CAIRO: As Arab leaders gathered in Kuwait to much faux posturing before becoming a band of brothers again, the actions which led to much of the divisions have proved a points winner, at least domestically for the Egyptian regime.
While the streets of the Arab world vented their anger at the Egyptian administration over its perceived lack of support for Gaza, many Egyptians got on the defensive and backed the regime’s position.
“What have they (the Arabs) done? We have done so much for Palestine, said 24-year-old Mohamed Yassin Ahmed, “I’m not a supporter of the regime, but there was wisdom in their actions. We didn’t blindly follow peoples’ actions and go to war or other such nonsense like that. We were looking for a solution.
Writing in his weekly column last Sunday, Editor-in-chief of the Coptic newspaper Watani Yousif Sidhom said, “It is only fair to applaud President Hosny Mubarak’s wisdom in managing the Egyptian response to the Gaza crisis. The repeated verbal abuse inflicted upon Egypt by Hamas, and the irresponsible behavior of its leaders and troops have failed to provoke the Egyptian authorities or to drag Egypt into an armed conflict.
When the Israeli offensive began on the Gaza strip Dec. 27, Arab protestors took to the streets demanding that Egypt completely open the Rafah border crossing, the only crossing into the strip not controlled by Israel, and cut all ties with Israel.
They were also angered by a visit Israeli Foreign minister Tzipi Livni made to Egypt two days before the attack began in which she effectively announced the intention to initiate strikes on Gaza. At the initial stage of the offensive, official Egyptian condemnation was muted in comparison to other countries like Turkey.
On the popular front, and parallel to the surge in popular support for the regime, this Arab sentiment was also prevalent among many Egyptians as well, mainly the thousands that took to the streets almost everyday to protest the war, demanding Egypt open the crossing.
Additionally, Qatar’s call for an Arab summit, which was given a miss by both Egypt and Saudi Arabia, led to accusations that America’s two biggest Arab allies were sabotaging the possibility of a unified Arab position. Egypt counter-argued that the summit was an unnecessary obstacle to the mediation efforts it was attempting to reach a ceasefire between Israel and Hamas.
“Egypt has tools it could use that other countries in the region do not have, and so they only talk big, said writer Suleiman Gouda in a commentary published Tuesday by Al-Masry Al-Youm.
It is this Arab criticism of Egypt which sparked domestic voices to speak out in support of the regime’s stance.
“Any observer of the Egyptian and Arab scene is bound to notice the massive deception and misconceptions which have dominated the understanding of Egyptians and Arabs as far as the situation in Gaza is concerned. Equally obvious is the rush by Arab politicians and media to wage ferocious verbal attacks against Egypt. It would almost appear as though the media and the authorities behind it had granted Egypt a historical proxy to fight and pay the blood debt on their behalf, Sidhom wrote.
For those Egyptians that did condemn the regime’s stance, Ahmed said, “Some people were ashamed. Yet I think it had a lot to do with the internal situation. People are generally angry at the government so when this came along they held it up as an example.
Added to the Arab criticism of Egypt, there were fears, widely prevalent, that to open the crossing unconditionally would result in a mass exodus and a Palestinian occupation of Egyptian territory.
“We don’t want to be another Jordan, where Palestinians outnumber the Jordanians themselves and then we would have lost the Palestinian cause. One of Israel’s plans is to remove the Palestinians from Gaza and relocate them in Sinai, Ahmed said.
George Ishaq, former coordinator for the Kefaya movement which calls for regime change, said, “The Egyptian position at the start was very bad, but things improved later on. The initial reaction should have been better and some comments made by the foreign minister (Ahmed Aboul Gheit) were inappropriate.
After three weeks and 1,300 casualties, Israel announced a unilateral ceasefire, followed by a similar announcement from Hamas a day later. At this point the tone from Egypt became stronger towards the Israeli operation.
In an interview with the Jerusalem Post Monday, foreign ministry spokesman Hossam Zaki said, “We expected the Israeli side to behave in a different way. We expected Israel to respond positively to [the Egyptian ceasefire] initiative.
By announcing a unilateral ceasefire, Israel was “basically saying, it is our decision. We don’t want anyone to interfere. . This is not what we expected. The initiative was severely criticized as ineffective because Israel was reluctant to implement it, he added.
Despite these statements, many in Egypt still make the correlation that the Israeli ceasefire was a direct result of the Egyptian initiative.
“A lot of people have been saying that Saudi Arabia has swept the rug from beneath us, but it was us and France that reached an agreement, without American involvement, Ahmed said. “This crisis showed that you cannot do anything in this region without Egypt. We are the only ones the Palestinians talk to and the only ones that can pressure Israel.
Gouda wrote, “Egypt has other tools, which President Mubarak was the first to realize since he came to power in 1981. And those who are trying to work against this are really trying to spoil Egypt’s efforts over the years.
“The President of Egypt is a military man who has seen wars and who knows that he has different tools than those of all the other 22 Arab countries. And the state-owned media must know that and must follow it lest we lose our tools, he added.
Ishaq took an opposite tack stating, “The Egyptian media was the worst when it came to covering the war on Gaza. They were awaiting orders and didn’t cover the crisis as they should have. Where was the debate?
As for whether the handling of the Gaza issue has added to the popularity of Mubarak and the regime, Ishaq said, “I doubt he has become more popular because of this, just take a walk in the streets. The corruption and oppression are still rampant and any foreign policy decisions don’t change that. We are against this regime and will continue to be against it.
Ahmed made a different distinction saying, “I hate the internal political situation in Egypt and we are oppressed, but in foreign policy we accomplish things. We should distinguish between the two and when he (Mubarak) does something good we should say so.
