The signing of the Abraham Accords marked an unprecedented step toward regional and global peace. However, unlike a single unified agreement, the Accords consist of multiple versions with significant gaps that need attention.
In 1215, the Magna Carta limited the powers of the English King and laid the groundwork for modern European ideas about human rights and constitutional law. Today, when parties enter into agreements or treaties, it is expected that all sides fully understand, accept, and commit to the shared terms.
There are foundational contradictions between Western international conventions and Islamic law, which complicate the uniform application of the Abraham Accords. This inconsistency raises questions about the strength and clarity of the agreements.
Following recent ceasefire developments in Gaza, efforts are underway to include more Arab countries in the Abraham Accords. Notably, Kazakhstan joined as of November 7, 2025, a move credited in part to the U.S. Trump Administration and Israel's military determination.
Given these developments, the original terms of the Accords deserve a thorough review to ensure clarity and consistency.
Michel Calvo, in his Jerusalem Center for Security and Foreign Affairs paper dated August 5, 2025, highlights:
“Actually, some signed Accords are four pages, some one-page declarations, and other versions not even signed by all parties.”
This variety in form and signatories further underscores the need for a unified and transparent agreement structure.
The Abraham Accords represent a historic peace effort, but to achieve lasting impact, the agreements require unification and clarity akin to the foundational role the Magna Carta played in legal history.