“Sharm el-Sheikh and the Shadows of History” by Muhammad Mohsin Iqbal
History, when it repeats itself, does so with painful consistency. The recent Sharm el-Sheikh peace agreement between Israel and Palestine, celebrated as a diplomatic milestone, has stirred more unease than hope. The presence of world leaders, including the U.S. President, gave the event international weight—but the empty seat of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu cast a long shadow. In diplomacy, gestures often matter more than words, and an absent leader can speak louder than any signed accord.
To understand this agreement, we must revisit history’s corridors. From Camp David to Oslo, from Wye River to Annapolis, every previous peace accord began with applause and ended in disillusionment. Each promised reconciliation but was undone by violence, mistrust, and imbalance. The peace of Sharm el-Sheikh risks joining that tragic tradition—a verse in the long poem of broken promises.
The central question endures: what enforces peace when trust is absent? Signatures alone cannot anchor stability. Without mutual respect and credible enforcement, agreements crumble at the first political storm. The world can convene urgent meetings and issue statements, but history shows that resolutions without accountability are hollow gestures. True peace demands more than ink; it requires integrity.
The presence of global powers at the signing adds diplomatic legitimacy—but moral legitimacy arises only from sincerity and justice. No treaty can endure if one party continues to occupy, oppress, or provoke. The imbalance of power remains the conflict’s core flaw. The stronger side negotiates from control; the weaker from necessity. Such asymmetry makes peace not a partnership but a concession. Without equality of intent and recognition of mutual suffering, peace remains an illusion.
The absence of Netanyahu raises questions. Was it political calculation—or a sign of Israel’s reluctance to shoulder peace’s moral burden? Symbolically, it reflects a familiar hesitation to commit to genuine reconciliation. True peace requires courage: to surrender privileges of power, to dismantle structures of occupation, and to extend humanity beyond fear.
History reminds us that peace without justice is only a pause. The Palestinian struggle is about more than borders—it’s about dignity and survival. Agreements that ignore these truths are temporary truces. Similarly, frameworks that hold one side accountable while excusing the other cannot last. When peace is imposed, not nurtured, it withers.
Philosophically, peace is a process, not an event. It needs transformation of hearts, not just policies. The children of Gaza and Tel Aviv deserve to inherit possibility, not pain. But such transformation cannot be legislated—it must be cultivated through fairness, empathy, and humility.
Academically, the problem lies in asymmetrical negotiations and weak enforcement. Without credible guarantors, compliance falters. When Israel expands settlements or launches strikes in defiance of accords, the global response rarely goes beyond “deep concern.” When extremist factions retaliate, they too erode peace. The failure, then, is not just political—it is moral. The world’s selective outrage and silence have nurtured the decay of accountability.
Peace, in moral terms, demands sacrifice from both sides. Israel must see beyond its walls; Palestine must rise above despair. And the world must uphold justice through sustained action, not symbolic sympathy. Guarantees must live in enforcement, not rhetoric.
As the ink dries on another Sharm el-Sheikh accord, the world watches—half hopeful, half doubtful. If history’s lessons have been learned, perhaps this time peace will endure—not because it was signed in grandeur, but because it will be honored in good faith. Otherwise, it will remain another echo in the archives of unfulfilled promises—a reminder that in the quest for peace, words are many but courage is rare.
Muhammad Mohsin Iqbal serves as the Director General (Research) at the National Assembly Secretariat, Parliament House, Islamabad. With extensive experience in legislative research and policy analysis, he brings a deep understanding of South Asian politics, Indo-Pak relations, and information warfare. His writings critically examine regional conflicts, propaganda narratives, and leadership dynamics, with a focus on promoting peace, stability, and cooperation in South Asia.
