Cairo’s Strategic Response to Trump’s Gaza Plan: Navigating…

Cairo’s response to Trump’s Gaza plan has involved a multi-stage strategy while collaborating with Arab leaders. High-level summits aimed to unify Arab positions, though divisions remain evident, particularly concerning Hamas’s influence. Meanwhile, the Palestinian Authority proposed its own plan, further complicating Cairo’s efforts. Egypt is tasked with managing diplomatic relations, seeking international support, and countering U.S. interests amidst significant political challenges.

Cairo’s strategic response to President Donald Trump’s controversial Gaza plan, which proposes the settlement of numerous Gazan refugees in Egypt and Jordan, has evolved through a comprehensive approach. Jordan struggles to manage its expected refugee influx, leaning on Egypt to resist the U.S. agenda and seeking support from Persian Gulf allies. To counterbalance Trump’s initiative, Egypt is developing an alternative phased strategy to gain the backing of a wider array of stakeholders.

The first significant step occurred on 21 February with a mini-summit in Riyadh, where Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi met with leaders from Jordan, Qatar, the UAE, Kuwait, and Bahrain. This meeting aimed to unify regional responses to the crisis instigated by Trump and to gauge the Arab world’s willingness to repel U.S. influence.

On 26 February, Egypt sent an unofficial delegation of seasoned diplomats to Washington to engage U.S. officials and assess the possibility of modifying the Gaza plan. The purpose of these discussions was to navigate potential adjustments in alignment with Egypt’s national objectives amidst escalating tensions in the region.

Further mobilization efforts occurred with an emergency Arab summit on 4 March, where Cairo aimed to secure regional solidarity. However, the absence of key leaders, such as UAE President Mohammed bin Zayed and Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, highlighted disunity among Arab states, indicating their reluctance to publicly support Egypt without substantial concessions.

This schism became apparent during the Riyadh meeting, as MbZ and MbS stressed the need to significantly alter the political landscape in Gaza, particularly by diminishing Hamas’s control, while Egypt intended to maintain a limited Hamas presence. Furthermore, the UAE proposed international oversight of Gaza, coupled with a $15 billion aid package, which Egypt swiftly rejected, fearing it could result in permanent Palestinian displacement.

Complicating matters was U.S. interference, with American officials reportedly incentivizing Saudi Arabia to pressure Egypt and Jordan regarding Trump’s refugee plan. Simultaneously, the Palestinian Authority was missing from critical discussions, and attempts to include Hamas in future political frameworks faced immediate opposition from several key Arab nations.

Amidst these tensions, the Cairo summit unfolded without fruitful resolutions for the impending humanitarian crisis concerning Gaza’s population. Notably, Algeria’s absence reflected frustrations over exclusion from prior discussions. Simultaneously, the historical rivalry between Cairo and Algiers over Palestinian delegations surfaced, impacting diplomatic dynamics.

Meanwhile, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas proposed a rival plan seeking to restore PA control over Gaza, including management of its borders. However, both Egypt and the UAE dismissed this framework, viewing it as outdated and unfeasible given the PA’s previous governance failures.

In a surprising move, Abbas announced a pardon for former Fatah members, possibly paving the way for Mohammed Dahlan’s return, whose connections to the UAE raised eyebrows. Despite endorsing Egypt’s reconstruction proposal, real obstacles remain, including widespread skepticism in the U.S. and Israel towards any frameworks involving Hamas.

Efforts to secure American backing for the reconstruction plan led Egypt to dispatch a delegation of former officials to Washington to lobby for support. Several discussions with U.S. lawmakers showed interest in the Egyptian agenda, yet there were no definitive commitments due to concerns about Hamas.

In response to U.S. hesitance, Egypt explored alternative financing options involving the European Union and China while trying to appease Gulf states by allowing the World Bank oversight for fund transparency. However, the situation was complicated by unexpected U.S.-Hamas talks, raising further questions about regional stability and political alignments.

As obstacles persist with U.S. and Arab reluctance, Cairo’s commitment to its Gaza plan remains steady despite shifting dynamics. Future endeavors will likely require Egypt to seek resources beyond its usual partners amid an uncertain reconstruction process.

In conclusion, Egypt’s strategic approach to responding to President Trump’s Gaza plan reveals the complexities of regional politics and the challenges of maintaining unity among Arab states. Despite efforts to construct a cohesive collective response, significant divisions persist, primarily regarding Hamas’s role and refugee absorption. Egypt must navigate these obstacles while seeking international financial support amid evolving dynamics influenced by U.S.-Hamas engagements. The future of Gaza’s reconstruction and Egypt’s regional standing hinges on overcoming these considerable challenges, necessitating a delicate balance of diplomacy and collaboration.

Original Source: thecradle.co