Egypt’s Calculated Stance on Gaza 

By Arnold Mutunga

As the world watches the Gaza-Israel conflict with growing alarm, Egypt finds itself in a complex and increasingly precarious position. The country, which shares a border with Gaza and has historically played a key role in mediating conflicts in the region, is now facing criticism for its cautious and, at times, contradictory approach. Egypt’s actions, and its significant inactions, reflect a deeply strategic calculus that is fraught with risks, both for the region and for Cairo’s standing on the global stage. 

Egypt maintains a critical peace treaty with Israel, supported by U.S. military aid, which limits its ability to fully back the Palestinian cause. Egypt’s government also sees Hamas, an offshoot of the Muslim Brotherhood, as a domestic threat, further complicating its stance. These factors make it difficult for Cairo to support Palestine, despite domestic and regional pressure.

Egypt’s Strategic Calculations: A Balancing Act

Egypt’s response to the current conflict has been marked by a series of carefully calculated moves designed to balance its security concerns, regional influence, and international obligations. Central to Egypt’s strategy has been its role as a mediator, a position it has carefully cultivated over decades. This role allows Egypt to maintain its status as a key regional power while also fulfilling its commitments under the 1979 peace treaty with Israel, which remains a cornerstone of its foreign policy.

However, Egypt’s mediation efforts have been criticized for being more about maintaining the status quo than achieving lasting peace. Critics argue that Egypt’s primary concern is preserving its strategic interests—particularly its peace treaty with Israel and its relationship with the U.S.—rather than addressing the root causes of the conflict or pushing for meaningful Palestinian autonomy, as evidenced by the ​United States Institute of Peace, Doha Institute, and MEMRI. 

While Cairo has successfully brokered temporary ceasefires, these efforts have often been seen as stopgap measures that fail to address the deeper issues. For instance, during the 2021 conflict between Israel and Hamas, Egypt brokered a ceasefire that halted the immediate violence but did little to tackle the root causes of the conflict, such as Gaza’s ongoing blockade and the broader Israeli-Palestinian territorial disputes. These ceasefires provide momentary relief but fail to resolve the underlying tensions, leading to repeated flare-ups of violence. 

The Rafah Crossing: A Humanitarian Chokehold?

The Rafah crossing between Egypt and Gaza has long been a critical lifeline for the Palestinian population, but it is also emblematic of Egypt’s fraught relationship with Hamas and broader Palestinian dynamics. Egypt has kept tight controls on the crossing, citing security concerns. The Egyptian government fears that opening the border too widely could allow militants, particularly those aligned with Hamas or other extremist groups, to infiltrate Egypt. This fear stems from the belief that Palestinian refugees, desperate and radicalized by years of conflict, could turn to militancy, particularly in the already volatile Sinai Peninsula, where Egypt is battling insurgencies.

The relationship between Egypt and Hamas is another key factor. Egypt views Hamas, the governing authority in Gaza, as an offshoot of the Muslim Brotherhood, a group that the Egyptian government has classified as a terrorist organization. Under President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi, Egypt has cracked down heavily on the Brotherhood, which it sees as an existential threat to its regime. This antagonism towards Hamas complicates Egypt’s willingness to fully engage with Gaza, despite its public support for the Palestinian cause.

Beyond security concerns, Egypt’s foreign relations play a crucial role in its approach. Egypt’s peace treaty with Israel, backed by substantial U.S. military aid, is a cornerstone of its foreign policy. This aid, along with Egypt’s broader desire to maintain good relations with Western powers like the U.S. and Britain, is crucial for its economy—especially for tourism and access to NATO-grade military equipment. These strategic relationships often take precedence over direct intervention in Gaza, with Egypt cautious about doing anything that could jeopardize this delicate balance.

While Egypt has allowed limited humanitarian aid through Rafah, its response has been criticized as inadequate. Cairo’s reluctance to fully open the border has made it difficult for aid to reach Gaza on time, forcing the U.S. and other international actors to look for alternative methods. The U.S. attempted to build a dock in Palestine to facilitate aid, but that initiative failed, largely because it bypassed the more direct and logistically feasible route through Egypt. The fact that aid delivery remains inconsistent highlights Cairo’s cautious strategy of limiting involvement while safeguarding its interests. 

The Consequences of Inaction

While Egypt’s measured approach might make sense from a security standpoint, the broader consequences of its inaction, or its selective actions, are becoming increasingly apparent. For the people of Gaza, the limited access to humanitarian aid has worsened an already desperate situation, leading to widespread suffering and a growing sense of abandonment by the Arab world, including Egypt. This has not only deepened the humanitarian crisis but also fueled resentment against Egypt, further complicating its relationship with the Palestinian territories.

Moreover, Egypt’s reluctance to fully engage in the conflict resolution process has had broader implications for its standing in the region. While Egypt has traditionally been seen as a leader in the Arab world, its cautious approach to the Gaza conflict has allowed other regional powers, such as Turkey and Qatar, to step in and assert their influence. This shift in regional dynamics could weaken Egypt’s position as a key player in Middle Eastern geopolitics, with long-term consequences for its ability to shape events in the region.

International Scrutiny and Domestic Pressure

Egypt’s actions, or lack thereof, are being closely watched on the global stage. Western powers, particularly the United States, have urged Egypt to take a more active role in addressing the humanitarian crisis in Gaza. However, Cairo’s reliance on U.S. military aid, which is tied to its peace treaty with Israel, has led to a cautious approach that prioritizes maintaining this relationship over taking bold action in Gaza. This has led to accusations that Egypt is more concerned with appeasing its Western allies than with addressing the suffering of the Palestinians. 

Domestically, the Egyptian government faces significant pressure to take a stronger stand against Israeli actions. Public sentiment in Egypt is overwhelmingly supportive of the Palestinian cause, and there is growing frustration with the government’s perceived inaction. This has led to a series of protests and demonstrations, putting additional pressure on the Sisi regime to respond more decisively. However, the government’s focus on internal stability and economic challenges has so far outweighed any push to take more drastic action.

Egypt, with a population of over 100 million, has deep historical and cultural ties to Palestine, and many Egyptians view the plight of Palestinians through the lens of Arab unity and anti-colonial struggle. This sentiment is powerful among opposition groups, who argue that Egypt should play a more active role in aiding Gaza and standing up to Israeli aggression.

However, within Egypt’s government, key figures including President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi and his military-backed regime are more concerned about maintaining security and stability. The Sisi government, wary of Hamas due to its ties to the Muslim Brotherhood, has been reluctant to fully open the Rafah crossing, fearing it could allow militants into Egypt. These security concerns drive the government’s restrictive policies on allowing Palestinians into the country.

Opposition voices, particularly from leftist groups and figures like Hamdeen Sabahi, a former presidential candidate, have criticized the government’s stance, calling for greater solidarity with Palestinians and more humanitarian aid. These groups argue that the government’s focus on internal security has led to an inhumane policy of keeping Palestinians out. Despite protests and demonstrations demanding more action, the regime’s focus on economic challenges and domestic stability continues to outweigh these calls for a stronger response.

Conclusion: Egypt’s Dilemma

Egypt’s current approach to the Gaza-Israel conflict is a double-edged sword. While its cautious diplomacy and security concerns are understandable, the broader implications of its actions—or inactions—pose significant risks. As the conflict drags on with no resolution in sight, Egypt’s role as a mediator is increasingly being called into question, and its influence in the region is at risk of diminishing. Regionally, Egypt’s influence as a mediator may not be under immediate threat, as other Arab states like Saudi Arabia and Jordan are similarly hesitant to intervene directly in Gaza. However, Egypt risks losing moral leadership on the Palestinian issue, with countries like Iran eager to fill the void. This could diminish Egypt’s role as a key regional power broker, as it navigates competing interests and growing expectations from its people.

Domestically, the government faces pressure from its population, which overwhelmingly supports the Palestinian cause. Though Egypt’s policy is not overtly pro-Israel, its actions suggest a priority on maintaining stability and relations with Israel and the U.S. rather than fully aligning with Palestinian interests. This balancing act poses risks, as growing frustration among Egyptians could challenge the regime if the situation in Gaza continues to worsen without stronger action from Cairo.

The world is watching, and the stakes are high. Egypt’s ability to navigate this complex situation will have profound implications, not only for the people of Gaza but also for its future as a regional power. Suppose Cairo continues to prioritize short-term stability over long-term solutions. In that case, it risks being seen as complicit in the suffering of the Palestinian people and losing its standing as a leader in the Arab world. The challenge for Egypt is to find a way to balance its security needs with the urgent humanitarian demands of the Gaza conflict—a challenge that will only become more difficult as the situation continues to unfold.