Hey everyone, welcome back to My Weird Prompts. We are coming to you from our usual spot in Jerusalem, and today we are doing something a little bit different. Usually, we wait for our housemate Daniel to send us a voice memo with some wild idea or a deep technical question, but today, Herman and I decided to take the reins. We wanted to dive into a topic that has been on our minds constantly, especially given where we live and the shifts we are seeing in the world right now. It is a beautiful morning here in the city, but you can feel the weight of the geopolitics in the air. We are sitting here in March of two thousand twenty-six, and the map of the Middle East looks nothing like it did even five or six years ago.
Herman Poppleberry here, and I am actually glad we are taking the initiative on this one. It is a topic that sits at the intersection of history, high-stakes diplomacy, and the future of the Israeli economy. We are talking about the Abraham Accords. It has been over five years since those initial ceremonies on the White House lawn in September of two thousand twenty, and yet, the ripples are still moving through the region in ways that most people do not fully appreciate. If you had told someone in two thousand fifteen that we would have direct flights to Dubai and joint naval exercises with Bahrain, they would have called you a delusional optimist. But here we are, and the "weird prompt" today is really about whether this is just a temporary alignment or a permanent tectonic shift.
It is true. And I think there is a tendency to treat the accords as a settled piece of history, like a finished chapter. But if you look at the geopolitics of two thousand twenty-six, it feels more like the preface to a much larger book. We want to look at what it actually took to get those deals over the finish line, why the old way of doing things failed for so long, and where we go from here. Specifically, we want to look at the big question of Saudi Arabia and whether the Arab world might eventually replace Europe as Israel’s primary trading partner. That is the part that really gets people talking in the cafes here in Jerusalem—the idea that our economic future might lie to the East and the South rather than the West.
That is the real kicker, Corn. The economic shift is just as important as the security shift. But before we get to the future, we have to understand the paradigm shift that made two thousand twenty possible. For decades, the entire world’s diplomatic core—especially the United States State Department—operated under what people called the Palestinian Veto. The idea was that no Arab state would ever, under any circumstances, normalize relations with Israel until the Palestinian conflict was fully resolved to the satisfaction of the leadership in Ramallah. It was the "linkage theory," and it was treated as an absolute law of nature by people like John Kerry and the European foreign ministries.
Right, it was this absolute wall. And it led to what we discussed way back in episode four hundred thirty when we talked about those ghost consulates in Jerusalem. You had this diplomatic limbo where the world refused to acknowledge the reality on the ground because they were waiting for a permission slip that was never going to be signed. The logic was that the "Arab Street" would rise up in flames if any leader dared to shake hands with an Israeli Prime Minister. It turned the entire region into a hostage situation where the most radical elements had the final say over everyone else's progress.
And what the Trump administration did—and specifically the team led by Jared Kushner and Avi Berkowitz—was to challenge that fundamental assumption. They realized that the interests of the Gulf states had diverged from the interests of the Palestinian leadership. The UAE, Bahrain, and later Morocco and Sudan, were looking at a rising, aggressive Iran and a changing global economy, and they realized that holding their own national interests hostage to a decades-old veto was no longer sustainable. They moved from a "center-out" approach to an "outside-in" strategy. They basically said, if we cannot solve the heart of the problem right now, let's build a circle of peace around it and let the prosperity pull the rest of the region forward.
It was a classic outside-in strategy. Instead of trying to fix the center and hoping the region followed, they fixed the regional relationships to create a new center of gravity. I remember at the time, people in the foreign policy establishment were mocking it. They said it would never work. They said you could not bypass the old path. They literally used the word "impossible." But then, you see the images of the planes landing in Tel Aviv with the Emirati flags, and suddenly, the world changed overnight. It was a psychological breakthrough as much as a diplomatic one. It proved that the "Arab Street" was actually more interested in jobs, technology, and security than in perpetual grievance.
It really did. And we should talk about what it actually took to get those deals over the table. It was not just about shared interests; it was about trust and a very specific kind of American leadership. The Trump administration offered a clear choice. They showed that they would stand by their allies and take a hard line against Iran. When the United States moved its embassy to Jerusalem and implemented the maximum pressure campaign on Tehran, it sent a signal to the Gulf states. It told them that the United States was no longer trying to play both sides or manage a decline. It was an invitation to join a winning coalition. You have to remember the context of the JCPOA—the Iran nuclear deal—which many of these Arab states saw as a betrayal. They felt the United States was pivoting away from them, and the Abraham Accords were the pivot back.
It is fascinating because it required the Arab states to make a very cold, calculated assessment of their own survival. If you are the United Arab Emirates, you are a tiny, incredibly wealthy nation sitting right across the water from a regime that wants to export its revolution and destabilize every monarchy in the region. Israel is the only regional power with the intelligence capabilities, the military hardware, and the sheer will to stand up to that threat. It is the ultimate marriage of convenience that turned into a marriage of genuine cooperation. I think about the "Peace to Prosperity" workshop in Bahrain in two thousand nineteen. Everyone laughed at it because it focused on economics instead of borders, but that was the blueprint. It was about showing the tangible benefits of peace.
And let us not forget the technology aspect. This is where the nerdy side of me gets really excited. The Abraham Accords were not just a peace treaty; they were a technology transfer agreement. The UAE and Bahrain wanted access to Israeli cyber security, agricultural tech, and water desalination. They are building cities in the desert while the world is talking about climate change and resource scarcity. Israel is the world leader in making the desert bloom. That is a much more compelling offer than anything the old diplomatic guard was bringing to the table. We are talking about joint ventures in space exploration, Corn! The UAE's Hope probe and Israel's Beresheet project—those teams are talking to each other now. In two thousand twenty-five, we saw the first joint Israeli-Emirati climate research center open in the Negev. That is the kind of stuff that builds a foundation that is hard to tear down.
So, if the foundation is so strong, why hasn't it expanded faster? We have been hearing about Saudi Arabia being next for years. We are here in March of two thousand twenty-six, and while the cooperation is deeper than ever, we still do not have that formal ceremony in Riyadh. We have seen the "near misses" in the news, the rumors of secret flights, and the high-level meetings in Neom. What is holding them back? Is it just the old guard in the royal family, or is there something deeper?
It is the big prize, Corn. Saudi Arabia is the custodian of the two holy mosques. Their position in the Islamic world is vastly more complicated than that of the UAE or Morocco. For King Salman and Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, normalization with Israel is not just a policy shift; it is a theological and historical pivot point. They have to move more slowly because they are bringing the entire Sunni world along with them. If the Saudis move, the "Palestinian Veto" isn't just bypassed; it is officially buried forever. They are also looking for a very specific price from Washington. They want a formal defense treaty, similar to what Japan or South Korea has, and they want help with a civilian nuclear program. Those are massive asks that create a lot of friction in the United States Congress.
But we know they are cooperating, right? I mean, we covered this in episode six hundred ninety-six when we talked about the secret air defense alliance. When Iran launched those massive drone and missile attacks in twenty-twenty-four and twenty-twenty-five, it was not just Israel and the United States defending the skies. There were reports of data sharing and even interceptions involving Arab partners. It is the Middle East Air Defense alliance, or MEAD. It is basically a regional version of NATO but focused on integrated radar and missile defense. Even without a piece of paper, the Saudis are part of that architecture because they have to be. Their oil facilities at Abqaiq are still in the crosshairs of Iranian proxies.
That is the open secret of the Middle East. The security architecture is already there. The radar systems are linked. The intelligence is flowing. In many ways, the formal piece of paper is the last step, not the first. But the obstacles are real. You have the domestic pressure within the Arab world, which is still very sensitive to the Palestinian issue, especially when there is active conflict. We saw how the escalations in late twenty-twenty-three and throughout twenty-twenty-four put a temporary freeze on the public-facing side of the accords. The leaders in Riyadh and Abu Dhabi have to manage their public opinion. They cannot look like they are abandoning the Palestinians even if they are frustrated with the Palestinian leadership.
It is also about what the Saudis want from the United States in exchange. They have been asking for a formal defense treaty and help with a civilian nuclear program. Those are big asks that require a lot of political capital in Washington. But I think the logic of the Iranian threat is eventually going to override those hurdles. Every time Iran or its proxies like the Houthis or Hezbollah take a shot, they are effectively driving Israel and the Saudis closer together. It is a classic case of your enemy's enemy being your indispensable partner. And let's be honest, the Houthis' disruption of the Red Sea shipping lanes in twenty-twenty-four was a massive wake-up call. It showed that the entire global economy can be held hostage by a group of rebels with Iranian drones. That pushed the "Land Bridge" project from a dream to a necessity.
And this leads us to that second-order effect you mentioned earlier. If we get to a point where Saudi Arabia formally joins the accords, we are looking at a regional bloc that controls the most important transit points for global energy and trade. This brings us to the question: could the Arab and Gulf states become a more important trading partner for Israel than Europe? This is the "strategic pivot" we modeled in episode eight hundred sixty-one. Historically, Europe has been our biggest market, but the relationship is getting... well, it is getting weird, Corn.
That is such a provocative thought because, historically, Europe has been Israel's biggest market. But the relationship with Europe is becoming increasingly fraught. We see it every day—the labeling of products, the threats of sanctions, the constant diplomatic friction in the United Nations. It feels like Europe is moving toward a more hostile stance, driven by their own domestic demographics and a very different worldview. There is a sense here that Europe wants to lecture us, while the Gulf wants to build with us. That is a massive psychological difference for an Israeli business owner or a tech founder.
You are hitting on something very deep there, Corn. If you look at the numbers, the growth potential in the East and the Gulf is staggering. Europe is a stagnant economy in many ways. It is aging, it is heavily regulated, and it is politically volatile in a way that is increasingly unfriendly to Israel. Meanwhile, the Gulf states are sitting on trillions of dollars in sovereign wealth funds and they are desperate to diversify their economies away from oil. They have Vision twenty-thirty in Saudi Arabia, and they have similar blueprints in Qatar and the UAE. They need what Israel has: innovation, rapid R and D, and a "startup nation" mentality. By the end of twenty-twenty-five, trade between Israel and the UAE alone topped five billion dollars. That is a drop in the bucket compared to the EU, but the growth rate is exponential.
And they do not lecture. That is the huge cultural difference, isn't it? When an Israeli tech company goes to Dubai or Riyadh, the conversation is about return on investment, technical specifications, and delivery timelines. It is not about the political situation in Judea and Samaria. There is a pragmatic, business-first culture in the Gulf that aligns much better with the Israeli spirit than the bureaucratic and often moralizing approach we see from Brussels. It is about mutual respect for sovereignty. The Gulf monarchs understand that every country has its own internal challenges, and they do not believe that trade should be held hostage to those challenges.
It is a massive shift. Think about the logistics. We are already seeing the development of the land bridge—the idea of moving goods by truck and rail from the port of Haifa through Jordan and Saudi Arabia to the Emirates. This bypasses the Red Sea and the Suez Canal, which we have seen can be easily disrupted by regional conflict or even a stuck container ship. If Israel becomes the Mediterranean gateway for the Gulf, the economic gravity of this country shifts entirely. We are talking about the India-Middle East-Europe Economic Corridor, or IMEC. That was announced back in twenty-twenty-three, and in twenty-twenty-six, we are seeing the actual tracks being laid. It turns Israel from an "island" into a "bridge."
It changes the whole map. For seventy-five years, Israel was an island. We had no land trade with our neighbors. Everything came and went by sea or air to the West. Now, suddenly, we are looking at the possibility of being the central hub of a new Silk Road. If you are a manufacturer in India or a logistics firm in Dubai, Israel is the most logical, stable, and high-tech path to the European market—if Europe even remains the primary destination. But what if the destination is the region itself? What if the "Middle East" becomes its own self-sustaining economic ecosystem?
That is the thing. Maybe the destination is each other. Israel has the human capital and the intellectual property. The Gulf has the capital and the energy. If you combine those, you have a self-sustaining economic engine that does not need to beg for approval from the European Union. We talked about this in episode four hundred seventy-four, the price of autonomy. To be truly independent, a nation needs diverse partnerships. Relying too heavily on a Europe that seems to be falling out of love with the Jewish state is a strategic risk. The Gulf states are not going to boycott Israeli med-tech because of a vote in the UN. They want the best technology to keep their citizens healthy and their economies running.
So, let us look at the friction points again. If the economic and security logic is so perfect, what could derail this? We have seen how quickly things can flare up. The conflict that started in late twenty-three and moved through twenty-four certainly slowed things down. It forced the Arab leaders to look at their own streets. Do you think the Abraham Accords are "conflict-proof"? Or are we one major escalation away from seeing the ambassadors recalled and the flights canceled?
I do not think anything is entirely conflict-proof, but I think they are conflict-resistant in a way that previous peace treaties were not. Look at Egypt and Jordan. Those are "cold" peaces. They are government-to-government, but there is very little people-to-people or business-to-business interaction. The Abraham Accords are different. Within months of the signing, you had hundreds of thousands of Israeli tourists in Dubai. You had joint ventures in healthcare and space exploration. When people's livelihoods and future prosperity are tied together, the cost of breaking that bond becomes much higher. Even during the height of the fighting in twenty-twenty-four, the UAE did not break ties. They criticized Israel's actions, yes, but they kept the diplomatic and economic channels open. That is a huge signal.
That is a great point. It is the difference between a treaty signed in a tent and a network built in a boardroom. The network is much harder to tear down. But I want to go back to the Saudi piece. If Saudi Arabia remains the "white whale" of this process, how does the current American political landscape affect it? We are in an election year in the United States. How does that play into the timing? We know the Saudis are watching the polls very closely.
It is everything. The Saudis are very sophisticated observers of American politics. They know that a Trump victory would likely lead to a much more aggressive push for a deal, probably with more favorable terms for Riyadh in terms of security guarantees. On the other hand, the current administration is desperate for a big foreign policy win to show that they can lead in the Middle East. So, the Saudis are in a position where they can play both sides of the aisle to get the best possible deal. But they also know that the window of opportunity is not infinite. Iran is not getting any less dangerous. By some estimates, Tehran is now closer to a nuclear breakout than ever before. That reality forces everyone's hand.
And that is the ticking clock. Iran’s nuclear program is the shadow hanging over this entire discussion. If Iran crosses that threshold, the entire region is forced into a new reality. At that point, a formal alliance between Israel and the Sunni states becomes a matter of absolute survival, not just a strategic preference. It is interesting how the most radical, anti-Israel regime in the world has done more to facilitate Arab-Israeli peace than any Nobel Prize-winning diplomat ever did. It is the ultimate irony of history. The Mullahs in Tehran wanted to destroy Israel, but they ended up creating the conditions for its regional integration.
It is the irony of history. The common threat creates a common destiny. But I want to push back a little on the idea that it is only about Iran. Even if the Iranian regime disappeared tomorrow, the economic logic of the Abraham Accords would still hold. The world is moving toward a post-carbon economy. The Gulf states know they have twenty, maybe thirty years to build a new foundation. They look at Israel and they see a mirror of what they want to become—a high-tech, resilient, innovative society that punches far above its weight. They want to learn how we do it. They want the "secret sauce" of Israeli innovation. That is a long-term interest that outlasts any specific regime in Tehran.
I love that perspective. It turns Israel from a "problem to be managed" into a "model to be emulated." That is a massive psychological shift for the region. For decades, the narrative was that Israel was an alien entity, a colonial vestige that would eventually be rejected by the Middle Eastern body. Now, the leaders of the most influential Arab nations are saying, actually, we want to learn from them. We want to trade with them. We want to build the future with them. It is the normalization of the heart, not just the normalization of the paperwork. I think about the Abrahamic Family House in Abu Dhabi—a mosque, a church, and a synagogue all in one complex. That is a powerful symbol of a new Middle East.
It is the end of the nineteen sixty-seven Khartoum Resolution. Remember the "Three Nos"? No peace with Israel, no recognition of Israel, no negotiations with Israel. That was the consensus for half a century. The Abraham Accords turned those three nos into three yeses. And once you break that seal, you cannot really put the genie back in the bottle. Even when things get tense, the underlying reality has changed. The younger generation in the Gulf—the people under thirty who make up the majority of the population—they do not remember nineteen sixty-seven. They do not even remember nineteen seventy-three. They want to be part of the global economy, and they see Israel as a partner in that, not an obstacle.
So, let's talk about the European side of this again. If Israel does pivot toward the Gulf and Asia, what does that actually look like for the average Israeli? Does it mean we stop caring about what happens in London or Paris or Berlin? Does it mean the Eurovision Song Contest becomes less important than a tech conference in Riyadh?
Not entirely. Europe will always be a major trade partner because of geographic proximity and historical ties. But it means we stop being dependent on them. It means when a European government threatens to boycott products from the Golan Heights, we can say, okay, we will just sell more to India or the Philippines or the UAE. It gives Israel diplomatic leverage that it has never had in its entire history. For the first time, we are not a client state looking for a protector; we are a regional power with a diversified portfolio of allies. It changes the power dynamic in every negotiation. We are no longer the "lonely nation" that the poets used to write about.
It is a more mature version of Zionism, in a way. It is the realization of the dream of being a "nation among nations," but on our own terms. We are not asking for permission to exist anymore. We are providing value that makes our existence indispensable to our neighbors. It is the shift from "please like us" to "you need us." And honestly, that is a much healthier place for a country to be. It is about being an asset, not a liability.
That is the key word: value. The old diplomacy was about concessions. What can Israel give up to get a temporary reprieve from hostility? The new diplomacy is about value creation. What can we build together that makes us both stronger? That is a much more stable foundation for peace. And it is why I am ultimately optimistic about the expansion of the accords. Whether it is Saudi Arabia this year or next, or Indonesia, or Oman—the direction of travel is clear. The old guard's walls are crumbling, and a new Middle East is being built on the ruins. We are seeing it in the joint energy projects, the shared water grids, and the integrated logistics networks.
It is a fascinating time to be living here. You can almost feel the air changing. You see the tourists from countries we never thought we would see here, and you hear about the business deals that would have been science fiction ten years ago. It makes you realize how much of our "reality" is just a set of assumptions that someone finally had the courage to challenge. It takes a certain kind of "weirdness" to look at a fifty-year-old conflict and say, "I think we can just go around it."
And that is a lesson that applies far beyond geopolitics. It is about looking at the data, ignoring the consensus of the "experts" who have been wrong for forty years, and having the vision to see the world as it actually is, not as the textbooks say it should be. The Abraham Accords are a triumph of realism over romanticism, and that is why they are working. They do not ask anyone to stop being who they are; they just ask them to be more prosperous together. It is a very grounded, very human approach to peace.
I think that is a perfect place to start wrapping this up. We have covered the history, the shift from the Palestinian veto to the outside-in strategy, the looming presence of Iran as a catalyst, and the massive economic potential of a Gulf-Israel trading bloc. It is a lot to take in, but it really feels like we are watching a new era of history being written in real-time. We are moving from the "era of conflict" to the "era of integration." It is not going to be a straight line, and there will be setbacks, but the momentum is undeniable.
It really does. And for our listeners who want to dive deeper into some of the specific angles we mentioned, I highly recommend checking out episode six hundred ninety-six on the air defense alliance and episode eight hundred sixty-one on the strategic pivot. They provide a lot of the technical and modeling context for what we discussed today. We have some great charts and data visualizations on the website that show the trade growth and the radar coverage maps we talked about.
Definitely. And hey, before we go, we have a small favor to ask. We have been doing this show for a long time—over nine hundred episodes now—and the community that has grown around it is incredible. If you are enjoying these deep dives and the brotherly banter, please take a moment to leave us a review on your podcast app or on Spotify. It genuinely helps other people find the show and keeps us motivated to keep digging into these "weird prompts." We are getting close to that one thousandth episode milestone, and we want to get there with as many of you as possible.
Yeah, it makes a huge difference. We read all of them, and we really appreciate the feedback. Also, if you want to see the archive or get in touch, head over to myweirdprompts.com. We have the full RSS feed there and a contact form if you have a topic you want us to tackle—even if you are not Daniel. We love the listener prompts, especially the ones that challenge our assumptions about how the world works.
We might just pick your prompt for a future episode. Thanks for joining us today for this look at the Abraham Accords and the future of the Middle East. It is a complex story, but it is one that gives me a lot of hope for the region we call home. It is nice to talk about something that feels like it is moving in the right direction for once.
Same here, Corn. It is a privilege to watch it unfold from right here in Jerusalem. It makes the history feel very alive.
Alright, that is it for today. This has been My Weird Prompts.
Until next time, stay curious.
Take care, everyone.
One more thing before we sign off completely. We should probably mention that while we are talking about these grand strategic shifts, the day-to-day reality for people on the ground still matters. The economic integration we are talking about isn't just about billionaires and sovereign wealth funds. It is about the small business owner in Haifa being able to ship to a customer in Dubai without three months of red tape. It is about the tech developer in Tel Aviv collaborating with a researcher in Abu Dhabi. It is the human connections that make the peace "sticky."
That is a great point, Herman. The macro-level stuff is exciting, but the micro-level is where the culture actually changes. When you have thousands of individual interactions happening every day, that is how you erode the decades of propaganda and hostility. It is hard to hate someone when you are trying to debug a piece of code with them or negotiate a shipping rate. We are seeing a new class of "Abrahamic entrepreneurs" who do not even think twice about crossing these borders. They just see opportunity.
It is the "commercial peace" theory in action. And while it is not a silver bullet—history has shown us that trade doesn't always prevent war—it certainly makes the alternative much less attractive. In the Middle East, where the alternatives have been so bleak for so long, that is a massive step forward. We are building a "cost of conflict" that is becoming too high for anyone to want to pay.
It really is. I think about the land bridge again. Imagine a train running from Haifa to the Gulf. That isn't just a logistics project; it is a physical link that binds the region together in a way that can't be ignored by future politicians. It creates a "path dependency" toward cooperation. Once those tracks are in the ground, the logic of using them is overwhelming.
I love that term. Path dependency. Once you lay the tracks, the train tends to follow them. And right now, we are laying a lot of tracks. It is going to be very interesting to see where they lead in the next five to ten years. We might look back at two thousand twenty-six as the year the "New Middle East" finally became the "Normal Middle East."
Well, we will be here to talk about it. Thanks again for listening, everyone. We really appreciate your time and your curiosity.
Thanks for sticking with us. This has been a great discussion. I am going to go look at some more trade data now.
Of course you are. We will see you in the next one.
Goodbye from Jerusalem.
It is funny, Herman, looking back at the early days of this podcast, I don't think we ever imagined we would be talking about an Israeli-Saudi alliance as a "when," not an "if." It just goes to show how fast things can change when the right conditions are met. I remember when we were doing episode fifty and we were still talking about the "stagnation" of the region.
It really does. It is a reminder that history is not a straight line. It is a series of punctuations. And the Abraham Accords were a massive punctuation mark. We are just living in the sentences that follow. The key is to keep writing those sentences with intention.
Well said. Alright, let's actually let them go now. I can hear the traffic picking up outside.
Fair enough.
Goodbye!
See ya!
You know, I was just thinking about that point you made about Europe. If we really do see a significant shift in trade, how does that affect the domestic politics in Israel? Does it move the country in a more conservative direction because we feel less pressure to conform to European social and political norms? Or does it make us more cosmopolitan because we are dealing with so many different cultures?
That is a deep question, Corn. I think the answer is yes to both. For a long time, the Israeli elite looked to Europe for validation. They wanted to be seen as "part of the West" in a very specific, liberal-democratic sense. But if our primary partners are increasingly in the Gulf and Asia—places that have very different ideas about national identity, religion, and the role of the state—it might give Israelis more confidence to embrace their own unique identity without feeling the need to apologize for it. It might lead to a more "authentic" Israeli culture that is less of a carbon copy of the West.
It is like we are finally moving out of our parents' house and realizing we don't have to do everything the way they did. We can make our own friends and set our own rules. It is a form of national maturity. We can be a democracy and a Jewish state and a Middle Eastern power all at the same time, without having to balance those things to please a bureaucrat in Brussels.
It is the sovereignty of the mind. And that might be the most important part of the Abraham Accords in the long run. It is not just about peace with our neighbors; it is about peace with ourselves and our place in this region. We are finally admitting that we are part of the Middle East, and the Middle East is finally admitting that we belong here.
Wow. We really are going deep today. But I think we should probably save that for episode nine hundred thirteen. That sounds like a whole other hour of conversation.
Good idea. Let's leave them with that thought. The sovereignty of the mind.
Alright, for real this time. Thanks for listening to My Weird Prompts.
Check out the website at myweirdprompts.com for all the show notes and the archive.
And don't forget that review! It really does help.
Bye everyone!
Talk to you soon.
You know, Corn, I can't help but think about how Daniel would have reacted to this topic. He probably would have asked something like, "Can we use AI to optimize the shipping routes through the Saudi desert to avoid sandstorms?" He always finds the most granular technical angle.
Oh, absolutely. He would have wanted to know the exact latency of a fiber optic cable running alongside that land bridge and whether it could be used for high-frequency trading between the Dubai and Tel Aviv stock exchanges. He would have turned this into a conversation about data packets.
And he would have been right to ask! That is the next frontier. Digital infrastructure is just as important as physical infrastructure. The "Digital Abraham Accords" are already happening in the background. We are seeing cloud computing centers being built that serve the whole region.
Maybe we will get him to send us a prompt on that next week. I would love to hear his take on the "Silicon Wadi" meeting the "Silicon Oasis."
I hope so. I miss his weird questions. They always push us into corners we didn't expect.
Me too. But it was good to stretch our own wings today. It felt good to tackle the big picture.
Definitely. Alright, I am going to go find some coffee. I think I have talked enough for one morning.
I will join you. There is that new place that just opened that serves Emirati-style coffee. Seems appropriate.
Perfect. See you guys!
This has been My Weird Prompts, a human-AI collaboration.
Hosted by the Poppleberry brothers.
See you next time.
Goodbye!
