as aggression and war crimes. However, this verbal condemnation falls short of meaningful action. This is despite the extensive loss of life, including the tragic death of approximately 5,500 Palestinian children since 7 October. The statistics from Gaza, indicating a child casualty every 10 minutes, paint a harrowing picture of the human cost of the conflict. Yet, the summit’s outcomes do not match this urgency.

The rejection of proposals to freeze diplomatic relations or prevent the transfer of US military equipment to Israel from bases in the Middle East, as well as the reluctance to explore oil supply sanctions, further underscores the limited willingness of OIC member states to use their considerable economic leverage. This reluctance is particularly poignant given the control of over 75 percent of global oil reserves by OIC members.

Additionally, the summit highlighted deep divisions within the OIC and Arab League members. The contrasting positions of countries like Qatar, Oman, Kuwait, and those moving towards normalising ties with Israel showcase the complex geopolitical realities of the region. This landscape is further complicated by Iran’s substantial influence over the summit’s resolutions, as evidenced by the integration of many of its proposals.

The OIC’s failure to offer a viable alternative to the United States’ veto at the UN, effectively allowing Israel to circumvent international law, underscores a critical deficiency in unity and effectiveness in representing the Muslim world.

Overall, the Riyadh meeting underscores the limitations and challenges faced by the OIC and Arab League in effectively addressing the Palestinian issue. While the resolution covers a wide range of concerns and calls for significant actions, the historical context and internal divisions within these organizations raise serious doubts about their ability to bring about tangible change.

The Riyadh summit, despite the participation of 57 primarily Muslim-majority states, did not become the transformative event in the Palestinian-Israeli conflict that many hoped for. Instead, it served to underscore the profound divisions and persistent inefficacy within the OIC and Arab League. The gathering, while significant in bringing together key regional players, failed to transcend beyond diplomatic posturing to actionable strategies. The summit’s inability to forge a cohesive and robust response to the Gaza crisis underscores the need for a fundamental reassessment of these organisations’ roles and strategies in Middle Eastern politics.

Mohd Amirul Asraf Bin Othman is a PhD student in Political Science and International Relations at the Australian National University. His academic interests are diverse and encompass areas such as Middle East Security Studies, Regionalism, Terrorism, and Extremism, as well as the broader fields of Political Science and International Relations in the Middle East context. You can find him on social media here.   

This article is published under a Creative Commons License and may be republished with attribution.