[House Hearing, 118 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]


                     EXPANDING THE ABRAHAM ACCORDS

=======================================================================

                                HEARING

                               BEFORE THE

                SUBCOMMITTEE MIDDLE EAST, NORTH AFRICA, AND 
                               CENTRAL ASIA

                                 OF THE

                      COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                    ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS

                             FIRST SESSION

                               __________

                             MARCH 9, 2023

                               __________

                            Serial No. 118-4

                               __________

        Printed for the use of the Committee on Foreign Affairs
        
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]        


       Available:  http://www.foreignaffairs.house.gov/, http://
                            docs.house.gov, 
                       or http://www.govinfo.gov
                       
                               __________

                                
                    U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE                    
51-383 PDF                   WASHINGTON : 2023                    
          
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------     
                       
                     COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS

                   MICHAEL T. MCCAUL, Texas, Chairman

CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, New Jersey     	GREGORY MEEKS, New Yok, Ranking 
JOE WILSON, South Carolina               	Member
SCOTT PERRY, Pennsylvania	 	BRAD SHERMAN, California
DARRELL ISSA, California		GERALD E. CONNOLLY, Virginia
ANN WAGNER, Missouri			WILLIAM KEATING, Massachusetts
BRIAN MAST, Florida			DAVID CICILLINE, Rhode Island
KEN BUCK, Colorado			AMI BERA, California
TIM BURCHETT, Tennessee			JOAQUIN CASTRO, Texas
MARK E. GREEN, Tennessee		DINA TITUS, Nevada
ANDY BARR, Kentucky			TED LIEU, California
RONNY JACKSON, Texas			SUSAN WILD, Pennsylvania
YOUNG KIM, California			DEAN PHILLIPS, Minnesota
MARIA ELVIRA SALAZAR, Florida		COLIN ALLRED, Texas
BILL HUIZENGA, Michigan			ANDY KIM, New Jersey
AMATA COLEMAN-RADEWAGEN, American	SARA JACOBS, California
    Samoa				KATHY MANNING, North Carolina
FRENCH HILL, Arkansas			SHEILA CHERFILUS-MCCORMICK, 
WARREN DAVIDSON, Ohio			 	Florida	
JIM BAIRD, Indiana			GREG STANTON, Arizona
MICHAEL WALTZ, Florida			MADELEINE DEAN, Pennsylvania
TOM KEAN, JR., New Jersey		JARED MOSKOWITZ, Florida
MIKE LAWLER, New York			JONATHAN JACOBS, Illinois
CORY MILLS, Florida			SYDNEY KAMLAGER-DOVE, California
RICH MCCORMICK, Georgia			JIM COSTA, California
NATHANIEL MORAN, Texas			JASON CROW, Colorado
JOHN JAMES, Michigan			BRAD SCHNEIDER. Illinois
KEITH SELF, Texas      
                                    
                    Brenden Shields, Staff Director
                    Sophia Lafargue, Staff Director
                                 ------                                

     Subcommittee on MIDDLE EAST, NORTH AFRICA, AND CENTRAL ASIA
     
     JOE WILSON, Chair
     
     BRIAN MAST, Florida                  DEAN PHILLIPS, Minnesota, Ranking 
     TIM BURCHETT, Tennessee                  Member
     RONNY JACKSON, Texas		     BRAD SHERMAN, California
     JIM BAIRD, Indiana		     GERALD CONNOLLY, Virginia
     MIKE LAWLER, New York		     DAVID CICILLINE, Rhode Island
     RICH MCCORMICK, Georgia		     KATHY MANNING, North Carolina                                   
     
                         Sophia Lafargue, Staff Director                            
                            
                            C O N T E N T S

                              ----------                              
                                                                   Page

                               WITNESSES

Greenway, The Honorable Robert, President and Executive Director, 
  Abraham Accords Peace Institute................................     8
Votel, General Joseph L., Distinguished Fellow, Middle East 
  Institute......................................................    15
Shapiro, The Honorable Daniel B., Distinguished Fellow, Atlantic 
  Council........................................................    22

                                APPENDIX

Hearing Notice...................................................    54
Hearing Attendance...............................................    55
Hearing Minutes..................................................    56

         STATEMENT FOR THE RECORD FROM REPRESENTATIVE CONNOLLY

Statement for the record from Representative Connolly............    57

            RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD

Responses to questions submitted for the record..................    59

             ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD

Additional statement submitted for the record from Mr. Lankford..    66
Additional statement submitted for the record....................    68

 
                     EXPANDING THE ABRAHAM ACCORDS

                        Thursday, March 9, 2023

                          House of Representatives,
             Subcommittee on the Middle East, North
                           Africa and Central Asia,
                      Committee on Foreign Affairs,
                                                    Washington, DC.

    The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:11 p.m., in 
room 210, House Visitor Center, Hon. Joe Wilson (chairman of 
the subcommittee) presiding.
    Mr. Wilson. Ladies and gentlemen, the Subcommittee on 
Middle East, North Africa and Central Asia will come to order. 
The purpose of this hearing is to identify opportunities to 
strengthen and expand the extraordinarily successful Abraham 
Accords.
    And at this time, I would like to ask for unanimous consent 
that the gentleman from Illinois, Mr. Brad Schneider, be 
allowed to sit on the dais and participate following all other 
members in today's hearing. No objection. I am not going to 
recognize you. And so, without objection, so ordered. OK. And 1 
day we will recognize people from Rhode Island. But it is going 
to be June, if you do not mind, after you are gone.
    I now recognize myself an opening statement.
    And good afternoon and welcome. And this is really 
meaningful to me, the first hearing of the Middle East, North 
Africa, and Central Asia Subcommittee in the 118th Congress. 
And I am really grateful to ultimately be serving again with 
Congressman David Cicilline, who has been the prior chairman, 
and prior to that, Ted Deutch. And so it has been a bipartisan 
experience with Dean Phillips I am confident will continue. And 
then Kathy Manning from the Republic of North Carolina is going 
to be sitting in today. One day it is going to be a State.
    And I want to thank our members for being part of the 
subcommittee. And I want to thank the expert witnesses for 
being here today to provide insight into how we can most 
successfully expand the groundbreaking Abraham and historic 
Accords.
    I regret that the ranking member, Dean Phillips, is unable 
to be here today. But, indeed, we are very fortunate to have 
Representative Kathy Manning from North Carolina.
    I look forward to a compelling conversation today of very 
talented people and in many more important hearings during this 
Congress as we promote the United States as the country that it 
is, so important in maintaining world stability.
    The historic Abraham Accords are one of the most 
consequential diplomatic achievements of my lifetime and a 
success of the Donald Trump Administration. I was grateful to 
be present at the signing at the White House. The signing of 
these accords by the leaders of Bahrain, Israel, and the United 
Arab Emirates represented the single most significant step 
toward a stable and positive Arab-Israeli relations since Egypt 
and Jordan normalized relations in 1979 and 1974 respectively.
    We have already seen positive results with Morocco formally 
joining and Sudan pledging to join the Accords in 2021 and 
additional memorandums of understanding being signed to address 
issues of mutual concern.
    These agreements are a win for the region and a win for the 
United States. For decades, we have known that our friends in 
the Middle East all have shared interests for mutual benefit. 
Now at long last, we can work together collaboratively to 
protect our countries' shared technology and information and 
grow our economies, address creating jobs, addressing the 
threat emanating from the kleptocratic Iranian regime. It is an 
issue of foremost concern.
    Both Israel and our Arab allies live under constant threat 
of Iranian-backed terrorism. And Iran continues the enrichment 
of uranium while testing satellite-launched vehicles in 
proliferating drones to its proxies, as well as to war criminal 
Putin to kill innocent Ukrainians.
    Sadly, the Biden Administration still seems to believe that 
diplomacy via a nuclear deal is possible. You cannot negotiate 
with those acting in bad faith, as we have seen time and time 
again. Working with our partners to deter these threats is 
critical to maintaining peace and stability through strength.
    The Abraham Accords coincided with Israel being moved into 
the responsibility of the U.S. Central Command from European 
Command. Now our Middle East partners can work together 
directly with U.S. military on issues of shared concern, like 
Iran and the integrated air and missile defenses.
    After three major countries joining the Accords in quick 
succession, UAE, Bahrain, and Morocco, we hope to see more 
countries join the Abraham Accords during the Biden 
Administration. Changing minds is hard. Diplomatic 
breakthroughs are hard. It is not easy to change longstanding 
policies or public opinions.
    With all the momentum built up during the Trump 
Administration, there have been at times questions regarding 
whether the Biden Administration is sufficiently prioritizing 
the Accords. I am pleased the Administration has now embraced 
the name Abraham Accords and has also worked to convene Israel 
and the Arab partners through the Negev Forum.
    This forum is important for helping to deepen the 
relationships between Israel, UAE, Egypt, Morocco, and Bahrain, 
and the United States. It shows other countries in the region 
the positive benefits that can come from a relationship with 
Israel.
    In addition to security cooperation, the Abraham Accords 
have ushered in unprecedented economic cooperation. We are 
witnessing significant increase in bilateral trade between the 
signatories, as well as joint projects in technology, energy 
and infrastructure, health care, and tourism. These efforts 
will undoubtedly yield positive person-to-person results and 
increased prosperity for all involved.
    Still, there is more to be done. I hope our witnesses today 
can speak to the types of initiatives that will be required to 
bring important countries, such as Saudi Arabia, into the 
Abraham Accords. We look forward to hearing from them about 
more details of how the Accords came to be, how we can 
strengthen relationships between countries that are parts of 
the Accords, and how we can bring new countries into these 
incredible agreements.
    I want to thank the witnesses for their time and expertise. 
And I yield to the stand-in ranking member, Congresswoman 
Manning, for her remarks.
    Ms. Manning. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for calling this 
important hearing. And on behalf of Ranking Member Dean 
Phillips, who asked me to fill in for him today, 
congratulations on holding your first hearing as subcommittee 
chair. We are all looking forward to working together with you 
in this Congress. And I want to thank our distinguished panel 
of witnesses for joining us today to share your expertise.
    In 1967, the League of Arab States put forward what is 
often referred to as the three no's: no peace with Israel, no 
recognition of Israel, no negotiations with Israel. Despite 
these overtures, Egypt was the first country to break ranks and 
make peace with Israel in 1979, a decision that cost President 
Sadat his life. Jordan then followed suit in 1994.
    And since then there had been no significant progress on 
regional peace agreements until the Abraham Accords, in which 
Bahrain, Morocco, the United Arab Emirates, and Sudan agreed to 
normalize relationships with Israel. This historic agreement 
changed the region practically overnight, leading to incredible 
opportunities for regional coordination and cooperation.
    With U.S. support, these countries chose to form a forward-
looking group of nations in the Middle East focused on building 
a better and brighter future for their people and a more 
integrated and secure region. These countries also recognized a 
common interest in cooperating to counter the threats posed by 
Iran, the principal source of instability in the region. Iran's 
advancing nuclear weapons program, expanding ballistic missile 
NUAV programs, and support for armed proxy groups, including 
but not limited to Hezbollah in Lebanon, Hamas in Gaza, and the 
Houthis in Yemen all pose deep challenges to security and 
stability across the Middle East.
    Our partners and allies are clear-eyed about this threat 
and are working side by side in coordination with the United 
States to advance their shared security. Israel's integration 
into CENTCOM marked a huge step toward creating a more secure 
and prosperous region. And its role in the recent international 
maritime exercise, along with increased intelligence sharing, 
communication, and training have demonstrated significant 
progress toward a more integrated regional security 
architecture.
    I am eager to hear from our witnesses today about 
opportunities for expanded security cooperation, the prospect 
of a more integrated regional security framework, and how 
shared security concerns can promote further expansion of 
normalization between Israel and its neighbors. Security 
cooperation is important. But it cannot be the only leg on 
which relations between Israel and the Abraham Accords' 
countries stand.
    The Biden Administration has sought to deepen and expand 
Israel's engagement with its neighbors by establishing the 
Negev Forum, a new vehicle for implementing the Abraham Accords 
on a multilateral scale. The forum established six working 
groups on regional security, food and water security, tourism, 
trade, health, and education and tolerance, areas that 
highlight shared regional challenges and create opportunities 
for tangible benefits to the citizens of each country.
    These buckets have provided a framework to weave together 
the fabric of the Middle East. For example, the signing of the 
Israel-UAE free trade agreement aims to bolster economic 
cooperation between the two countries, bringing trade volume 
from around one billion to ten billion within 5 years. 
Increased trade and tourism, investment in technology and 
health, cooperation on cyber security and green energy, the 
opportunities are seemingly endless.
    I look forward to hearing from our guests today about how 
to advance Israeli-Arab engagement, promote greater regional 
cooperation, and engage the private sector and civil society in 
this effort.
    As we celebrate the Abraham Accords, the milestone for 
regional security and stability that it represents and look 
ahead toward opportunities to expand the Accords, we must also 
try to find ways to include Palestinians in regional 
cooperative initiatives and continue working toward a 
comprehensive Israeli-Palestinian peace. Key additional 
regional players have indicated their interest in normalizing 
relations with Israel, but not without significant steps toward 
peace.
    As we look for ways to strengthen and expand the Abraham 
Accords, I am interested in hearing about how these efforts can 
be used to help both Israelis and Palestinians make progress 
toward the long-term goal of a negotiated peace. And as we hold 
this hearing just weeks away from the convergence of Ramadan 
and Passover, I would further ask how the U.S. and our regional 
partners can support steps to de-escalate tensions.
    Since the Abraham Accords were announced by President Trump 
in 2020, there has been bipartisan support in Congress and 
across Administrations for the Abraham Accords and ongoing 
efforts to support peace between Israel and its neighbors. The 
Middle East today is not the same region it was even a few 
years ago. And efforts to continue to enhance and expand the 
Abraham Accords are integral to building robust security and 
economic relationships, establishing people-to-people ties, and 
contributing to a more tolerant, peaceful region.
    So, again, thank you, Mr. Chairman, for holding this 
hearing. I look forward to hearing from our distinguished 
panel. And with that, I yield back.
    Mr. Wilson. And thank you, temporary ranking member.
    I ask unanimous consent that a statement by Senator Jim 
Lankford of Oklahoma and a statement of Representative Ann 
Wagner of Missouri be entered into the record. Without 
objection, so ordered.
    We are pleased to have a distinguished panel of witnesses 
before us today on this important topic.
    The Honorable Rob Greenway, a graduate of the Virginia 
Military Institute, is President and Executive Director of the 
Abraham Accords Peace Institute. He previously served as Deputy 
Assistant to the President and Senior Director for Middle East 
and North Africa at the National Security Council under the 
Trump Administration.
    Also, General Joseph Votel is a Distinguished Fellow at the 
Middle East Institute. He served as Commander of U.S. Central 
Command in 2016 to 2019. And I know of his great service 
because I had the opportunity to visit with him and to great 
success. Thank you.
    Ambassador Daniel B. Shapiro is a Distinguished Fellow at 
the Atlantic Council. He served as the U.S. Ambassador to 
Israel from 2011 to 2017. I think you must have set a record, 6 
years.
    I want to thank you all for being here today. Your full 
statements will be made part of the record. And I will ask each 
of you to keep your spoken remarks to 5 minutes in order to 
allow members for questions. And they, too, will be strictly 
maintained, including me, of 5 minutes.
    I will now recognize President Greenway for his opening 
statement.

   STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE ROBERT GREENWAY, PRESIDENT AND 
      EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, ABRAHAM ACCORDS PEACE INSTITUTE

    Mr. Greenway. Chairman Wilson, Ranking Member Manning, 
members of the subcommittee, thank you all for the opportunity 
to testify on the development of the historic Abraham Accords 
peace agreements and the ways in which the United States can 
help ensure they reach their true potential. It is an honor to 
join Ambassador Shapiro and General Votel today.
    The Abraham Accords Peace Institute, where I serve as 
President and Executive Director, is a non-partisan, non-profit 
U.S. organization dedicated to supporting the implementation 
and expansion of the Accords, the primary platform for 
disseminating Accord progress. And we work with a broad range 
of actors abroad as appropriate to develop new opportunities in 
the fields of trade, investment, tourism, and people-to-people 
relationships.
    The Abraham Accords constitute the beginning of a 
transformation of a region that will continue to be a vital 
battleground astride security and economic interests of world 
powers. American leadership was a necessary but insufficient 
condition for the emergence of these agreements. And American 
leadership will remain essential to its growth and evolution.
    The alignment of our regional partners and allies in 
economic and security domains will ensure that the agreements 
endure. It will also be incentivizing to others to join, 
pooling critical capacities to advance and defend mutual 
interests.
    This transformation serves to constrain the malign 
influence of Iran and Russia and predatory practices of China. 
These countries will continue to manufacture and exploit 
fissures among the U.S. and its regional partners if we fail to 
take advantage of the favorable shift in the region's security 
and economic architecture.
    On the other hand, appropriate support will allow the 
Abraham Accords to advance and secure America's interests with 
the use of significantly fewer resources and with more capable 
partners integrated as never before.
    To give just a brief sense of the impact the Accords have 
had in just less than 3 years, in 2022 trade between Israel and 
regional peace partners as a whole reached $3.47 billion, up 
from $593 million in 2019. 470,700 Israelis have traveled to 
Abraham Accords countries in 2022, up from 39,300 in 2019. 
Seventeen new flight routes have been established to 
accommodate this growth. Cooperation has flourished in the 
fields ranging from water and food security, renewable energy, 
technology and innovation, health care, sports, trade, and 
investment.
    I would suggest five ways the U.S. can encourage and 
support these historic agreements.
    The first would be for the U.S. to the support the 
establishment of an Abraham Accords free trade area, ensuring 
progress toward members' aspirations, preserve the integrity 
and stability of global markets, provide a tangible alternative 
to China's Belt and Road Initiative. We could begin by 
leveraging the matrix of free trade agreements and other 
bilateral agreements already in place between the U.S. and 
Accord members and between the Accords' members themselves.
    According to RAND analysis, the benefits of a multilateral 
free trade area encompassing current signatories would create 
more than 150,000 new jobs and new economic activity exceeding 
$75 billion. A multilateral free trade area among the expanded 
number of potential Accord signatories could create as many as 
four million new jobs and one trillion dollars in new economic 
activity.
    A second avenue would be to ensure that resources dedicated 
to regional peace encompass the Accords and work with Accords' 
members to reestablish the Abraham Fund, providing financial 
and technical support necessary to reduce poverty, expand 
infrastructure, and help improve health and education, 
reinforcing the Accords.
    A third way would be to connect Accords' members and other 
partners to establish new overland trade routes, connecting its 
members from the Mediterranean to the Gulf. Such routes would 
revolutionize East-West trade, decrease associated transit 
times, costs, and risks, and strengthen resilience and 
prosperity.
    The fourth would be to support and resource a new enduring 
regional security architecture in the Middle East, the Abraham 
Accords as a foundation, while accelerating protected security 
systems to Accord member countries. Only by making our partners 
and allies more capable will we mitigate the spectrum of risk 
to our vital national interests in the global economy. This 
would also reduce, but not eliminate, the requirement for a 
robust U.S. presence.
    A fifth way would be to leverage Abraham Accords to offset 
the loss of European energy following the Russian invasion of 
Ukraine and strategically realign our partners and allies by 
breaking the dependency on adversary resources.
    Without U.S. leadership, the historic agreements would not 
have been concluded. Absent sustained investment, they will 
fail to achieve their potential. Such a setback would constrain 
the region's economic recovery from the pandemic, erode support 
for counterterrorism cooperation, open a door to malign 
influence by Russia and China, compromise regional stability, 
disrupt global markets, discourage essential cooperation, and 
provide an opportunity for resurgence of both ISIS and Al 
Qaeda.
    But if we seize the opportunity this historic agreement 
offers, the inverse holds. We would buildupon it to enhance 
regional stability, security, and trade. We could also seize 
the opportunity for a U.S. regional security architecture built 
to safeguard an economic foundation that can endure, while 
reducing our costs and constraining our adversaries.
    The Abraham Accords, and the Institute which bears its 
name, hold the potential to serve as the foundation for an 
enduring peace in the Middle East by demonstrating the tangible 
benefits of interpersonal ties, trade, commerce, and mutual 
cooperation. It is vital we seize this historic opportunity, 
unleash the potential of our partners and allies in the Middle 
East and North Africa, keep America safe, and help the region 
turn the page on a generation of conflict and instability. 
Thank you.
    [The prepared statement of Mr. Greenway follows:]

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    
    Mr. Wilson. Thank you, President Greenway.
    And we now recognize General Votel for his opening 
statement. And, General, I want to congratulate you, 2016 to 
1919, the achievement of you and your personnel. There was no 
terrorist attack against American people. And that to me is 
such an achievement. Please proceed.

STATEMENT OF JOSEPH L. VOTEL, DISTINGUISHED FELLOW, MIDDLE EAST 
                           INSTITUTE

    Mr. Votel. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and good afternoon to 
you and to Representative Manning and to the distinguished 
members of the subcommittee.
    I am pleased to join my fellow panelists, Ambassador Dan 
Shapiro and Mr. Rob Greenway, in this hearing on expanding the 
Abraham Accords. I am testifying today in my capacity as a 
former Commander of U.S. Central Command and as well as a 
Distinguished Fellow with the Middle East Institute right here 
in Washington, DC.
    The Abraham Accords were signed after my retirement and 
departure from Command, as was the decision to include Israel 
in the U.S. Central Command's designated area of 
responsibilities. It was my view at the time and it remains so 
today that these Accords and the decision regarding Israel were 
timely and essential steps in promoting stability and security 
across the region. In both cases, these actions represented the 
maturing of the political and security situations across the 
area.
    As noted in a recent report by the Jewish Institute for 
National Security of America, JINSA, the United States has a 
fundamental interest in strengthening the Accords and helping 
ensure they achieve their full political, economic, and 
security potential.
    Less than 36 hours ago, I returned from my most recent 
travel to the Middle East. These trips have left me with three 
impressions that are germane to the issue we are discussing 
today.
    The first impression is that U.S. leadership in the region 
remains critical. While our force posture has changed due to 
policy decisions, focusing our attention and resources toward 
the pace and challenge presented by China, the U.S. remains an 
indispensable partner across the Middle East. The region looks 
to us for our leadership, for our world-class capabilities, and 
our values-based approaches. Initiatives like expanding the 
Abraham Accords are clear examples of things we can and must do 
to promote stability in a critically important region where we 
retain enduring interests.
    My second impression is the importance of continuous 
dialog. The Middle East is an area with deep underlying 
tensions which left unattended will work against the better 
interests of those who live in the region and those who retain 
vital national security interests there, including the United 
States.
    It is an area prone to misperceptions and failed 
expectations. And the only way through this is by effective 
communication and relationship building. We must have open 
dialog and a framework to interact and operate that minimizes 
miscommunication, while at the same time promoting better 
interaction in areas of common interest. Therefore, we must 
promote better relationships and more substantial cooperation 
and collaboration among our regional friends. The Abraham 
Accords are doing this today.
    My third impression is the need for a sense of urgency to 
move forward in the region. Change is coming quick to the 
Middle East. Saudi Arabia is a good example. There is profound 
and palpable change due to its 2030 vision and strategy, change 
that can be seen and heard. It is accelerating on a day-to-day 
basis. We should be encouraging this.
    Our adversaries and strategic competitors are operating 
with a sense of urgency as well. Iran continues its pursuit of 
nuclear capability and is doubling down on its malign influence 
activities across the region. Chinese influence is apparent 
across the region. And they continue to maneuver effectively 
into the spaces left behind by the U.S. to promote their 
economic and political objectives. These activities and others 
like them can undermine critical interests of the United States 
and our partners.
    In an era of Great Power competition, the United States 
must play its role. Today, that role is unlikely to be 
manifested by large U.S. military formations and long-term 
deployment across regional military bases. It is, instead, more 
likely to be pursued through improved security cooperation 
efforts, partnership, shared awareness and responsibility, and 
greater resilience among our friends and partners in the 
region.
    The best tool against these factors is not just better 
equipment and more U.S. troops on the ground. It is, in fact, 
strong relationships, effective communications, and trust. As a 
former boss reminded me often, you cannot surge trust in times 
of crisis. It must be nurtured and developed beforehand.
    The Abraham Accords are an essential hedge platform to 
promote better understanding, shared interests and 
responsibilities, and common expectations that lead to better 
trust. We must seize the opportunity it presents.
    There will be obstacles to expanding the Abraham Accords 
and pursuing meaningful progress under its rubric. Iran's 
pursuit of a nuclear weapon and continued efforts to sew 
instability and chaos across the region will continue to 
frustrate our efforts and pose real challenges, threats against 
our interests. Resolving the Palestinian situation remains 
essential for many in the region. This important issue will 
continue to resonate strongly in and out of the area.
    And, of course, geopolitics will play a role as well. Our 
efforts and those of our allies to support Ukraine against 
unprovoked invasion by Russia, as well as China's posturing 
against Taiwan, will have impacts in the region that will 
challenge our goals and objectives.
    The United States has a critical role in overcoming these 
and other obstacles. We must be willing to lead and use our 
inherent attributes to bring parties together to expand and 
truly operationalize the Accords in a way that allows for real 
change and progress. We can do this by being a good convener, 
bringing others together and helping work through the issues 
with candid communications and trustful dialog. And we must do 
this by recognizing the importance of acting now to strengthen 
and solidify emerging alignments and seize near-term 
opportunities.
    Once again, thank you for the opportunity to speak with the 
subcommittee today. I look forward to joining my panel 
colleagues in answering your questions and bringing more 
attention and understanding to what I believe is one of the 
most significant opportunities to promote stability in this 
region, a region where we have made extraordinary sacrifices 
and expended significant national treasure and where we have 
and will continue to have enduring interests that are important 
to our security and prosperity.
    [The prepared statement of Mr. Votel follows:]

    
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    
    Mr. Wilson. Thank you very much, General Votel.
    And now we are very grateful to have Ambassador Daniel 
Shapiro for your opening statement.

  STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE DANIEL B. SHAPIRO, DISTINGUISHED 
                    FELLOW, ATLANTIC COUNCIL

    Mr. Shapiro. Mr. Chairman, Representative Manning, thank 
you and my thanks to Ranking Member Phillips for the 
opportunity to testify before the subcommittee on expanding the 
Abraham Accords. Like my colleagues on the panel, Rob Greenway, 
who was involved in negotiating the Accords, and General Votel, 
who has done so much for regional security, it is a subject I 
am passionate about.
    I direct the N7 Initiative, a partnership between the 
Atlantic Council and the Jeffrey M. Talpins Foundation, that 
convenes conferences of Israeli and Arab experts to generate 
multilateral policy and program ideas to bring the benefits of 
normalized relations to the citizens of those countries.
    The past year has seen a great deal of progress in building 
on the Abraham Accords. Thanks in no small part to the 
commitment of the Biden Administration. I will not detail them 
all, but the Negev Summit, the Negev Forum, opening of air 
space, free trade, and expanded trade between the parties, 
cyber security cooperation are all ongoing examples.
    And a number of challenges remain as well. The Negev Forum 
is a consensus organization. A consensus is sometimes hard to 
achieve. Jordan has not yet joined the group. There appears to 
be low and by some polling results declining public support for 
normalized relations with Israel, even in the UAE and Bahrain, 
and spiking Israeli-Palestinian tensions may weaken the 
popularity of the Abraham Accords.
    But none of those challenges diminish the progress that has 
been made. And with the remainder of my time, I will outline a 
number of steps the United States should pursue to expand that 
progress that has been made to date.
    First, our strategy should be to combine U.S.-led security 
coordination with regionally led, U.S.-supported integration in 
civilian fields. When it comes to building an integrated 
regional security architecture, there is no substitute for the 
United States, as the convener, sponsor, and enabler. Our 
unique capabilities, our enduring presence in the region, and 
the way each U.S. partner looks to us to shape the security 
environment and coordinate responses to key threats makes the 
U.S. role essential.
    The Biden Administration and CENTCOM leadership have 
embraced this responsibility, sponsoring joint exercises that 
improve interoperability, facilitating high-level strategic 
discussions on addressing the full range of threats posed by 
Iran and its proxies, and initiating the gradual process of 
integrating air defenses across these U.S. partners. It is not 
likely to become a Middle East NATO. But it does not need to be 
NATO to be meaningfully beneficial for the security of all who 
participate. But what it does need like NATO is the energetic 
leadership of the United States.
    Alongside the U.S.-led security architecture, we should 
support a regionally led web of non-defense integration. In 
parallel with the Negev Forum, there must be room for the 
emergence of a truly regional organization, like the European 
Union or ASEAN, that weaves together multilateral cooperation 
at every level, in every area of governance, collaboration and 
integration of resources and capabilities, a regional free 
trade zone, and reinforcing linkages between private sectors, 
universities, professional organizations, religious 
communities, and other elements of civil society.
    Let's call this hypothetical organization AMENA, A-M-E-N-A, 
the Association of the Middle East and North Africa. AMENA has 
the advantage that it means trustworthy or reliable in both 
Hebrew and Arabic. And it will signal with trilingual clarity 
that it represents a community of trust, reliability, common 
interests, and the common benefits of security and prosperity. 
And as the participating countries benefit from this 
association and as they forge a common regional identity, it 
will create incentives for other States to join, just as the EU 
and ASEAN expanded well beyond their original membership in 
their respective regions.
    Second, we should draw on all resources and expertise of 
the U.S. Government and beyond to advance the U.S. interest in 
deep regional integration. At the Negev Summit working group 
meetings in January, over 40 U.S. Government personnel from 
some 9 government agencies took part. That is an excellent 
showing and something to build on.
    While the State Department, Defense Department, military, 
U.S. military, USAID under the guidance of the National 
Security Council will always have the lead, nearly every 
cabinet department and Federal agency has an international 
affairs department, and most have resources and programs 
available to promote international cooperation that serves U.S. 
interests. The House and Senate Abraham Accords Caucuses are 
critical partners in this effort, able to use their diverse 
expertise and committees of jurisdiction to motivate and fund 
the work of the cabinet departments they oversee.
    In this context, I want to take note of H.R. 1268, a 
thoughtful bill introduced by Representatives Torres and 
Lawler, to create a special envoy for the Abraham Accords. If 
Congress creates such a position, one of that official's most 
important duties might indeed be to serve as the traffic cop 
for an expansive and diverse set of U.S. Government and non-
government programs that support integration in various fields.
    Third, we must give special focus and priority to achieving 
Israeli-Saudi normalization, while recognizing that it will 
take time and may advance in phases. Clearly such an agreement 
would have many transformational effects, given Saudi Arabia's 
centrality and influence as a leading nation in the Arab and 
Islamic worlds. In some respects, we see it happening 
gradually. But I would caution against the narrative that Saudi 
Arabia is ready to normalize relations with Israel tomorrow as 
long as the United States provides the right quantities of 
weapons, security guarantees, or civil nuclear technology.
    Saudi-Israeli normalization is certainly in the United 
States' interests. And we should be prepared to contribute as 
the United States has done in nearly all previous Arab-Israeli 
agreements. But it cannot be divorced from the U.S.-Saudi 
relationship, nor from other U.S. interests that we must 
protect.
    If, in fact, the United States would be expected to provide 
a range of benefits to Saudi Arabia at the time normalization 
occurs, there will also be things the United States needs from 
the Saudis, such as their commitment to stable oil markets and 
not to act in ways that run counter to core U.S. interests 
regarding Russia and China.
    A Saudi-Israeli deal is also unlikely to require nothing of 
Israel, especially in periods of heightened tensions with the 
Palestinians. And the U.S.-Israel dynamic will also be 
complicated. Israel may seek additional security assistance, 
which the United States has always provided, and the United 
States may seek from Israel steps to keep the two-State 
solution alive. Such an agreement would be a carefully balanced 
triangle. And it is worth pursuing with significant diplomatic 
resources. But it is far from automatic.
    Finally, I will just endorse Congresswoman Manning's point 
that it is imperative and there is an opportunity to draw 
positive energy from the Abraham Accords into the deeply 
deteriorating Israeli-Palestinian arena. In short, no other 
regional development holds better prospects of breaking down 
Palestinian resistance to normalization with Israel or Israeli 
resistance to including Palestinians in the promise of a better 
region.
    And Arab States as partners to both are uniquely positioned 
to positively influence the decisions and actions of both sides 
in ways that can improve conditions on the ground and keep a 
two-State solution alive for a future attempt to reach it 
through negotiations. The United States can play an important 
role in reinforcing these positive messages.
    I thank you again for the opportunity to testify. And I 
look forward to answering any questions.
    [The prepared statement of Mr. Shapiro follows:]

    
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    
    Mr. Wilson. Thank you very much, Ambassador. And, indeed, 
each of you are so important for the American people to promote 
the developments and stability in the Middle East by your 
input.
    And additionally, again, one of the highlights in my 
service was to be present at the White House in September 2020 
when the president signed the agreements, the Abraham Accords. 
And it was just such a positive experience and a dream come 
true to see stability so beneficial to all the countries 
involved in the Middle East.
    And with that, President Greenway, stability and shared 
security interests in the historically volatile region is just 
one of the many ways the Abraham Accords has benefited our 
partners in the region and by extension the United States. The 
Abraham Accords' countries have made significant commitments in 
trade, tourism, energy, and infrastructure investments.
    With U.S. leadership, expansion of the Accords would mean 
our allies working together in the interests of their countries 
to the detriment of the predatory Chinese Communist Party and 
Putin presence in the region. The Chinese Communist Party and 
Putin engaged in debt trapping and expansionism disguised as 
diplomatic investment and posed a serious threat to the 
sovereignty and security of the countries that enter into the 
agreements.
    With that, President Greenway, what is your view of the 
strategic impact the United States and our allies under the 
Abraham Accords working together to facilitate investment and 
trade rather than the Chinese Communist Party and Putin?
    Mr. Greenway. Thank you, Chairman Wilson, an excellent 
question, perhaps among the most vital.
    As I alluded to in my opening remarks, there is an 
opportunity to take advantage of this constellation of U.S. 
aligned partners and allies. And it is, in fact, at the expense 
of inroads that China is actively building within the region. 
And so it is to a certain extent a binary question.
    I would also I think remind all of us that the benefit 
derived from the Middle East has always been principally 
economic, whereas the evolution of the Carter Doctrine in 1979 
made the region important because of the necessity of U.S. 
imports of oil and gas from the region. Now I would argue it is 
the criticality of those resources to support the global 
economy, not necessarily the United States. In either case, it 
is in our best interests to do so.
    Second, it is China's devoted interest to ensure they have 
adequate access to energy to sustain their economy and 
hypothetically would sustain any military excursion or 
operations. They are now dependent upon the Middle East for oil 
and gas. And that dependency creates a strategic imperative for 
them to maintain relationships. And so they have prioritized 
that. And most recently, President Xi managed to convene and 
hold quite an assemblage of regional heads of State in Riyadh 
during his recent visit.
    I would argue that if we do not prioritize our engagement 
we would cede natural partners and allies and a critical 
strategic objective of our own and allow the Chinese to benefit 
greatly from it. The inverse I think is also true in that we do 
require stability of the global energy markets. Our partners 
and allies are well situated to help us do that.
    Second, important to look at the region as a transit point 
for all goods and services moving between Europe and Asia and a 
good bit of it moving elsewhere. And that includes information 
and the global information network which also transits the 
region.
    And so it is critical I think for us to safeguard both and 
to build on the partners and allies of which many are Abraham 
Accords' member countries in order to safeguard our own 
interests, advance our own economic prosperity, and at the same 
time create constraints for China's advance in the region.
    It is an unnatural place for the Chinese to operate. We 
have been there for decades, generations to build, as General 
Votel referenced, the trust required to do business and to gain 
I think progress in the region. The Chinese do not have that 
advantage. And so I think it is our advantage certainly, and I 
think it is in our best interests to do so. The Chinese 
recognize it.
    Most importantly, our partners and allies in the region 
eagerly want the United States to play this role as we once 
had. And so I think they would welcome our efforts on their 
behalf to integrate the region more effectively. And it would 
serve our interests and theirs.
    Mr. Wilson. Thank you very much. And, General Votel, in 
November 2021 the U.S. faithfully coordinated the first joint 
military exercise between Bahrain, UAE, and Israel in the Red 
Sea. And President Greenway is actually correct. The United 
States has had such an association, an affection for the people 
of the Persian Gulf, actually with the Kingdom of Bahrain, 
developing the first schools and hospitals there in 1895 and 
then in 1948, the location of the U.S. naval base, which was 
critical in the victory in the cold war by having such a 
presence in Bahrain.
    And then flash forward, in South Carolina tomorrow, even 
Congresswoman Manning will be surprised, we are celebrating the 
delivery of F-16 Block 70's to the Kingdom of Bahrain by 
Lockheed Martin in Greenville, South Carolina, not the other 
one. And so we are--and how important that is to see this 
relationship and how it can come together within the next 24 
hours.
    With that, what shared security concerns in the Red Sea, 
General, help drive the cooperation between Israel and, hey, 
our longtime and treasured ally of Saudi Arabia?
    Mr. Votel. Yes, thank you, Mr. Chairman. That is an 
excellent question.
    And my response to you would be the proliferation of 
autonomous systems is a particular concern of our partners in 
the region. As many of you will recall, there was a very 
devastating attack on Abqaiq, you know, the Saudi Aramco 
facility here a number of months ago. And that was devastating 
to the economic prowess of this. And that attack continues to 
resonate, not just in Saudi Arabia, really across the region.
    So it is effectively addressing the proliferation of 
autonomous systems in the Gulf that is I think of primary 
concern, not just to the United States but certainly to our 
partners. And addressing this I think would be a good way to 
bring, to build trust in the relationship, while also 
effectively addressing what is a rapidly growing and changing 
threat to not just Saudi Arabia but others.
    Mr. Wilson. Thank you very much. And I regret my time is 
up. But, Ambassador, I would love to get your input later in 
regard to expanding Abraham Accords.
    Now we proceed to Congresswoman Kathy Manning of North 
Carolina.
    Ms. Manning. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And, indeed, both of 
our Greenvilles are lovely places.
    Thank you to our witnesses for your work and for sharing 
your expertise.
    General Votel, I want to thank you for sharing the 
impressions arising from your recent trip to the region. I am 
sure, as former Commander of CENTCOM, you have particular 
insights into the region and the changes taking place. And I 
appreciate your emphasis on the urgency of moving forward to 
build on these transformative Accords. I wonder if you could 
give us your thoughts about the most significant barriers to 
moving these Accords forward and expanding on the work that is 
already being done.
    Mr. Votel. Thank you. Thank you, Congresswoman.
    I think, as I mentioned in my comments, I think there is 
really three that stand out. And then there are several others.
    Certainly, Iran and our policy toward Iran or our approach 
toward Iran continues to be a topic that resonates with our 
partners in the region. They are looking for a clear 
articulation of what it is that we are trying to do with Iran 
and how we are going to bring them to a position where they are 
not a threat to their partners in the region. So I think Iran 
is a big one.
    I do think the Palestinian situation still does resonate in 
many of these countries, as you are well aware. This is a 
particular challenge in Saudi Arabia I believe because of their 
role as the custodian of the holy sites. And so this is more 
delicate for them. And as a result, it will take more time and 
more effort to work through that particular issue with the 
Saudis. And I think that that will be a big piece.
    I also think areas that, just in my most recent visit 
there, areas where we could move forward and which I think 
present some current obstacles right now, particular with Saudi 
Arabia, is in investments, particularly investments in 
renewable energies and some of the other technologies that they 
are attempting to develop under kind of their diversification 
plan here. They are looking for the U.S. and other Western 
partners to come in and invest in these areas. And I do not 
think that that has manifested itself in the way that they had 
hoped that it would at this particular time.
    So my point is that I think anything we can do to promote 
investments in the business community through our capital 
markets and other things I think is important to demonstrate 
resolve there.
    Ms. Manning. Thank you. So, with regard to Iran, is it fair 
to say that you think those countries are looking to us, to the 
U.S., for our long-term strategy on dealing with Iran?
    Mr. Votel. I think they are. I think they are looking for 
that. They are looking for the long-term strategy of how the 
United States continues to pursue its interests more broadly 
across the Middle East. And it is really important to do that. 
The narrative that many of them repeat back to me is they hear 
about our shift to the Pacific and our focus on China. But what 
they do not hear as well is what we are doing to continue to 
preserve the interests that we retain in this region.
    So, again, in this matter, articulation, clear articulation 
of our policies, of our approaches, of things we are going to 
do and things we probably will not do are really important for 
our partners in the region.
    Ms. Manning. And with regard to your second point about the 
Israeli-Palestinian issues, is there a way that you think we 
can use the positive energy of these Accords to encourage the 
Abraham Accord countries to have a positive impact on improving 
relationships between the Israelis and the Palestinians?
    Mr. Votel. Well, I absolutely believe that to be true. I 
think doing--progress in one area I think gives way to progress 
in other areas. And I think it is important for people in the 
region to see the definitive progress and improvements that are 
being made as a result of the Abraham Accord process and the 
arrangements that are in place, because they give indications 
of areas where we can do this, where we can make progress in 
other areas.
    I do not know that it can directly address that issue. But 
the important part of the Abraham Accords is the fact that it 
provides a platform for dialog. It provides a platform for 
interaction. It provides a way for these countries of the Gulf 
and Israel to have candid discussions and to move forward in 
critical areas that are of mutual interest.
    Ms. Manning. Thank you so much. I have about 12 more 
questions. But in fairness, I will yield back.
    Mr. Wilson. Thank you very much, Congresswoman Kathy 
Manning.
    And, indeed, we are so fortunate with scheduling on the 
first person who came to the Middle East Subcommittee meeting 
for 2023 was Congressman Brian Mast. He was here first. And so, 
he gets all that credit, except for one thing, we are all 
balancing different meetings, so he had to go to another 
meeting, too. But he should be remembered as No. 1 to be here.
    And so, but then that shifts all the weight from Florida to 
Indiana, of all things, Congressman Jim Baird.
    Mr. Baird. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    And I would just say that most of my questions have been 
answered, one of which was the Palestinian-Israeli 
relationship. And I think you have discussed that.
    So, I will pass, Mr. Chairman. Thank you.
    Mr. Wilson. Well, thank you very much, Congressman Baird.
    And we now proceed immediately to Congressman Brad Sherman 
of California.
    Mr. Sherman. Thank you. As to an opening comment, I do not 
think any of us trust the Iranian regime, but I do think we 
have to negotiate with them just as Roosevelt negotiated with 
Stalin, and Nixon negotiated with Mao.
    We are embracing the Abrahamic Accords, but we should 
remember that as to real diplomatic relations it remains 
somewhat stalled, both as a result as regards Sudan and 
Morocco.
    It looks like the Saudis and Ambassador are pushing for 
U.S. cooperation with their supposedly peaceful nuclear 
program. As I have pointed out to some friends of Israel, just 
because the Saudis are not Shi'ites does not mean that they are 
Zionists.
    And I saw a close relationship the United States had with 
the Shah, and every weapon the Shah had was then in the hands 
of the ayatollahs. So, we do not want to see Saudi, we do not 
particularly want to see a nuclear-armed Saudi Arabia.
    The UAE entered the gold standard level of assurance that 
they wouldn't be using their peaceful program for military 
purposes. The Saudis seem very reluctant to do that. And, of 
course, bin Salman has, you know, hinted, well, if the Iranians 
have a nuclear weapon then we ought to have a nuclear weapon.
    Does Saudi Arabia want cooperation with a peaceful program 
with all the safeguards, or do they just want to be able to 
respond to the Iranian nuclear weapons program?
    Mr. Shapiro. Thank you, Congressman. I think the Saudis, 
obviously, have made clear in every forum that they view Iran 
as their most significant threat. It is not only the nuclear 
program of Iran; it is also the proxies in Yemen and elsewhere 
who have attacked Saudi Arabia. General Votel mentioned the 
attack on Abqaiq. And so, they are rightfully concerned, and 
rightfully seek the kind of assurances from the United States, 
as their key security partner, that would help themselves.
    Mr. Sherman. Why are they reluctant to sign the safeguards 
their close neighbor has signed?
    Mr. Shapiro. First of all, there is some rivalry between 
Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates. I think that is 
actually increasing over time. And it may--there may be a 
factor of what the UAE wants, the Saudis want, and plus a 
little bit more.
    But it is also, I think, what one would expect almost at 
the beginning of any negotiation. The gold standard 123 
Agreement achieved with the United Arab Emirates took many 
years to negotiate. And so, if the Saudis are serious about 
wanting U.S. civil nuclear technology cooperation as a part of 
a settlement, they would need to come to a serious negotiation 
about that.
    Mr. Sherman. I would just say that diplomatic relations and 
niceties can be reversed, governments can be overthrown, but 
nuclear weapons or nuclear weapons technology stays where it 
is. And, thank God, while we did a lot to the military of the 
Shah, none of it was in the nuclear area.
    The Ambassador of the UAE has Stated the truth of the 
Abraham Accords was about preventing annexation. The reason it 
happened, the way it happened, at the time it happened was all 
to prevent annexation. To what extent does some of the comments 
made more recently by the Netanyahu regime--government about 
annexing parts of the West Bank conflict with either the letter 
or the spirit of the Abrahamic Accords?
    Mr. Shapiro. Well, it is true that at the time that the 
Abraham Accords were signed the Emirates did make clear that 
they expected the what was then being discussed as Israel, 
which was a partial annexation of the West Bank, to be shelved. 
And there was such a commitment by Israel.
    So, to have some Israeli, members of the Israeli Government 
speak about de facto annexation, or to take actions that might 
be consistent with de facto annexation, even if it is called 
something else, obviously raises question about whether that is 
upheld.
    But I think more concerning is whether, of course, it also 
could mean the death of any possibility of the two-State 
solution. But how that development would influence and impact 
the possibility of future expansion of the Abraham Accords.
    The Saudis may not prioritize the Palestinian issue as 
their No. 1 priority in this, nor may other Arab States looking 
at this and, yet, the polling we have seen about the relatively 
low popularity of the Accords suggest the Palestinian issue is 
at least part of the reason for that.
    And if we see two-States receding over the cliff and 
annexation pushing it there, I think that will make it harder 
to achieve the goal we are all here to discuss.
    Mr. Sherman. And, finally, I will just point out that in 
addition to the Abrahamic Accords, the Biden Administration's 
brokerage of an agreement with Lebanon on maritime and 
exploitation of the natural gas resources, and their 
negotiation with regard to Egypt, and Saudi Arabia, and Israel 
over the islets of the Gulf, mouth of the Gulf of Aqaba, they 
may not be Abrahamic but they are important.
    Thanks.
    Mr. Wilson. Thank you very much, Congressman Sherman.
    And I am happy you brought up about the Biden 
Administration's success for the drilling in the Mediterranean, 
how important that is going to be for the economy of Lebanon, 
how beneficial it is for Israel, and to show how things 
connect. And that is that he did not brag about it enough.
    The oil that is achieved by Israel is sent to Egypt, of all 
things, to be refined, to be sent to Italy to reduce any 
dependency on Putin. And so that was a tremendous achievement 
of offshore drilling in the Mediterranean.
    With that in mind, indeed, the very first person to be here 
for the very first Middle East, North Africa, Central Asia 
Subcommittee is here, Congressman Brian Mast.
    Mr. Mast. Thank you, Chairman. I appreciate it.
    I want to start with just giving my own personal analysis 
on the last comments that you made about two-State. You 
mentioned it briefly, so I am just going to mention my opinions 
on it.
    I think two-State should be left dead. In my opinion it 
makes no sense to me that the United States of America work to 
make a State out of an entity that would have to immediately be 
labeled as a terrorist State, and a State that we would 
immediately in Congress begin coming up with sanctions for.
    So, personally, that is my analysis of the situation.
    My question goes to you, General, and it is about what was 
spoken about, the communication that is taking place, and the 
diplomacy that is taking place, and stability that can take 
place between different entities. But I want to ask if the 
Abraham Accords are leading to communication in another place?
    We have the Abraham Accords taking place. We have a de 
facto separation between Gaza and the West Bank for two 
decades, let's say. It is well-assumed by many that if there 
were to be a real election held, that Hamas would win a popular 
election across those, those two de facto areas.
    Are the Abraham Accords resulting in an increased 
communication between Gaza and the West Bank to one way or 
another change that relationship from de facto separation to 
officially separated, or somehow united under the PA, or united 
under Hamas, or in some other ways has it resulted in that over 
there?
    Mr. Votel. Congressman, to be very truthful, I am not sure 
I can make a conclusion one way or the other on that. Some of 
the other panelists may be in a better position to comment on 
that.
    I think, tangentially, it could have some influence, 
frankly, in terms of, in terms of, you know, uniting some folks 
in those, in those particular areas around, around certain 
issues. So, I think there may be some tangential issues. But in 
terms of something more substantive and influencing, I am not 
sure. I haven't seen that. And I may not be the best person to 
conclude that.
    Mr. Mast. Thank you, General. And I do not know that we 
would necessarily see it, or that it would be evident to us. 
But I would certainly welcome the opinions from both of you as 
well about if you are seeing that. That is something I am just 
particularly curious about because I think it is whatever, 
wherever people stand on wanting to see two-State or not two-
State, or however they see peace, long lasting peace and 
stability in that region taking place, that is something that 
has to be addressed is that separation of those two entities. 
And I do not see it being looked at a lot, so I would be 
curious to know you all's analysis as well.
    Mr. Greenway. Thanks, Congressman.
    I would say that the direct answer to your question is I do 
not think that is the case now.
    I think the perspective of the Accords members before and 
after the agreement was that they could better contribute to 
setting conditions for an eventual brokered settlement, 
whatever that might be, by being a member of the Accords and 
having normalized diplomatic relations with Israel. And they 
point to both Egypt and Jordan as examples of this, where their 
influence over Israel, positive and negative, would contribute 
to an ultimate resolution, one that they would frankly admit is 
not currently within sight.
    And I think there is merit to that argument.
    Second is I think there is a material way for them to 
contribute to the conversation and to set conditions. And I 
think that that has probably not been exploited to the degree 
to which it could. And one of the ways which I mentioned up 
front in my opening remarks, and one of the ways we established 
early on with the Accords was a fund to allow Accord member 
countries to contribute to infrastructure investment within the 
territories. That was both acceptable to Israel and to the 
Palestinians, and to the benefit of both.
    And I think there is ample opportunity for that to continue 
to occur while we are waiting for the resolution of a more 
difficult political question.
    Mr. Mast. Thank you, sir.
    Mr. Shapiro. Congressman, I think the attitude of the 
Palestinian Authority to the Abraham Accords was very 
disappointing. They, of course, have called it a betrayal and 
essentially boycotted it. Of course, Hamas, Gaza's terrorist 
organization that rejects Israel's existence, are obviously not 
going to be a party.
    I do think there are different views among the Palestinian 
people, the younger generation, businesspeople, people who are 
open to the idea, that Palestinians could benefit and 
contribute if they were participating in these dialogs.
    What I hope is that we will see--we try to do this in our 
programs--but I think the Arab States that have normalized with 
Israel--the UAE, Bahrain, Morocco, in particular are well 
positioned to be convenors in forums where both Israelis and 
Palestinians participate, look for ways to cooperate, develop 
some personal relationships, lower suspicion.
    That may not get us to the resolution that I would like to 
see, the two-State solution, or any resolution of the conflict, 
but it would certainly lower the barriers to an eventual 
resumption of negotiations and some kind of resolution by 
developing this.
    I think these Arab States have more influence in that arena 
than they may realize they do, and that we should encourage 
them to use it.
    Mr. Mast. I appreciate you all taking the time to testify 
today. And I yield no time back because I have no time left.
    Mr. Wilson. Thank you very much, Congressman Brian Mast. 
And we now proceed to former chairman David Cicilline.
    Mr. Cicilline. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I congratulate you 
on your first hearing as chair, chairman of this important 
committee. And thank the witnesses for being with us today and 
for your testimony.
    I think we all recognize that the Abraham Accords is really 
an important and historic breakthrough on building and 
maintaining peace in the Middle East through new and extended 
regional cooperation. And as we acknowledge the successes of 
these agreements I am optimistic about the opportunity that 
lies ahead to build on these historic achievements.
    Additional engagement and partnerships will allow for 
cooperation on key issues, which you have discussed. And I, you 
know, of course am looking forward to ways in which Congress 
can help support efforts to deepen and broaden the Abraham 
Accords in a better future for all in the region.
    As you mentioned, Ambassador Shapiro, one of the main 
impedimenta to expanding the Abraham Accords has been the 
Israeli-Palestinian issue. And Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Qatar, and 
Oman have all indicated, to various extents, their interest in 
stabilizing relations with Israel, but not without significant 
steps toward peace.
    And so what I am wondering is if you have recommendations 
on the kinds of things that we might be suggesting to our State 
Department in these conversations that would provide some 
engagement to Palestinians, some benefits so they would see the 
Abraham Accords is not only bringing more peace and stability 
to the region but actual benefits to them?
    Mr. Shapiro. Sure. Thank you, Congressman.
    The kinds of projects that have already been announced, for 
example the Prosperity Green and Prosperity Blue solar energy 
for desalinated water exchange between Jordan and Israel, 
financed by the United Arab Emirates, is a very good example of 
a project that could have and should, I think, include the 
Palestinians. They are, obviously, in the same geographic area. 
They have similar needs for energy and water. They could be a 
contributor but also a beneficiary of that and ten other joint 
projects like it.
    I discussed the idea that the UAE can be a convenor of the 
kinds of exchanges where Israelis and Palestinians outside 
their own immediate environment can actually meet with their 
mutual Arab partners to do business deals, to do development 
projects, do education initiatives. And just by doing that, it 
shows that there is something to be gained by Palestinians by 
contributing.
    It is not going to answer all of their immediate needs. It 
is not going to start a negotiation tomorrow. And, certainly, 
the lack of trust, almost total lack of trust between Israeli 
and Palestinian leaders is a big barrier. We are not going to 
overcome that tomorrow.
    But I do think those parties, with U.S. sponsorship and 
organization, can draw Palestinians into these dialogs with 
Israelis and with their other Arab partners and change that 
dynamic rather than dramatically.
    Mr. Cicilline. Thank you.
    And, you know, I think we all recognize this past year has 
been one of the deadliest periods of violence in the West Bank 
in nearly two decades. And I am wondering whether you, General, 
or you Mr. or President Greenway, have thoughts on whether or 
not the parties to the Abraham Accords have been helpful and 
can they be helpful in terms of assisting and responding to 
some of the violence and brokering some kinds of agreements 
because of their new positions as members of the Abraham 
Accords?
    Has that proved useful or has that not really spilled over 
into some of these issues with respect to settlement expansion?
    Mr. Shapiro. OK. You know, the UAE is struggling with this. 
They are a member of the U.N. Security Council. They have 
several times in the last 2 or 3 months brought complaints on 
behalf of other Arab countries to the U.N. Security Council 
about statements or actions by Israel in the West Bank.
    I do not think they have been as consistently critical as I 
think they should be of Palestinian terrorist attacks that take 
the lives of Israelis or, indeed, of Palestinian Authority 
salaries paid to terrorists.
    But, again, it is a demonstration that they are, they are 
positioned to play a role as both a supporter of both. They are 
now friends with Israel, and nobody would want them to withhold 
any of that, but also friends and partners to the Palestinians. 
They can be supporters. They can be coaches. They can put some 
positive pressure on each side to avoid the things that make it 
harder, or keep the situation on the ground very tense, or make 
it harder to resume negotiations.
    I would like to see them step more into that role. 
Obviously, that should be done in coordination with the United 
States.
    Mr. Votel. Congressman, I completely agree with the 
Ambassador. I think that, I think the key point here is that 
the maturing of the Abraham Accords relationships will really 
give the opportunity for trustful communication between the 
partners in the arrangement. That does take time, frankly. I 
think we are seeing some of that. People are treading lightly, 
but over time continuing investments I think does provide a 
good platform of addressing really sensitive issues like, like 
you raised.
    Mr. Cicilline. Thank you so much.
    I yield back, Mr. Chairman.
    Mr. Wilson. Thank you, Chairman Cicilline.
    We now proceed to Congressman Rich McCormick of Georgia.
    Mr. McCormick. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am going to make 
this quick because each one of you brings such a wealth of 
knowledge, I am really excited about this.
    I am going to start with the general, if you do not mind.
    I2U2, are you familiar with I2U2?
    Mr. Votel. I am not sure that I am.
    Mr. McCormick. With India, Israel, United States, and UAE, 
the partnership they have, sharing information, sharing 
economy, and just kind of thinking outside the box with what we 
have with the Abraham, and thinking outside even the regional 
benefit of the Abraham.
    As we tie in other places you have a big country like 
Indonesia, which is primarily Muslim, and who also has a 
potential to come in and be a part of this greater peace 
process. What do you think about expanding this outside of the 
direct region?
    Mr. Votel. I think it is extraordinarily important, in my 
view. Again, I think the benefit of these types of accords, 
these types of arrangements, is they promote dialog and they 
promote communication between partners. And I think whenever 
you are doing that you are reducing risk for things happening. 
So, I am very, very supportive.
    I understand Indonesia is one of the countries that has 
been most engaged to date in some of the expansion. So, I think 
that is a, I think that is a positive, positive thing.
    That said, the priority needs to remain in the Middle East.
    Mr. McCormick. Absolutely.
    Mr. Votel. That is where the original problem really 
exists.
    Mr. McCormick. Perfect. And I agree with you, power in 
numbers, especially with such a large population of the Muslim 
community coming on board in that peace process.
    Honorable Mr. Greenway--by the way, thank you for both of 
your services, too, by the way, as fellow military brothers in 
arms. When we talk about the second largest Shi'a population in 
the world, next to Iran, being in Azerbaijan, and having Russia 
distracted with a war where they have basically withdrawn from 
the Armenian region, provides a real needed opportunity, I 
think, to kind of go in there and establish this presence. What 
are the holdups, or what are the pros and cons do you think to 
including Azerbaijan? And how can we get them pulled in quickly 
while Russia is distracted?
    Mr. Greenway. Thank you, Congressman. Excellent question. 
And your preceding one was I think as well.
    I think that, well, first, Azerbaijan already has a strong 
relationship with Israel. And so membership in the Accords 
would be more formal and symbolic than substantive because of 
the relationship they already enjoy.
    To your broader point on whether there is room for us to 
pull Azerbaijan out of the other Central Asian States more 
closely within the fold, at the expense of Russia and China, 
which I think would be their strong preference, I think there 
is in fact an opportunity for us to do exactly that. And I 
think the time is certainly right for it.
    And we would, I think, increase our flexibility, and also 
economic prosperity for ourselves, and also for the region. The 
benefit of looking outside the Middle East, particularly, the 
Middle East, North Africa, to Asia and to the Central Asian 
States is the economic benefit that ties them together, 
increases the bond, the bond that endures.
    So, I think any effort we can make along those lines would 
be beneficial.
    Mr. McCormick. That's perfect. And I always stress that 
economic tie, which kind of goes to I2U2, and with the other, 
especially you mentioned Azerbaijan's strong economic ties to 
Israel, especially with energy, so that is what I am looking 
for.
    Ambassador, I am going to shift back to more local 
concerns. You mentioned in your opening remarks the 
deteriorating relationship between Israel and Palestine. I have 
been in the military for over 30 years, or around the military 
for over 30 years, it always seemed bad to me. I do not see how 
we can deteriorate from bad to bad. I am just curious what you 
mean by that.
    I mean, it always seems like we kind of vacillate but we 
never really get good. So, I do not understand what you mean by 
deteriorating. What specifically do you mean?
    I mean, is there a path forward? It seems like there is a 
vested interest since a certain guy came along to divide us, 
people actually make a profit off of dividing us. And I do not 
know how we overcome that other than to tie them in somehow 
economically. At one time it seemed like they were kind of blue 
color workers, they had a pretty good relationship, pretty 
economically sound model for those particular, that particular 
demographic to succeed. And now that has kind of gone by the 
wayside.
    Mr. Shapiro. Congressman, it is obviously a situation that 
does go through ups and downs and various cycles. I do not 
think anyone would dispute that the recent months has seen a 
spike in violence and number of terrorist, deadly terrorist 
attacks by Palestinian terrorists against Israeli citizens. A 
number of operations the Israeli military has undertaken to go 
after those who are responsible for those attacks. And 
sometimes civilians are wounded in those or killed in those 
operations.
    Mr. McCormick. I get your point.
    I am sorry, I am almost out of time.
    Just what do you think, if we, once again I think Iran is, 
if you take away the big brother, the person who is kind of 
supplying the motivation, the arms behind it, is there a way to 
divide them from that and cutoff that supply that would benefit 
this process?
    Mr. Shapiro. I think the best opportunity, and I am not 
saying anybody can promise that this is a guarantee of success, 
but to get Palestinians who have been drawn toward violent 
extremism, drawn toward the sponsors who are the providers of 
that kind of weaponry--and I do not mean Hamas, who are 
ideologically committed to Israel's destruction--I mean other 
Palestinians who have in the past at least considered what 
would it look like to live alongside Israel in the two-State 
solution, would be to, first of all, show some improved 
conditions on the ground via economic and security upgrades 
and, second of all, to show that there is a horizon, a path, a 
diplomatic pathway that could get back to that outcome if they 
are willing and, obviously, if Israel is also willing to engage 
in that diplomatic process.
    As long as it looks absolutely hopeless from the 
Palestinian perspective that there will ever be any end, then I 
suspect it will be harder for us to steer more Palestinians 
away from that path as we absolutely should be trying to do.
    Mr. McCormick. Apologize for going over time.
    Mr. Wilson. And thank you very much, Congressman Rich 
Burchett. We now proceed to Congressman--Excuse me, to Rich 
McCormick.
    We now have Congressman Tim Burchett of Tennessee.
    Mr. Burchett. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Ambassador Shapiro, you know, we are quick to be critical 
of anti-Semitism overseas. And we should; we have got it here. 
But, of course, overseas it has been thousands of years before 
we were even a country. I am wondering what can the Abraham 
Accords do to help put a stop to some of it?
    Mr. Shapiro. Thank you, Congressman. It is an excellent 
question, and something I am quite excited about.
    In December, our N7 Initiative hosted a conference in 
Morocco on education and coexistence. And we brought together 
from eight countries, Israel and seven Arab countries, 
educators of NGO's involved in coexistence, interfaith work, 
including a number of Arab activists in Morocco, and in the 
UAE, and in Bahrain who are working to educate their own 
populations against anti-Semitic narratives that have been 
present in their societies or their education systems for far 
too long, for understanding the common roots of Judaism and 
Islam, and the times during history when Jews and Muslims have 
lived peacefully alongside each other.
    There is a lot of pride in that, particularly in Morocco 
where the Jewish community has been a major part of Moroccan 
society of centuries.
    And so, I think there are initiatives underway. There is 
Holocaust education now being brought into their school 
systems, at least the UAE and Morocco, for the first time. So 
there is significant progress. And all of this is made possible 
by the dialogs and the cross-pollination discussions that were 
only really started after the Abraham Accords came into being.
    Mr. Burchett. Would you say that leadership sometimes I 
find that they want to stay in power? And that seems to be the 
key. And as long as Jews, and Muslims, and Christians are all 
fighting it keeps the same old bunch of dirtbags in power? And 
would you say that is a safe assumption?
    Mr. Shapiro. I think there are many examples of that 
dynamic throughout history.
    Mr. Burchett. ``Dirtbags'' is probably not in you 
diplomatic dossier, but it is in mine, so.
    Mr. Shapiro. I think, Congressman, you can find many 
examples of that dynamic throughout history.
    Mr. Burchett. All right. I will take that as a yes.
    Mr. Greenway, Saudi Arabia's interest to engage publicly 
with Israel affects other countries. And I would be interested 
in do you feel like they are interested in normalizing those 
relations?
    Mr. Greenway. Thanks for the question, Congressman.
    We had a number of conversations with our Saudi partners 
while we were negotiating the Abraham Accords, before and 
since. I would say, first, that public discussions about 
negotiations tend to increase negotiating leverage of one or 
more parties. Usually it become detrimental.
    It is why the Accords themselves were never disclosed or 
announced before they were concluded. So, I think any public 
discussion usually has a less-than-productive impact on it.
    My private and conversations, and what has been, I think, 
disclosed publicly generally comports with the conclusion that 
this is really about the Riyadh-Washington relationship and has 
very--has a lot less to do with the relationship with Israel. 
And on sound footing I think there is room to proceed.
    I think, ultimately, it is in our interests, the United 
States' best interests. I think it is certainly within Israel's 
best interests. I think it is also within the Kingdom's best 
interests. But I do think that we would have to repair the 
relationship and build on a sounder footing in order to 
proceed.
    Ultimately, I do think it is about integrating our partners 
and allies in the region, which I think they desperately want. 
And I do think that there is certainly room to address 
legitimate security concerns.
    And the previous comments about the Saudi discussion and 
potential requirement to pursue civil deeper cooperation, I 
think the general point there is they do not want to see a 
standard upheld by the United States that is one way for Tehran 
and another way for partners and allies in the region. And I 
think they would be comfortable with the gold standard 123 
Agreement that saw the construction of Barakah and the UAE 
ultimately, provided that the United States did not enable a 
wholesale civil and military nuclear program in Tehran.
    Mr. Burchett. Do you think there is any additional measures 
that need to be taken to support peace besides those that you 
mentioned?
    Mr. Greenway. Well, I think there certainly are. And, 
again, I think providing for our security and stability in the 
region, and our partners' and allies', would demonstrate 
exactly that level of commitment.
    I think the right approach on Tehran, as the shared-upon 
and the agreed-upon principal threat to peace and stability in 
the region, would go a long way toward doing that. So, I think 
if we make movement in that direction, I think we will find 
partners moving with us.
    Mr. Burchett. What do you think America sees by expanding 
these Accords, what benefits? Quickly.
    Mr. Greenway. The first is to constrain China's ambitions 
globally.
    The second is to secure global markets upon which we are 
dependent and the principal beneficiary.
    And the third would be to see stability in the region that 
all too often has required a huge expenditure for the United 
States to redress.
    Mr. Burchett. Those are three good things.
    Mr. Chairman, I yield back the remaining 8 seconds.
    Mr. Wilson. And thank you, Congressman Tim Burchett. And we 
appreciate your very accurate terminology, whatever you use. 
So, this is correct.
    With this, we are very fortunate to have Congressman 
Michael Lawler from New York.
    Mr. Lawler. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank you to all 
of you for testifying today.
    Ambassador Shapiro, you made note in your remarks of the 
legislation that Congressman Torres and I have introduced to 
create a special envoy specifically for the Abraham Accords. 
Why do you believe that would be an effective tool, if you 
will, to help ensure the stability and long-term success of the 
Abraham Accords?
    Mr. Shapiro. Thank you, Congressman.
    I think when Administrations elevate their focus on 
particular areas and appointments of that nature, special 
envoy, they can have other titles, can help do that, it 
demonstrates a very significant commitment that gets the 
attention of our foreign partners, obviously those in the 
region, those who have already made their decision to normalize 
with Israel, and the additional steps that we seek to have them 
deepen those conversations. Those States that have not yet 
normalized relations, and there is a focal point for 
discussions with those countries. And even for external 
partners.
    Mr. McCormick mentioned the I2U2 Initiative that India has 
constructively contributed to, while we have a lot of other 
U.S. partners in Europe, in Asia, that also could be 
contributors. But somebody needs to sort of corral that. 
Somebody needs to organize that. Somebody needs to be the focal 
point.
    And then within our own Government, I mentioned it is not 
just the State Department, it is not just the Defense 
Department that has to do this. There are numerous other 
cabinet departments that have something to contribute.
    But, again, having a focal point for organizing all of that 
effort, and even the effort of external non-government entities 
that want to contribute, I think is made easier when you have 
that sort of focal point.
    Mr. Lawler. So, obviously in 2020 the Abraham Accords were 
entered into with the UAE, Bahrain, Morocco. They have 
somewhat, I do not want to say stalled, but obviously I think, 
you know, there was obviously a change in Administration here, 
and there are other, other events that have happened in the 
world, obviously the Russian invasion of Ukraine being one of 
them. It is your belief that whether it is a special envoy or 
some sort of heightened position, that would help maybe 
continue to push this forward toward success?
    I mean, we are seeing, you know, other countries allowing 
Israeli airlines to operate and come into their airspace which, 
certainly, I think is a positive step toward more normalized 
relations. But you agree that ultimately having this type of 
position, or something similar, would help advance the ball 
here?
    Mr. Shapiro. I do.
    I want to give full credit to the Biden Administration. I 
think they have invested in this. I think the Negev Summit and 
the resulting Negev Forum and the working groups that have met, 
as you've mentioned, the opening of airspace first in Saudi 
Arabia, now in Oman, that facilitates much shorter flights 
between Israel and the Far East, some of the other visits, and 
the I2U2, and some of the other engagements that the United 
States has helped sponsor, all result from good work, good 
diplomatic work.
    But, again, you can do even more when you have a high level 
focal point without our own Government and dealing with foreign 
governments.
    Mr. Lawler. What additional countries would you, and just 
if you could name them, just in the interests of time, but what 
additional countries would you like to see ideally enter into 
the Abraham Accords?
    Mr. Shapiro. Of course Saudi Arabia is the biggest prize 
but probably one of the most difficult. I think Oman, 
Mauritania, Qatar, and Kuwait are all possibilities. Next, 
outside of the region, Indonesia, Somalia, Niger, and Malaysia 
are also legitimate candidates.
    Mr. Lawler. OK. Last, and you are somewhat uniquely 
positioned on this, given both your role as former Ambassador 
to Israel, but also your work as a consultant with respect to 
Iran, how do you think the Administration's approach toward 
Iran, and their efforts as recently as last year to restart the 
Iran Nuclear Deal, impacts the Abraham Accords and the 
potential of other countries, like Saudi Arabia, to really 
engage with Israel?
    Mr. Shapiro. Well, you know, one thing Israel and a number 
of these Arab partners, those that have normalized this, have 
not agreed on is that they disagree with the United States. 
They disagreed at the time the JCPOA was signed, and they 
disagree with the Biden Administration's approach. But I think 
that--to try to reenter it.
    But I think that ship has largely sailed. I do not see an 
opportunity to go back into that deal. Things that were 
possible or necessary in order to do it I do not think are 
possible anymore in light of Iran's oppression of its own 
people, and the protests, and arming of Russia in the war in 
Ukraine. So, I think we are in a new phase.
    Mr. Lawler. Just so I am clear, is it your position that 
the United States should not try to restart?
    Mr. Shapiro. I do not think it is even an option at this 
point.
    Mr. Lawler. OK.
    Mr. Shapiro. I think we are in a new phase where 
deterrence, and that is something that the United States, 
Israel, and a lot of these Arab partners can agree on is going 
to be a central portion, a central component of a new Iran 
policy, obviously drawing certain lines about things that Iran 
might do, hopefully will not do, but if they would do would 
draw a response of one kind or another from one or a coalition 
of these partners.
    So, I think there is actually a new opportunity, mostly 
because of Iran's behavior and Iran's refusal to try to return 
to that agreement, and then do all of these other destabilizing 
things, to coalesce a more unified U.S. and regional policy to 
deal with Iran.
    Mr. Lawler. Thank you.
    Mr. Chairman, thank you for the additional time.
    Mr. Wilson. And thank you very much, Congressman Michael 
Lawler.
    And, also, I am really grateful that we have the co-
chairman of the Bulgaria Caucus here, Congressman Brad 
Schneider.
    Mr. Schneider. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I want to 
personally thank you for allowing me to join the committee 
hearing this morning.
    I want to thank our witnesses first and foremost for your 
service to our Nation, all three of you in different ways. We 
are grateful to you as a country, and for your time here, and 
for your commitment to the Abraham Accords.
    I have the privilege of being one of the co-founders and 
co-chairs of the bipartisan, bicameral Abraham Accords Caucus. 
And I think that is a reflection of what we do, what you do in 
this fundamental belief that the Abraham Accords Caucus are one 
of the most bright things we see coming out of the Middle East. 
It is something that we, as a Nation, should be extraordinarily 
proud of, being the facilitator of this accords a couple of 
years ago, and something that we need to be completely 
committed to.
    As you have touched on, we need to make sure that we are 
deepening the roots of the Accords in the countries that have 
signed the Accords today, while at the same time I would argue 
working to help it branch out, branch out in two ways that you 
have touched on:
    One, bring more countries in. Saudi Arabia obviously would 
be very welcome. But, Ambassador Shapiro, as you touched on, 
reaching out to Europe, building relationships with Asia, and 
making sure that this becomes a centerpiece of diplomacy and 
opportunity.
    In that vein, I think one of the challenges we face is 
demonstrating the value of the Abraham Accords, first to the 
decisionmakers in the region and around but, also, critically, 
to the people living in these countries, that they see the 
benefits of the Accords, and to demonstrate U.S. commitment to 
the region, and through that commitment to the Accords.
    So, I will start with you, Ambassador Shapiro.
    How do we work to make sure that the people living in the 
region see the value of the Accords, and that they see the U.S. 
commitment to the region and to the Abraham Accords itself?
    Mr. Shapiro. Sure. Thank you, Congressman.
    The Negev Forum, obviously, is one effort to try to come up 
with projects and proposals that will go beyond the leadership 
level, but show benefit to the public in the different sectors, 
energy, health, water, and food, et cetera.
    The problem is the Negev Forum is a consensus organization 
and moves very slowly. It takes time for the ministers to meet 
again and ratify the work done at the working level. And so, 
there are a lot of proposals but very little has actually been 
implemented.
    Those things that have been implemented haven't been 
region-wide, they have been sort of between individual 
countries: the UAE-Israel Food Trade Agreement; I mentioned the 
Prosperity Green and Blue; Israel-Jordan-UAE Agreement.
    We are, as I said, at the Atlantic Council trying the N7 
Initiative to bring together a Track 2 or Track 1.5 component 
to run parallel to the Negev Forum so that a broader community 
of experts can build a network, develop ideas for projects that 
really are focused precisely on that. How does a citizen of one 
of these countries feel that they have a new educational 
opportunity, new better health care, better access to water and 
food security than they did before, and because of these 
agreements?
    So, there is a number of ways. It requires a lot of 
investment by expertise. It requires money, of course, some 
from governments, some from private or foundation or 
philanthropic entities. But that really needs to be the focus 
going forward.
    Mr. Schneider. General Votel, let me turn to you. And just 
to refresh, sir, we actually spoke about a year-and-a-half ago 
with a mutual friend Al Goldstein. So, it is good to see you 
here. But I would love to have your thoughts on this as well.
    Mr. Votel. Absolutely.
    So, just to build a little bit on that, I think one of the 
most important things that could take place is the promotion of 
people-to-people exchanges in contact between countries. 
Obviously, tourism provides an opportunity for this, but so 
does exchanges for education purposes, for business purposes, 
for health care, for technology exchanges. I think these are 
extraordinarily important. And people in each of the countries 
who are parties to the agreement will begin to see this. And 
so, I think this idea of promoting people-to-people exchanges.
    Certainly there is a series of exercises and other things 
that are taking place in the Gulf, and in the air over the 
Gulf, and in a variety of areas. A demonstration of, you know, 
an effective defense against the threat certainly will, I 
think, is something that needs to be emphasized in the region. 
And, again, people will begin to see that.
    Mr. Schneider. Thank you.
    And, Mr. Greenway, give you the last word.
    Mr. Greenway. I appreciate it, Congressman. Excellent 
question.
    I think we spend a lot of our time on implementation. There 
have been over 260 agreements between the Accord member 
countries. And we spend most of our time connecting ministries, 
departments, agencies, public and private institutions, to 
execute these:
    Academic exchanges, including scholars and fellows 
programs; athletic events which will encompass some of the 
first international Abraham Accords-based international 
athletic events this year; an agriculture initiative between 
the Accord member countries actually putting shovels in the 
ground in Sudan this year; expanding cross-border trade by 
expanding infrastructure; and, as you mentioned earlier, 
bringing external support to this.
    We have worked hard to build caucuses in the U.K., in 
France, in Germany, in Brussels, in Hungary just this past 
week, and soon we hope in other countries as well, and in Asia 
in order to leverage that support.
    So, implementation and follow-through on agreements that 
have already been achieved I think will go a long way toward 
cementing the ties, demonstrating the benefit to people, and 
encouraging others to join.
    Mr. Schneider. Great. Thank you.
    And let me just emphasize, I agree with everything you 
said.
    General Votel, you have talked about people-to-people. We 
have had the chance here with the caucus to meet with the 
Ambassadors of the Abraham Accords countries, Israel, UAE, 
Bahrain, Morocco. It is very important.
    And if I can, Mr. Chairman, we are working to try to get a 
trip to the Abraham Accords countries, and would love to try to 
work with you on that as well.
    And with that, I yield back.
    Mr. Wilson. And thank you, Chairman, co-chair of the 
Abraham Accords Caucus, for your--you have had so many 
chairmanships it is hard to keep them straight. But I just want 
to say that is terrific. In fact, you are doing so good we are 
going to have a second round. And when we have such 
distinguished individuals here. And so we would like to 
proceed, including Chairman Schneider.
    So, at this time, Ambassador Shapiro, the normalization of 
relations between Israel, the UAE, Bahrain, Morocco, and Sudan 
have been an historic accomplishment during the Trump 
Administration, benefiting all of the Abraham Accords countries 
and the United States. At this point, what roadblocks might be 
stopping more Arab countries from joining the Abraham Accords?
    And if you could review again the benefits that signatories 
have made since normalizing relations?
    Mr. Shapiro. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    The benefits, I think, are flowing on a regular basis. 
There are already people-to-people exchanges, as General Votel 
mentioned, although room for vast expansion of those. There are 
the beginnings of educational exchanges, Israeli students 
studying at Arab universities and vice versa. There is room to 
dramatically expand that as well.
    There is a free trade agreement between the UAE and Israel, 
and a dramatic increase in bilateral trade between them, and 
negotiations on an Israel-Bahrain agreement.
    And then, of course, there are the various things that 
those governments sought from the United States, again 
something that the United States has always done in Arab-
Israeli peacemaking, which is make a contribution. The UAE 
sought a particular weapons system. It hasn't actually followed 
through on that, but that was part of that agreement.
    And Morocco got the recognition of Western Sahara.
    So, they of course seek something in their own interests in 
addition to what they get out of the relationship with Israel.
    I think other countries, of course, look at some of those 
negotiations and they look for the right moment. They look for 
the question of whether they, too, would be in a bargaining 
situation with the United States. I think we need to expect 
that with any country that comes forward.
    They also, I think, look for the moment when they would 
find this to be something they could most easily absorb in 
their own political systems. That is where the tensions between 
Israelis and Palestinians that have increased have also, I 
think, been a--have the potential to slow additional countries 
from coming into the fold.
    Mr. Wilson. Thank you very much.
    And indeed, President Greenway, it has just been awesome to 
see the agreement between Lebanon and Israel. I just I cannot 
even visualize how important that is for the offshore drilling 
of oil and natural gas, environmentally sound. How important it 
is to back up a country that should be great, but it is not, as 
Lebanon. It has been great in terms of economic opportunity and 
achievement. But the economic stability that can be achieved by 
the sale of oil and gas.
    And then how extraordinary to put together the benefit to 
Israel and then the thought that this would tie directly to 
Egypt for the refining, and then tie to Italy for the export. 
And also to have an impact on war criminal Putin.
    And so, again, the offshore drilling I was hoping to get 
more attention what an achievement that is, because what you 
have Lebanon wins, Israel wins, Egypt wins, Italy wins, war 
criminal Putin loses.
    Are there any other initiatives that you see that--I think 
it would be hard to replicate that--but are there any other 
economic achievements that could be achieved between the 
countries of the Middle East?
    Mr. Greenway. Well, you bring up, I think, one of the most 
important areas, Chairman, and that is energy cooperation. And 
I think we haven't yet seen the full potential of this.
    And so, while cooperation between parties we have already 
mentioned, chiefly Israel and Egypt in this case, but others 
within the Mediterranean can, I think, offset and replace the 
loss of Russian gas. Some 43 percent of Europe's energy 
requirements were met previously by Russia. That loss has not 
been replaced.
    There isn't yet infrastructure plans in place to offset it 
completely. The United States, Norway, and others I think have 
taken steps, but there is not yet a mid-to long-term plan in 
place. This is where we judge the Abraham Accords countries, 
including Israel, Egypt, and other partners could, in fact, 
offset, if not replace the loss of Russian gas to Europe. And I 
think the U.S. can play a critical role in doing it.
    The plans previously existed but the business model to 
require the infrastructure investment did not until Russia 
invaded Ukraine. And at that point it then becomes perfectly 
reasonable. But it will take time, effort to do. It will be an 
enormous revenue generator for the participant countries. It 
will also, again, strategically align our partners to one 
another and not dependent upon an adversary.
    So, we cannot emphasize the enormous potential of this too 
much, but there is a lot of work to be done.
    Mr. Wilson. Well, it is just exciting to see the offshore 
drilling, the consequence. That could be expanded to pipelines 
to Greece, Bulgaria, Romania, to the Western Balkans, all to 
provide the energy independence for that region of Southeastern 
Europe.
    And so, I yield back.
    And now we have Congresswoman Kathy Manning.
    Ms. Manning. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    And thank you again to our witnesses for sharing your time 
and your expertise.
    So, there are two other countries in the immediate region 
that we have barely mentioned. And Mr. Chairman just mentioned 
Lebanon which, sadly, is on the verge of becoming a failed 
State. We haven't even talked about Syria, which is the source 
of countless problems in the region.
    So, I am wondering is there any way that the Abraham 
Accords countries working together could have any positive 
impact on either of those countries?
    I saw a smile on Ambassador Shapiro's face. I do not know 
if that meant you were hoping someone else would answer the 
question or you would like to take it on?
    Mr. Votel. Well, I think it is an excellent question, 
Congresswoman.
    I think the defense, security and defense cooperation 
between Israel and other countries in the region, particularly 
those that are involved in this, I think does increase the 
opportunity to emplace measures that can have an impact on 
Iran's ability to move their lethal resources closer to Israel.
    That is very indirect right now. But I think when we, when 
we look at some of the initiatives that are being undertaken 
right now by U.S. Central Command with a very excellent 
commander trying to, you know, create a series of sensors, and 
drones, and all backed by artificial intelligence, to really 
understand what is happening in the Gulf, that gives us the 
opportunity to better control the maritime movement of lethal, 
lethal aid.
    The same thing could apply to the air. These things, I 
think are, they are indirect at this point, but they could have 
the opportunity to have an impact on that.
    I think, you know, what is most important I think what I am 
trying to emphasize to you is that showing a united front and 
then demonstrating coherent approaches to security and defense 
in the region can have a--can address that situation and 
particularly with respect to some of the Iranian malign 
influence that plays out in Syria, and affects Israel, and 
others in the region as well.
    Ms. Manning. Thank you.
    So, let me ask this question: what can we be doing in 
Congress to support and foster the expansion of the Abraham 
Accords? You have talked about so many ways these Accords and 
the interaction of these countries is transformative and can be 
even more transformative for the region, what can we in 
Congress be doing to be supportive?
    And I would actually ask each of you to answer that. 
Ambassador Shapiro, would you mind starting?
    Mr. Shapiro. Sure. Thank you, Congresswoman.
    I think, first of all, the establishment of the Abraham 
Accords Caucuses in and of itself demonstrates that this is a 
cause that deserves bipartisan sustained investment and support 
rather than being the province of one party or one 
Administration. And I think that is very, very important.
    The visits that a number of members have already made, and 
Congressman Schneider referenced additional visits that will 
come, are an opportunity to go and talk directly to those 
leaders and people, and explain why it is that the United 
States sees its own interests and the interests of its partners 
served by doing this.
    And then as I also indicated, there are, there is more than 
just the negotiations that the State Department sponsors, more 
than just the security cooperation that the Defense Department 
and the military lead on. Almost every department of the U.S. 
Government has an international affairs program, has something 
to bring to it: things as diverse as USTR's expertise on trade 
negotiations; the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum's ability to 
bring curriculum on Holocaust education; the U.S., the Center 
for Disease Control's ability to share, provide information, 
and networks for sharing about future pandemics. These are just 
a few examples.
    But every Member of Congress sits on a committee and has 
oversight over, has jurisdiction over a department that could 
be encouraged, and maybe even more than encouraged and 
impounded to participate in this. And kind of this whole 
government approach I think would be the right way to think 
about how the Congress can make its biggest contribution.
    Ms. Manning. Wonderful. Mr. Schneider, you have your 
charge.
    And, Mr. Greenway, would you add to that?
    Mr. Greenway. Yes, Congresswoman, happy to.
    It already mentioned energy cooperation in the free trade 
area and, like Ambassador Shapiro, would allow the formation of 
a caucus in both House and Senate. I would say that we, the 
United States, allocates a fair amount of money toward Middle 
East peace more broadly, and has for many decades.
    And I would say no need to look at additional preparations, 
but perhaps ensuring those that currently exist could encompass 
the Abraham Accords. So, we spend a lot of money on supporting 
programs that nominally support peace between Israel and 
Palestine, and Israel and its neighbors, but we do not allocate 
resources toward it. So, perhaps looking at existing 
legislation, modifying it to encompass the Accords so that we 
could encourage and support the actual piece that is manifested 
in front of us
    Second is, I think, providing capabilities to our partners. 
It enables them, one, to defend themselves more appropriately, 
and reduces the burden on us. So, ultimately, I think we need 
to get to a point where we are more comfortable with 
accelerating the provision of capabilities to our partners. And 
it will send exactly the right message to them.
    But I would emphasize that trade, and energy, and the 
economic argument does provide for a strong rationale. If we 
want them to get along, they are going to have to trade with 
each other to the point where they will defend that trade 
relationship.
    Ms. Manning. Thank you.
    Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
    Mr. Wilson. Thank you very much, Congresswoman Manning.
    And I want to thank you for raising, indeed, there are so 
many countries that need to be addressed, and Lebanon, Syria. 
As we are thinking of the tremendous success, the Kingdom of 
Jordan. And then our hopes for the people of Iran, our 
appreciation of the women of Iran. And then West Balkans, when 
you think of countries that have come to life: Albania, North 
Macedonia. And then you go to Serbia, what a great opportunity 
for civility in a region that was unimaginable.
    And so, with that I want to proceed. And our last 
questioner will be, of course, someone extremely important 
because he is the Abraham Accords Co-Chairman Brad Schneider.
    Mr. Schneider. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    And, General Votel, let me go back to what you put in your 
opening remarks about the importance of U.S. leadership, and 
the question I asked earlier, the demonstration of U.S. 
commitment to the region. I can start with you, but I will ask 
the whole panel what should we be doing to demonstrate our 
commitment and leadership in the region?
    And I will give one leading aspect to it, the idea of 
coordinated defense, sharing of information, collaboration 
across systems.
    Mr. Greenway. Thank you, Congressman, or Mr. Chairman.
    These are areas in which we have extraordinary expertise 
within our military and across, across all services. And so, I 
know in helping our partners develop better shared awareness 
systems, you know, to share information among themselves as we 
have been able to do very effectively, I think is one of the 
ways that we can, we can help, help our partners become more 
resilient and more self-reliant in looking after their own 
defense.
    So, you know, sharing our lessons learned, sharing our 
practices, putting our leaders into a place where they can 
advocate for these types of approaches I think are really, are 
really important.
    I also think an area where we could provide some additional 
help is in the area of security cooperation. Candid discussions 
with our partners about the capabilities that they need and 
should be acquiring I think are extraordinarily important. And 
this, I think, has been a longtime challenge in the region. And 
so, this is an area where we can actually demonstrate some 
leadership.
    And then, finally, just the ability for us to bring people 
together, to be a convenor. We do not have to drive the whole 
conversation, but the fact of the matter is in the Middle East 
when the United States speaks it carries weight. And our 
leaders, like the CENTCOM commander, or our various 
Ambassadors, or others, really do have that level of 
credibility that they can bring people together to talk about, 
talk about the difficult challenges.
    So, this idea of a convenor I think is a really important 
way for us to demonstrate our leadership.
    Mr. Schneider. Great. Thank you.
    Mr. Greenway?
    Mr. Greenway. Thank you, Congressman.
    I would say first, it has come up before, that if we do 
not, I think, have some common agreement on how to approach the 
threat from Iran, it is going to be difficult to make progress 
across a number of other fronts, including security 
cooperation.
    We have talked about a number of issues today. But I cannot 
overemphasize the fact that this is the most pressing threat to 
all of them. What happens in the Israel-Palestine conflict 
matters to them, but not nearly to the point in which the 
immediate threat to their very survival coming from Tehran 
today is, and the desperate need for U.S. leadership in the 
response to that threat. That is a huge opportunity.
    And I agree with Ambassador Shapiro that it seems the ship 
has sailed. It is an opportunity, then, for us, I think, to 
stake a claim in partnership with our allies in the region. And 
that would allow us to convene from a position of strength, 
which I think they all and we want.
    Second, I would say our support for Israel is critically 
important during this time. The rest of the region watches us 
incredibly closely. They cannot be more pro-Israel than we are. 
That does not mean unequivocal or without conditions. It does 
mean if there is daylight between the capitals, there will be 
huge daylight between their capitals.
    Second, I would say that building support abroad, which we 
have talked about actually matters a great deal, and adds 
additional leverage and other partners in this expanding and 
supporting the Accords.
    And, last, I would say they always ask this question. We 
ask them to commit resources toward each other and toward the 
region. They ask us what have we committed to the Abraham 
Accords? And the answer to that question is we really haven't 
at all.
    And I think that there is room for us to do it. And I'm not 
saying that we need to find resources. I am saying we could 
look at existing resources and apply them more effectively to 
support the Accords. And that to date has not yet occurred.
    Mr. Schneider. OK, thank you.
    I will give you the last word, Ambassador Shapiro. Before I 
give it to you I do want to go back to a conversation earlier 
where you were asked about two States. And I do not think 
anyone is talking about a two-State solution on the horizon. It 
is not going to be a second State where it is a terrorist 
State. That is a non-starter.
    And as you said, Mr. Greenway, the greatest threat, the 
existential threat is a nuclear Iran. And I agree that the ship 
has sailed on past agreement. We need to make sure that Iran 
understands that we are looking forward and will never allow 
Iran to have a nuclear weapon. But we are also looking at a 
place where we are pursuing peace in the region.
    So Ambassador Shapiro, I give you the last word.
    Mr. Shapiro. Thank you, Congressman.
    I think the narrative that sometimes pervades in the region 
of a U.S. withdrawal, or a U.S. absence, or the U.S. pivoting 
to other regions is rather exaggerated. It is true, of course, 
that three consecutive presidents of very different characters 
and Administrations have all demonstrated different ways. The 
American people are not looking for new major military 
entanglements in the region, but we are still there. CENTCOM is 
still the main convenor and still the main partner for all 
these countries as we are now involved in it.
    I think President Biden made a very courageous decision and 
the right decision to travel to the region last summer, knowing 
he would get some criticism for going and meeting with the 
Saudis, but as a way of indicating to all of these countries 
that we may have had some disagreements, and we may have, at 
times, different views about what the right approach is on a 
given problem, but the United States is committed to that 
partnership, is committed to ensuring that the partners have 
the ability to defend themselves but, also, that we are there 
as an ultimate backstop.
    But then, of course, we also have expectations that they 
will act in ways that are consistent with core U.S. interests 
when it comes to China, when it comes to Russia, when it comes 
to oil markets.
    So, being a good, faithful partner that expects the flow of 
that partnership to go in both directions I think is critically 
important.
    And, finally, I would just add that I do think that when 
you get to moments like the current one where there is a 
deterioration between Israelis and Palestinians, that can be 
destabilizing for Jordan, that can be difficult to Egypt, that 
can be a source of tension between Israel and new partners, and 
prevent progress between Israel and partners that haven't yet 
joined with them.
    And there, too, showing that the United States is invested 
in that, cares, tries to improve the situation long before it 
is possible to actually negotiate it toward a solution so that 
Israelis and Palestinians, but also everyone in that circle, 
broader circle that is affected by those events, sees some U.S. 
commitment and investment trying to improve the situation also 
adds to our leadership capability in the region.
    Mr. Wilson. And, again, thank you, Congressman Brad 
Schneider, for your vision to create the bipartisan Abraham 
Accords Caucus.
    And another point that you just made is so important, and 
that is that it is bipartisan, that there be every effort, any 
effort, every effort that could possibly be made for Iran not 
to achieve nuclear weapons. What a threat that would be to 
world stability. And, so, it is bipartisan truly here in 
support of every effort to block the ability of Iran to have 
nuclear weapons.
    With that, I want to thank the witnesses for their valuable 
testimony and the members for their questions. The members of 
the subcommittee may have some additional questions for the 
witnesses. And we will ask you to respond to those in writing.
    And with this, we are adjourned.
    [Whereupon, at 3:57 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]

                                APPENDIX

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

    STATEMENT FOR THE RECORD SUBMITTED FROM REPRESENTATIVE CONNOLLY

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

            RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

             ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD

[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                 [all]