Khaled Ali, a lawyer and a candidate in the Egyptian presidential elections, has said that any settlement of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, even one that would force Israel to pull back to its pre-1967 borders, will not satisfy him. Another candidate, Abdel Moneim Aboul Fotouh, vowed to amend the Camp David Accords between Egypt and Israel if he were elected. The Muslim Brotherhood candidate, Muhammad Mursi, did not make many promises regarding the issue of Palestine, but the Israeli newspaper Yediot Ahronot speculated that he would make Palestine his primary concern if he were elected in a bid to avoid the hot domestic issues. Mahmoud Al-Zahhar, one of the most rigid leaders of the Hamas movement in Gaza who also carries the Egyptian nationality, said he would cast his vote as an Egyptian citizen for an Islamic candidate. He might vote for Mursi, as the two belong to the same group, the Muslim Brotherhood.
The question that arises here is: What are the priorities of the Egyptian voter? A more important question is: What are the potentials of any new president to adopt a decisive attitude regarding the conflict with Israel, which is the most difficult and dangerous issue? In fact, the conflict is not only a Palestinian issue, but also an Egyptian one in the first place. Israel borders Egypt and the two have border issues. The two countries could threaten the interests of each other. An Egyptian citizen is pained by the injustices meted out to the Palestinian people, but he differs with the Palestinians concerning the method and limits of the Egyptian intervention into the cause.
During the 1960s and 70s, external issues were Egypt’s first priority, including matters such as Arab nationalism, confrontation with Israel and the liberation movements. During the past 30 years, poverty and job issues became the main concern for any Egyptian leader and his people.
Egypt is now at the crossroads of a new era. This made Al-Zahhar say bluntly: Egypt is a previous treasure for the Palestinian cause. It is, in fact, a valuable treasure that may show itself in many faces. If an Islamist president comes to power and decides to go forward with a peace project, Israel would definitely welcome such a move and would be ready to make many concessions. Israel is well aware that the Muslim Brothers are as dogmatic as the members of the Likud party and are able to gain the support of their people if they decide to go for peace with it. If the Islamist president opts to get entangled with Israel in a political or a military duel either to embarrass the Egyptian Military Council or to manifest its military credentials calling for war against Israel, the entire setup of the region would forever change.
However, a decision to go to war against Israel will be much more difficult for any Egyptian president than the decision to opt for peace. The costs of war are larger than the country's resources, particularly now that the country is burdened with the rising costs of bread for its people. Any defeat might result in the president and his party ending up in the same tragic situation in which the most charismatic Egyptian President, Jamal Abdul Nasser, found himself. After the defeat of 1967, Abdul Nasser accepted the humiliating Rogers' (US state secretary) Peace Initiative exasperating the entire Arab nation. The Palestinians demonstrated against him in Jordan, and a student protest movement started against him in Cairo University.
Although I doubt that the new president of Egypt would be able to change the balance of power or take the risk of a military confrontation with Israel, I have no doubt that he might be able to reach a solution that would lead to the birth of a Palestinian state. Deposed Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak could not do this in the 30 years of his rule. However, Israel knows very well that the next president in Egypt will be different from Mubarak, because he will be coming to power through elections and thus will have the full backing and support of his people in any decision he might take against Israel. Israel is also aware that the big powers, especially the US, would be in favor of maintaining good relations with the first freely-elected president in Egypt and would thus be keen not to alienate him, particularly on the Palestinian issue, which is now ripe for a solution that would result in the establishment of two states. This solution was accepted by all Palestinian factions including Hamas.
Much of what has been said by many presidential candidates, such as not being willing to recognize Israel's borders, amending or nullifying the Camp David Accords, or supporting Hamas in its confrontation with Israel, remains to be just election talk. All that any Islamist president in Egypt might be able to do is to enable Hamas to continue ruling Gaza and to oblige the Palestinian Authority to involve it in any negotiations with Israel.
Front Page Features