No Sovereignty for Egypt

by Dr. Abdul-Sattar Kassem

Egyptian officials keep appearing before us talking about Egypt’s sovereignty every time Gaza is in need of food. Egypt’s sovereignty is granted importance and emphasis only in the face of the people of Gaza, who have no designs on Egyptian land, do not mobilize to occupy Cairo, and have no aim in Egypt other than buying food and various life necessities. I do not deny that the resistance factions have another objective, namely smuggling money and weapons, and smuggling materials necessary for manufacturing weapons in Gaza in order to defend themselves against the Zionist entity. Gaza’s weapons are not for fighting Egypt, nor for insulting Egypt, but rather to repel and beat back aggression, and to empower the Palestinian self toward restoring the fixed national rights of the Palestinian people, or a part of them.

It is clear that the parties concerned are not trying to reveal the truth, which is that Egypt has no sovereignty over Sinai, and that all the talk about Egyptian sovereignty and Egyptian national security is nothing but obfuscation and deception. There are those who are complicit with the Egyptian regime and so support what it says and the policies it implements, and there are those who know the truth and do not want to speak for various reasons. The truth is that Egypt is not the sovereign authority over Sinai, and cannot decide on its own regarding any strategic or tactical action without referring back to Israel and America.

Egypt enjoys self-rule over Sinai under the 1979 Camp David accords, a self-rule similar to the self-rule practiced by the Palestinian Authority, limited to managing the civil affairs of the people. Under the agreement, Egypt is permitted to bring in only a single brigade of the Egyptian army, to be stationed in the western part of Sinai, west of the Mitla and Giddi passes — a symbolic Egyptian military presence as a matter of respect for Egypt, which does not enable it to wage a war or defend against aggression, or to impose any particular policy. And under the agreement, so that Egypt may retain some face, the Israeli army must keep only two kilometers away from the notional Egyptian-Palestinian border. Egypt is also forbidden from establishing military airfields in Sinai, while the United States built two massive airfields for Israel in the Negev as part of the deal accompanying the signing of the Camp David accords.

Egypt is permitted to keep a limited police force in Sinai for the purpose of maintaining civil security, on condition that its weapons be individual arms — that is, rifles and pistols. It is forbidden from using combat security equipment, and can only use riot-suppression equipment, that is, equipment suited to confronting demonstrations and public anger. Egypt cannot build new cities in Sinai, nor implement a policy of increasing the population there, which is considered one of the necessities of Egyptian national security.

Egypt, under the Camp David agreement, is committed to Israel’s security, and must pursue terrorism and terrorists who try to harm Israel’s security, and must prevent the carrying out of any activity that might compromise Israel’s security. This is what makes the agreement, first and foremost, a security agreement — and had Egypt been able to reject the security arrangements specific to Israel, Israel would not have signed it, nor would its forces have withdrawn from Sinai. On this basis, opening up to Gaza is forbidden because of the security risks this might pose to Israel, and Egypt must keep the border with Gaza closed on the grounds that it is a security border as far as Israel is concerned. This is why crossings were designated between Egypt and Israel, with each state supervising movement on its own side — and the Rafah crossing is not among them, on the grounds that it is a crossing controlled by the occupying state according to its own security and political standards.

When it was decided to open the Rafah crossing for a certain period, we must recognize that Israel authorized this, and that the media falsely and unjustly attribute the act to the Egyptian regime. This applies to all the convoys of moral and material support for Gaza — no convoy can pass without permission from Israeli security. That is, Egypt uses the idea of Egyptian sovereignty and Egyptian national security as a media pretext, and it never means that at all to those familiar with the Camp David agreement and its security arrangements. This applies to the steel wall now being built, since Egypt has no relation to its construction other than providing the labor and facing the media with a great deal of humiliation and sovereign babble. It is America that drew up the plans in cooperation with Israel, and America that funds it, while the Egyptian regime supplies the labor.

The multinational force led by the United States is what controls Sinai, and it holds the decision-making power over any Egyptian security or military movement. This force is present at the strategic Mitla and Giddi passes, possesses advanced electronic early-warning devices, and runs land patrols and aerial and space reconnaissance operations according to its own will, not according to Egypt’s will. It is America that commands this force, and its representatives who move freely in Sinai, and it is America that directs the Egyptian police forces to act against groups suspected of smuggling weapons into Gaza, or cooperating with the Palestinian resistance in any way whatsoever.

Egypt was unable to bring additional forces into Egyptian Rafah to tighten monitoring of the lines separating Gaza from Sinai, and was obliged to obtain Israel’s permission to do so. Israel responded that the Camp David agreement would need to be amended for Egypt to be able to bring in additional numbers. Egypt was not seeking to bring in regular army forces, but riot-control and border-monitoring forces, and even so it was subject to Israeli approval.

And yet Egyptian officials are not ashamed to speak of Egyptian sovereignty over Sinai. Sinai is violated every single day by the Americans, is monitored by Israel, and the movement of Egyptians within it is restricted, and the matter does not seem to trouble the nerves of the Egyptian regime except when it concerns Gaza and its needs.

Only yesterday, American officials violated al-Arish Hospital, touring its wards and inspecting it without Egyptian permission and without any Egyptian escort accompanying them. And yesterday too, Israeli aircraft crossed Egyptian airspace into Sudan and bombed a convoy in Sudan said to be carrying weapons and aid for Gaza. Egypt’s sovereignty is not provoked when Israel violates its airspace and kills hundreds of Arabs in Sudan, but the smuggling of a tin of Danone milk keeps the president of Egypt up at night.

Perhaps we would understand if the Egyptian regime spoke of its incapacity, and of its lack of control over Sinai, and we would understand if it told us that the decision over Sinai lies in American and Israeli hands, because we have known that since the signing of the Camp David agreement. But to continue speaking of sovereignty and national security fools only the ignorant, and is accepted only by those who ally themselves with the Zionists.

It is therefore important that those who appeal to President Hosni Mubarak spare their efforts, because he is not the one who decides. What is possible is only to carry out major media activities to embarrass the Egyptian regime, or to incite the people of Egypt — and then, if Israel and America see that the Egyptian regime might be harmed, they may authorize Egyptian assistance to Gaza. Israel and America are keen on the survival of the Arab regimes, because the alternative might be a patriotic one.

Source: Translated from the original Arabic, “لا سيادة لمصر” by Dr. Abdul-Sattar Kassem.