From containment to trust

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

Egypt and Sudan have an opportunity to emerge from the crisis of the gold miners’ accident with a stronger understanding, if they succeed in combining revealing the truth, getting justice for those affected, and developing cooperation tools. The most effective response to exploiting the accident to strain the relationship is for the two peoples to see joint steps that protect them and confirm that their interests are protected through coordination and mutual respect. There are signs worth building on. Following his meeting with the Egyptian ambassador the day before yesterday, the Governor of the Darfur region, Mona Arko Minawi, called for exchanging investigative information, reassuring the families of the victims, and refusing to generalize accusations among the people. On the same day, the Egyptian Foreign Ministry confirmed the continuation of coordination in strategic files and the interdependence of the security of the two countries. This is a suitable ground for moving to concrete actions. These procedures begin with serious cooperation in the investigation, identifying facts and responsibilities, and announcing verifiable results. Slowness and ambiguity give conflicting narratives longer life. Transparency, along with addressing any proven error, gives families a sense of fairness and helps Egypt protect its position against unproven accusations. The trust we need is built on fairness and clarity of information. This is accompanied by a joint humanitarian response, which includes treating the injured, searching for missing persons, and communicating with families. It is important that sympathy be at the forefront of Egyptian discourse, and that it be accompanied by clarification of procedures. Protecting sovereignty and resources is an inherent right, and providing concern for lives makes the defense of this right more persuasive.

The further step is to activate a permanent communication mechanism between the border, security and justice authorities, which exchanges information, addresses problems before they escalate, and establishes clear arrangements for warning, evacuation, and dealing with violations. Sudan has the responsibility of organizing the activity of its citizens and making them aware of dangerous borders and areas, while coordination allows Egypt to implement the law while reducing risks to civilians and preserving its sovereign jurisdiction.

The relationship also requires regular communication with the public, which provides the press with accurate information and answers to legitimate questions. Every reliable information reduces the space for rumors. Press and media institutions in both countries can expand professional cooperation, verify circulating images and narratives, and reject generalizations and insults. Protecting the dignity of the Egyptian and the Sudanese must be a fixed rule, within the two countries and on the platforms. These steps gain importance in a region where interests and differences are intertwined. The tension between Cairo and Khartoum may tempt parties to use it to exert pressure or change alignments. The two countries can narrow this space through direct consultation, agree to address their differences through their institutions, and protect their relationship from turning into a tool in others’ contradictions. Differences in regional estimates can be managed as the partnership continues. Legal formulas for work, trade, and mining activity can be studied, if legislation and security permit, in a way that preserves the rights of states and workers. Organizing interests reduces the chaos that allows exploitation networks to expand, and gives border communities additional reasons for stability and cooperation.

The success of Egypt and Sudan will be measured by their ability to protect people and prevent the recurrence of accidents, and by what treatment adds to the balance of trust between them. When the citizen feels that the neighboring country is a partner in his security and dignity, the ability of incitement to influence decreases. Then the crisis becomes the beginning of deeper cooperation, and the relationship gains immunity created by just interests and responsible actions.

Quoted from “Al-Masry Al-Youm”.