Can the Abraham Accords be this century’s Magna Carta?
The signing of the Abraham Accords represents a historic milestone toward both regional and global peace. However, the absence of a unified document among all signatories and several unresolved gaps raise the need for a comprehensive review of the agreements.
The Magna Carta, sealed in 1215 by the King of England, limited royal authority and laid the foundation for modern European concepts of human rights and constitutional governance. In today’s world, international treaties are expected to clearly define mutual obligations that all signatories accept and follow.
A comparison between Western international conventions and Islamic law reveals deep-rooted differences in foundational principles. These inconsistencies are significant when interpreting the obligations within the Abraham Accords framework.
Following the ceasefire in Gaza, discussions to include more Arab nations in the Abraham Accords have resumed. As of November 7, Kazakhstan has officially joined, with acknowledgments directed toward the U.S. Trump Administration and the Government of Israel for their diplomatic and strategic efforts.
Michel Calvo, in his paper for the Jerusalem Center for Security and Foreign Affairs (August 5, 2025), wrote: “Will More Countries Reconsider Their Core Beliefs and Sign the Abraham Accords?”
Calvo highlights that not all versions of the Accords are consistent—some documents span four pages, others are brief one-page declarations, and several have not been endorsed by all parties involved. This lack of standardization emphasizes the necessity for a unified, transparent framework for future participation.
Author’s Summary
The Abraham Accords mark a step toward peace yet lack uniformity, making a clear, standardized agreement essential for lasting regional stability.