Egypt’s accession to the Syrian understandings is a Saudi positioning

Written by Nasser Kandil,

The Egyptian country through its diplomatic, military, and security institutions and at the peak of the control of the Muslim Brotherhood on the authority was keen to keep its relationships with the Syrian country outside the game of the Muslim Brotherhood. The leaders of these institutions did not hide their feelings of standing with the Syrian army and the Syrian President as well as the bet on the fall of the Muslim Brotherhood project in Syria in order to overthrow it in Egypt. After the fall of the Muslim Brotherhood the Egyptian position has insisted on it, but it continued avoiding the publicity and the propaganda, it remained in the middle between the opposition which it tries to clean up its ranks from the Muslim Brotherhood, Al Nusra, and ISIS, searching for who can support it to make Cairo’s platform similar the Egyptian policy, but this has not achieved yet. But the Egyptian seeking for neutrality was due to the conviction that the role of Egypt comes from its linking with the track of settlements rather than the bias to the Syrian country, on the other hand and which is most important, due to the conviction of the Egyptian leadership of the need to adjust the Egyptian timing on the appropriate Saudi-American timing. So there is no justification for taking a risk if the US –Saudi position that supports the settlements is not ready yet, because the presence of Riyadh and Washington outside the settlements will lead to their failure, and therefore, Egypt will lose so much politically, diplomatically, and financially, it will put itself in a confrontation that it cannot bear its consequences.

At every stage of the stages of the Russian progress towards settlements, Egypt was present in the Russian considerations, the Syrian preference of the regional parties were always given to Egypt when it was ready, but when Astana path has got matured the Russians tried to lure Egypt to make a balance with Turkey and a parallel balance with Iran. The two balances were of interest to Egypt and its leadership, but Egypt reserved from giving the response after it saw American ambiguity and Saudi discouraging, so it realized that the time has not come yet, but when the US-Russian understanding about the southern of Syria became ready, Egypt decided to draw a plan of moving towards Russia entitled “an agenda for the Syrian south that stretches  till the countryside of Damascus and Ghouta where Egypt will be a regional partner in it and where Jordan be under its umbrella”. “It ensures getting rid of Al Nusra and ISIS and isolating the similar takfiri groups as Al-Rahamn legion and the formations associated with the Muslim Brotherhood, As it ensures that the understandings will have humanitarian and civilian dimension as well as the preparation to participate in sending Egyptian observers if the Syrian country accepts that”.

The concerned parties with the Syrian south are: America the partner of Russia in the understanding, second, Israel which knows the limited capacities of Jordan and its inability to have a Syrian consensus for a role of observers inside the Syrian territories, so this requires Saudi acceptance as long as the pivotal force in Ghouta is the Army of Islam which is affiliated to Saudi Arabia, this is during the crisis in which Egypt and Saudi Arabia converge in standing against Qatar and having the same position towards the Muslim Brotherhood, Al Nusra, Al Rhamn legion, and Ahrar Al Sham and the attempt to determine the size of the Turkish participation as a regional sponsor of the settlement and forming an Arab balance in exchange of the Iranian presence.

Egypt’s sponsorship in partnership with Russia to have understating about Ghouta is the beginning and the indicator of a new stage, it includes American and Saudi support and no Israeli objection otherwise Egypt would not take this initiative. At the end of this stage during weeks or few months the Egyptian role will include Egyptian observers in Syria who will devote the Syrian-Egyptian cooperation desired by Damascus and which is not opposed by neither Iran nor Hezbollah despite the apparent competition, guarantees, and differences in agendas.  The Egyptian rise in the region especially in Syria is in itself a positive welcoming sign, while the consensus of the camp of the opponents of Syria on the Egyptian role is a sign of their weakness not its complicity with them.

Translated by Lina Shehadeh,