By Abdel-Rahman Hussein
Egyptian foreign relations in 2010 were marked by touchiness from criticism from abroad, mainly allies expressing reservations about the country’s poor human rights record and sectarian strife.
One the eve of Coptic Christmas, Jan. 6, three Muslim men killed six Coptic Christians and a Muslim guard outside a church in Naga Hammadi in southern Egypt. Much outrage resulted, both within Egypt and abroad, but the regime was having none of it.
Even before a statement by the European Parliament expressing concerns about sectarian strife in Egypt and the treatment of Copts, the foreign ministry responded belligerently to the attack in a statement that said, “It is an internal Egyptian matter that no foreign party is allowed to consider.”
In March, Egypt also reacted angrily to the annual US State Department’s Human Rights report, which stated that the Egyptian government’s “respect for human rights remained poor, and serious abuses continued in many areas.”
Again the foreign ministry hit back, saying that the report was of “no great value” and that Egypt did not pay much credence to reports emanating from the United States. Head of the Egyptian Organization for Human Rights Hafez Abu Saeda told Daily News Egypt at the time, “The government and foreign ministry need to change their language. They should not keep saying they don’t care about any criticism from abroad. You have to care and you have to see how you’re going to change things.”
Another spanner in the works for Egyptian foreign affairs was the decision of the seven Nile Basin countries aside from Sudan and Egypt to sign a new water-sharing agreement that gave a more equitable share of the water to them, instead of the colonialist-era agreement that governed the water rights till then and gave Egypt and Sudan the lion’s share.
After a period of bravado, the foreign ministry took a more conciliatory approach once the agreement was actually signed by six of the seven other Nile Basin countries. Egyptian experts who had stated that a different approach was needed to resolve the issue again criticized Egyptian foreign policy.
However, once the water treaty was signed, Egypt decided to freeze all forms of bi-lateral cooperation with the countries that put pen to paper. After that, it was reported that the Nile water issue was to be handled by the National Security Authority headed by Intelligence Chief Omar Suleiman, and no longer by the irrigation and foreign ministries.
In July, a proposed US Congress bill “supporting democracy, human rights and civil liberties in Egypt” was also met with criticism, with editor of the state-run Al-Gomhuria newspaper Mohamed Ali Ibrahim saying on television that the US shouldn’t be asking for the emergency law to be repealed when they have their own version of the law but under a different moniker, namely its anti-terrorism law.
However, despite any criticism by any entities within the US towards Egypt, ties remained strong between the two allies for various geo-political reasons, namely US involvement in Iraq and both countries’ concerns about Iranian influence in the region.
As such, the US never went beyond paying lip service to civil liberties and human rights in Egypt. The relationship between President Hosni Mubarak and US counterpart Barack Obama were markedly different than the relationship with the latter’s predecessor, George W. Bush.
Thus when invited to attend the opening of a new round of talks between the Palestinian Authority and Israel in September, Mubarak went accompanied by his son Gamal, which added to the pre-existing speculation that he was being groomed to be his successor.
Indeed US experts told Daily News Egypt in September that the US would accept the inheritance of power scenario in Egypt as long as stability was insured. Lawrence Korb, Senior Fellow at the Center for American Progress said, “What the US is going to do is it’s going to say, this is up to the Egyptians. That the US is looking to have stability. We’ve recognized that elections don’t lead to democracy and if the Egyptians have a fraudulent election, we’ll speak out. In the final analysis we have to deal with whoever is in power.”
