For more than four decades, Egypt has honored its peace treaty with Israel. It demilitarized the Sinai, upheld border security, and acted as a stabilizing force in one of the most volatile regions on Earth. That record matters — and it makes recent Israeli warnings about Egypt’s military growth not just hypocritical, but fundamentally unjustified.
Egypt’s Military Is Defensive — By Necessity
Egypt sits at the crossroads of regional instability. To its west, Libya remains fractured. To its south, Sudan teeters amid internal conflict. The Red Sea corridor faces rising threats, piracy, and great-power competition. The Suez Canal — a global economic artery — demands constant protection. In the Sinai, Egypt has spent years combating extremist groups that directly threatened civilians and state sovereignty.
Against that backdrop, Egypt’s military modernization is not aggression; it is prudence.
No sovereign nation is required to seek permission to protect its borders, infrastructure, or people — especially not from a neighbor that possesses one of the most advanced militaries on the planet.
Israel’s Position Rings Hollow
Israel maintains:
Nuclear ambiguity
Air superiority across the region
Advanced missile defense systems
One of the most sophisticated intelligence and cyber capabilities in the world
Yet Israel now claims concern over Egypt — a country that has never violated the peace treaty, never attacked Israel since 1973, and continues to coordinate on security matters when required.
That posture is not about security. It’s about control.
Peace Treaties Are Not Permanent Leashes
The 1979 Camp David Accords ended a state of war and demilitarized the Sinai — they did not grant Israel veto power over Egypt’s national defense strategy.
Treaties are mutual commitments, not instruments of permanent subordination. Egypt complied with demilitarization when regional conditions allowed it. As threats evolved, even Israel quietly approved limited Egyptian force increases in Sinai to combat terrorism. That precedent alone undercuts claims that Egypt’s military growth is inherently destabilizing.
A Dangerous Double Standard
Israel routinely asserts its right to:
Preemptive defense
Strategic deterrence
Regional military superiority
But when Egypt exercises the same logic — defensively, transparently, and within its own borders — it is suddenly framed as a threat.
This double standard fuels resentment, not peace.
Egypt Is Not the Aggressor — It Is the Anchor
Egypt has:
Preserved the longest-lasting Arab–Israeli peace
Acted as a mediator during Gaza crises
Maintained open diplomatic and economic channels
Protected one of the world’s most critical trade routes
A stable, secure Egypt benefits Israel, not the other way around.
The Real Risk: Reckless Rhetoric
Publicly questioning Egypt’s right to defend itself weakens trust, emboldens extremists, and undermines one of the Middle East’s few enduring peace arrangements. It also signals to the region that peace is conditional — tolerated only so long as one side remains militarily constrained.
That is not how lasting security is built.
Bottom Line
Egypt does not need Israel’s approval to protect its sovereignty.
It does not need lectures from a regional military superpower.
And it certainly does not need to apologize for ensuring its own survival.
Peace is strongest when it is based on mutual respect, not military intimidation dressed up as “concern.”
Egypt has earned that respect — and it should demand it.
One question remains, is Israel laying the ground work to eventually go into Egypt for its greater Israel project?
No comments:
Post a Comment