Egypt's Flirtation With the Syrian Regime
20 November 2016
By Abdulrahman Al-Rashed
Not many people are interested in the official statements made by the Egyptian
Foreign Minister Sameh Shoukry that some portrayed as being biased towards
Bashar Al-Assad's regime. Neither did they stir up sensitivity in some Gulf
countries as some people expected them to. Why?
What is the impact of the statements? At a time when the Syrian sky is
congested with dozens of Russian and US fighter jets, and there are thousands
of troops and Iranian mercenaries on its soil, these statements add nothing at
all.
The truth is that Egypt chose early on to stay away from the Syrian crisis
since it began five years ago because it was busy with its revolution and its
aftermath. Because it does not agree with the policy of its allies in Syria,
it does not lead the political process, fund the opposition or support the
regime. It allows some opposition figures to enter and prevents the entry of
others, and it uses flexible and diplomatic language.
Under the rule of three regimes in five years, Cairo has announced its
impartiality on various occasions, and this has repeatedly been interpreted as
bias towards the Assad regime. This has happened since the military government
was established after the Egyptian revolution, during the Muslim Brotherhood's
period in office and now in President Abdel Fattah El-Sisi's presidency.
Perhaps the most dangerous stance was when the president at the time Mohamed
Morsi hosted the then President of Iran Ahmadinejad in early 2013. When
Ahmadinejad visited Cairo, he became the first Iranian president since the
Islamic revolution to set foot on Egyptian soil. Even this move was ignored by
the Gulf governments as they were aware that the Muslim Brotherhood's
relationship with the Iranians in Egypt and Gaza was deep rooted. Mohamed
Morsi continued to resist Saudi and Qatari pressure, and refused to take a
hostile attitude towards Assad, an ally of Tehran, until June 2013, i.e.
eighteen days before the protests that demanded that he be ousted took place.
He took a stance against Damascus when he attended a conference in solidarity
with Syria, but it was too late.
This stance was unusual because the Syrian Muslim Brotherhood does not see eye
to eye with the Muslim Brotherhood of Egypt or Gaza as a result of the split
on Iran. The deputy leader of the Muslim Brotherhood of Syria Mohammad Farouk
Tayfour said that he refused the association of his movement with theirs by
saying ''We're not obliged to adopt the Brothers' approach in Egypt and
Palestine. We're in a violent conflict with the Iranians.''
Only the former Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak's policies were consistently
stern against the regimes in Tehran and Damascus over a period of nearly
thirty years. Now it appears that Cairo prefers to reduce its regional role
and has repeatedly said that it wishes that the wars and chaos in the region
would dwindle. However, this remains a romantic wish.
The civil war in Libya is a source of constant danger for Egypt and has cost
the treasury billions of dollars. Egypt could have considered Libya as a
security issue, which it is, and got involved in imposing a military solution
supported by a central authority. Such a move would have obstructed
interfering parties and would have made Egypt an important player in the
Middle East and for European security. However, we understand the desire of
the Egyptian leadership to move away from crises and its desire to focus on
its internal situation.
Al Rashed is the general manager of Al -Arabiya television. He is also the
former editor-in-chief of Asharq Al- Awsat, and the leading Arabic weekly
magazine, Al Majalla. He is also a senior Columnist in the daily newspapers of
Al Madina and Al Bilad. He is a US post-graduate degree in mass
communications. He has been a guest on many TV current affairs programs. He is
currently based in Dubai.
©
EsinIslam.Com
Add Comments