Responsible calculation

Criticisms of Egypt's stand on Sharon's disengagement plan are ill-informed, writes Ibrahim Nafie

---

Egypt is once again the butt of a vicious campaign, this time spearheaded by some Arab satellite stations. No sooner had we set into motion an initiative to ensure that the Israeli withdrawal from Gaza and parts of the West Bank would be the first phase of a comprehensive settlement process that will lead to the creation of a Palestinian state than we came under attack. Some have even had the audacity to charge that Egypt has been lured into helping Sharon with the promise of $300 million in aid from the US.

Names and faces familiar to us for their profound hatred of Egypt are making reappearances on Arab television screens. Of diverse ideological orientations and political affiliations, they have found a warm and welcoming host in those news networks that thought it opportune to revive individuals who had acquired a certain celebrity status for their ravings in defence of Saddam Hussein and then disappeared following the embarrassing fall of his regime. Today, these individuals have the chance to wail again, this time on behalf of the "Palestinian people" who, they claim, are threatened by a conspiracy woven by the PA, Egypt and a few other Arab governments.

We in Egypt are long accustomed to such barrages by those minor media personalities who are probably paid by the word for their tirades in the press and on TV. Egypt has also long since demonstrated that such base attacks will not keep it from assuming the regional responsibilities incumbent upon it as the largest and most strategically significant Arab nation.

At the time of President Sadat, Egypt became the object of a particularly malicious assault because of his historic visit to Jerusalem and subsequent signing of the Camp David peace agreement. Egypt nevertheless remained confident in the clarity of its foresight and the soundness of its decisions, which others eventually recognised, if too late. If other Arab countries had followed Egypt's suit in the late 1970s we could have won tremendous victories for the Palestinian cause. Instead, Israel was given the next quarter of a century to exploit, constructing dozens of settlements and relocating thousands of settlers to the West Bank and Gaza, creating what has become one of the foremost obstacles to any peace drive.

Given Egypt's long established record of commitment to the Palestinian cause and the sacrifices it has made on this behalf, one of the most absurd and feeblest charges levelled against Egypt's current diplomatic drive was that it would work to "bury" the Intifada. In a recent article I wrote that "Palestine and the Palestinian people have always been of foremost concern to Egypt. Egypt's role is to help the Palestinian people regain their legitimate rights and liberate their land. While these are our aims, the means to attain them are manifold, diverse and variable, and all should remain available to draw upon as circumstances dictate."

Such flexibility in approach, which requires careful calculations of costs and benefits, is an indispensable asset and by no means suggests that Egypt has lost sight of its most cherished and immutable goal, which is to help liberate occupied territory and establish an independent Palestinian state. I would therefore advise those who lend themselves to the dissemination of tendentious allegations to the contrary to remember that Egypt is above such spurious affronts and that we all know the quarters they are intended to serve.

What most struck me in the recent anti- Egyptian campaign was the delight some of our critics took in resting their case on quotations from Israeli writers. Specifically, several of them cited an article from a Hebrew-language newspaper whose author expressed surprise at the sudden shift in Cairo's position towards the Israeli prime minister. At a time Sharon is mired in domestic crisis, Egypt has thrown him a lifeline, the Israeli author wrote.

I would suggest that before quoting from an Israeli journalist, Arab opinion pundits should first consider his political affiliations and the ideological orientation of the newspaper he writes for. They should also bear in mind a very simple truth: what the Israeli journalist says is one thing, his motives are another. It is particularly odd that those Arab commentators who were so impressed by that Israeli newspaper article with its not so subtle accusations against Egypt are usually the first to warn against the so-called division of roles among the diverse political forces in Israel, which are ultimately working towards the same ends. Clearly, it suited their purposes to make an exception in this case.

But, whatever those purposes may be, the idea that Egypt would throw a lifeline to Sharon is patently absurd and those who propose it are dismally ignorant of the nature of Egyptian-Israeli relations. On what possible logical foundations could such a contention rest when these relations have been variously described as a "cold war" or an "armed peace"?

Egypt's position towards Sharon is well- known and unchanged. It still maintains that Sharon has no vision for a viable settlement process, that he is determined to force the Palestinian people to their knees and that he is still a far remove from being a "man of peace". However, this opinion is one thing and the need to capitalise on an available opportunity is quite another. Egypt fully appreciates the grave perils the current situation holds for the Palestinians. But it believes that, with a certain amount of effort, Sharon's plan can be brought into the framework of the roadmap and that this will strengthen the position of the PA. At the same time Egypt realises the enormous difficulties posed by the interplay between the various parties in the field, each of which is determined to see its own plans or initiatives prevail. Well before it launched its initiative, Egypt knew it would be no picnic.

In light of the foregoing, the bids to second the claim of that Israeli author that Egypt is lending a helping hand to Sharon cannot be taken seriously. The Egyptian diplomatic drive has nothing to do with Israeli domestic politics and everything to do with a vision for how best to serve the interests of the Palestinian people. In all events, outside powers do not carry all that much weight when it comes to determining the rise or fall of Israeli governments; Washington's massive backing for Sharon did not spare him the current crisis of his government.

Egypt believes that there are many ways it can help the Palestinian leadership achieve its priorities. We can contribute to the restructuring and streamlining of the PA security agencies, we can assist in training, technical advice and the arrangement of funding needed for these forces to perform their functions competently, and we can help facilitate the reforms needed to enable the Palestinian people to ready themselves for control of an independent state.

In pursuing this course Egypt is acting on the principle, stated above, that only through a carefully calculated blend of means and strategies can we reach our objectives. At one point military action promised to be the most effective option and Egypt launched the October War. At a later stage, however, it was necessary to capitalise diplomatically on the military gains we achieved on the ground. In other words, we did not wage war for the sake of waging war. Rather, we had an aim in sight, which was to liberate the occupied Sinai, and we pursued the actions necessary in the order necessary to accomplish this aim.

The same principle applies to Egypt's approach to the situation in Palestine. With the Palestinians more vulnerable than ever to Sharon's relentless acts of war, murder, assassination and mass demolition, and with the US mired in its problems in Iraq and its attention soon to be diverted for a long time by the forthcoming presidential elections, Egypt felt it time to act. Not to act is to let Sharon continue to take out his wrath against the Palestinian people, to continue his demolition of Palestinian infrastructure and to continue his construction of the separating wall. It seemed like there was no stopping Sharon after the pledges of support he received from President Bush. His next step was to unveil his plan for "unilateral withdrawal from Gaza", which, in fact, does not call for a full withdrawal and accords no role to the PA. However, after careful study of this perilous situation, Egypt realised that, in spite of the risks, it offered an invaluable opportunity to rehabilitate the roadmap.

It should be stressed that Egypt has set several conditions for its recent initiative regarding Sharon's plan. Israel must withdraw fully from all parts of Gaza and evacuate all settlements. These actions must be taken in coordination with the PA. The withdrawal from Gaza must be regarded as no more than a first phase in the process of the Israeli withdrawal from all territories occupied in June 1967. Finally, Egypt's assistance in the training and rehabilitation of Palestinian security forces must be considered only a part of its potential contribution to the reform process called for by the roadmap.

With regard to the latter point, the assertion that Egypt's role should be restricted to the security question is both offensive and tendentious. Egypt's contribution should operate on several levels, from the preparation of legal codes, the restructuring of government agencies and the strengthening of a centralised Palestinian authority to relief work, mobilising funding and assistance to rebuild the Palestinian economy and other such reconstruction tasks needed to create the foundations for a viable independent state.

Because Egypt hopes to strengthen the PA, the governing body elected by the Palestinian people, Egypt has assiduously sought to work in close cooperation with the Palestinian leadership. Simultaneously, it has worked to promote Palestinian unity of ranks, to which end it has hosted numerous Palestinian-Palestinian and Palestinian-Egyptian dialogues aimed at reaching a reconciliation between the PA and the various Palestinian factions.

Such efforts testify to the fact that Egypt's current drive on the "Sharon initiative" is motivated by strategic considerations that place the interests of the Palestinian people foremost. Egypt has never and will never abandon its duty to support the Palestinian cause. To those who like to play petty games at Egypt's expense I say that Egypt has sustained a heavy toll for its dedication to this and other Arab causes and that it will continue to sustain this toll. If Egypt was interested in profit, as some opinion pundits suggest, it would have taken an entirely different approach to its relations with the US. Instead, Egypt has made its bilateral relations with Israel and all projects for regional cooperation that include Israel contingent upon progress towards the restoration of Palestinian rights and the creation of an independent Palestinian state with its capital in East Jerusalem.