Saudi-signed statement blaming Israel for instability doesn't rule out Abraham Accords, expert says

The fact that Saudi Arabia was among the signatories of a joint statement declaring Israel as “the fundamental source of instability in the region and beyond” is not a sign that Riyadh has abandoned all future interest in joining the Abraham Accords, Gulf analyst Dr. Ahmed Alkhuzaie told The Jerusalem Post on Sunday.

The statement signed on Sunday by Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and Egypt shows a regional alignment among major powers whose “strategic priorities do not always align,” Alkhuzaie said.

“By collectively declaring that, as per their statement, ‘the Israeli occupation’ constitutes the principal source of instability in the region, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Turkey, and Pakistan are signaling the emergence of a broader diplomatic consensus that views the Palestinian issue not as an isolated conflict, but as a central driver of wider regional turbulence.”

The statement is “particularly noteworthy” as Riyadh has traditionally balanced its support for Palestinians with pragmatism and diplomacy, he continued, and so by publicly endorsing language that places responsibility for instability on Israeli policies and reaffirming support for a Palestinian state based on the 1967 borders, Riyadh “appears intent on anchoring its position within a broader Arab and Muslim framework rather than pursuing an independent diplomatic track.”

Though Alkhuzaie acknowledged that the statement placed Israel as the problem in the region, he advised that it should not be interpreted as the concrete end of hopes for Saudi-Israel normalization.

“It suggests that the political and diplomatic conditions surrounding normalization have become considerably more demanding. The statement reinforces the message that Riyadh is unlikely to separate relations with Israel from meaningful progress on the Palestinian file,” he said.

“In effect, Saudi Arabia is signaling that normalization can no longer be advanced solely through strategic, economic, or security calculations while the Palestinian question remains unresolved.”

He noted that Riyadh was positioning itself as “a leading architect of regional stability.”

Pointing to the fact that the same joint statement also condemned the Houthis attacks against Saudi Arabia and maritime shipping, Alkhuzaie said that the calls for diplomacy signal that “Saudi policymakers increasingly view Palestine, regional security, maritime stability, and de-escalation with Iran as interconnected components of a single regional order.”

“Viewed through that lens, the statement is less a rejection of future normalization than a reminder that any such process will likely remain contingent on credible movement toward a political settlement of the Palestinian issue,” he said.

Waqas Javed, the Global Abrahamic Movement’s special envoy for Saudi Arabia, an NGO that promotes peace across the Middle East, told the Post that he also didn’t view the statement as a sign that Riyadh was abandoning the idea of normalization altogether.

“Saudi Arabia may have reasons to strengthen its defense relationships with Pakistan and Turkey. However, such partnerships need not be directed against Israel or interpreted as a rejection of the Abraham Accords. Regional security arrangements are most constructive when they reduce the risk of conflict rather than reinforce divisions between competing political blocs,” he said.

“For Riyadh, the strategic opportunity lies in maintaining its independent diplomatic relationships while exploring whether engagement with Israel could contribute to a more secure and economically integrated region. Saudi Arabia can retain strong ties with Pakistan and Turkey without making its future relationship with Israel a zero-sum choice.”