Egypt and October 7...no concessions and no adventures

Listen to the article. The audio text is automated, generated by an automated system

As if walking in a minefield full of dangers and traps, Egypt dealt with the “Al-Aqsa flood,” which shook the region three years ago, when Hamas launched its surprise attack on Israel, writing a turning point in the process of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, and placing the entire region in the crater of a volcano, the fires of which are still burning to this moment.

Although the Egyptian position regarding this momentous event, and the subsequent barbaric Israeli aggression against our people in Gaza, was widely appreciated by some parties, and criticized and accused by others; It became clear, after this revealing period, that this position was characterized by a high degree of rationality, discipline, and efficiency. Egypt has been able to manage this dangerous crisis with clear ingenuity, as it has proven that it never abandons its principled positions and national commitments on the one hand, and that it does not rush or get involved in policies with uncalculated consequences on the other hand. As for the summary of this position, it can be explained by the phrase: No concessions and no adventures. Egypt could not have been immune from the repercussions of the tragic war that swept Gaza, following October 7, 2023, and the political, security, and humanitarian disasters it brought. By virtue of its neighborhood and history, and because it is the most prominent actor, possessing the keys to regional crossings and balances, Cairo found itself facing a very delicate question: How does it preserve its national security and strategic interests, and remain loyal to its Arab role in supporting the Palestinians, without getting involved in a direct confrontation that threatens its internal stability and regional role?

From the first moment, the Egyptian position was decisive in rejecting any attempts to displace Palestinians from Gaza to Sinai. Cairo did not hesitate to declare that any mass exodus of Palestinians to Egyptian territory would mean liquidating the Palestinian issue from its roots and burying the right of return, which the Egyptians will not accept. I clearly warned that what is happening is not just a war on a specific movement, but rather an attempt to push the civilian population to migrate. With this decisive stance, Egypt placed a red line in front of all parties, and established the image of a state that does not compromise on its principles. Although some voices in Israel, and outside it, tried to promote the option of displacement as a solution to the crisis, the Egyptian refusal has blocked attempts to impose this scenario until the present moment.

Egypt has learned well from the sins of 1967, when hasty and impulsive decisions led to the loss of large areas of territory and the exposure of the home front. This time, despite repeated provocations, Cairo maintained restraint and managed the crisis rationally. It was not drawn into a military confrontation that might take the country and the region to disaster, but at the same time it adhered to its right to protest and warn, assuring Israel that any expansion of the circle of fire might undermine stability. With this approach, Egypt has proven that it has learned the lessons of the past, and that it is able to distinguish between principled solidarity with the Palestinian cause and being drawn into uncalculated steps that put its national interests at stake.

In parallel, Egypt engaged in active diplomacy at the regional and international levels, and sought from the first days to curb escalation and open paths for a political solution, and hosted coordination meetings between Palestinian forces. Later, it entered heavily into mediation negotiations in coordination with Qatar and the United States, and these efforts resulted in humanitarian truces that enabled the entry of aid convoys and the exchange of prisoners. Cairo then repeated its attempts to establish a permanent ceasefire, presenting integrated visions ranging from immediate relief to long-term political solutions, as well as reconstruction plans.

On the humanitarian level, Egypt sought to mitigate the effects of the humanitarian disaster as much as possible. For its part, it kept the Rafah crossing open for the entry of aid, and established shelter camps inside the Strip to ensure that the Palestinians would remain on their land. UN estimates indicate that the vast majority of the aid that entered Gaza crossed from Egyptian territory, which made Egypt bear the brunt of the relief effort. Thus, it proved that it is capable of balancing its humanitarian and national responsibilities and protecting its borders from chaos.

In managing its relationship with Israel during the war, Egypt took a very precise path, represented by a strong political and media discourse exposing crimes and violations, matched by continued security communication and coordination on the borders. Cairo has realized that maintaining balance in this equation gives it a greater degree of influence on the parties and protecting its interests, without losing its position as a solid voice supportive of Gaza.

Some may describe the Egyptian strategy, in this regard, as too “pragmatic,” or that it “missed opportunities to show its national face and restore its legacy of support for the Palestinian cause,” but that would be a form of scheming and traditional bickering in politics. Therefore, the Egyptian decision-maker does not seem to be affected by such positions, because previous historical facts, within the framework of the same issue, were a reason for accusing his predecessors of “recklessness and imprudence,” and the current internal circumstances, especially the economic crisis, do not allow for any adventures or uncalculated actions, which is something that the largest sectors of internal public opinion seem to be well aware of and appreciate.

We do not know the outcome of the Gaza war specifically, and all possibilities still exist in this context, but Egypt’s steadfastness in its current policies, which combine its principled commitments with the guarantee of strategic interests, will remain greatly appreciated.

Quoted from “Al-Masry Al-Youm”