Courcy’s Intelligence Brief

One of the reasons we do not believe that a general Arab-Israeli war is imminent (see this week’s main briefing), unless Israel blunders in the way described, is because the evolution of Egypt from reliable US ally to a return to Arab leadership, based on adherence to Islamic principles and opposition to Israel, still has some way to go.  But the view that Egypt is moving in that direction has been given further support by the decision of Muhammad al-Baradei, the former head of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), to drop out of the Egyptian presidential election race.

The decisive fact that the US and Israel now have to live with is that Egypt’s Islamists – that is the Muslim Brotherhood (MB) and the more extreme Salafists – together won around 70% of the 498 seats in the People’s Assembly.  It is hoped by the US and Israel that victory in the parliamentary elections for the Islamists can still be mitigated by a combination of the persuasive powers of American aid, the dissuasive power of Israel’s military might, and the hope that other elements of Egypt’s power structure – notably the presidency – can be kept in more moderate hands.  Al-Baradei’s self-removal from the presidential contest suggests this latter hope is a forlorn one.

In his 14 January statement, al-Baradei implied that the reason he didn’t want to run was because of the continuing influence of the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (SCAF).  He said that it seemed as if no revolution had taken place and “as if no regime had fallen”.  He also complained that preparations for the presidential election were being made “in the light of a constitution whose articles are being cooked up in a few weeks”.

Egyptian sources, however, say that al-Baradei’s decision not to run is based on more self-serving grounds: he simply does not think he can win given the support now held by the Islamists.  His relations with the Muslim Brotherhood are reasonable, if not overly warm, but his relations with the Salafists are very poor.  That his withdrawal is based on a negative reassessment of his prospects is supported by the fact that his complaints about the SCAF are not a new factor.  He complained about the SCAF before intending to run.  The only thing that has changed is the demonstration of how deep the support for the Islamists is during the general election.

This clearly is another setback for the US and Israel in Egypt, but there is still hope that differences between the Muslim Brotherhood and the hard-line Salafists can be exploited to good effect, and there is some evidence to suggest that this is possible.  Ahead of the elections, the Muslim Brotherhood’s Freedom and Justice Party (FJP) tried to bring the Salafist Al-Asalah and Al-Nour parties into a ‘Democratic Alliance’, but the two Salafist parties withdrew from the alliance over disputes about sharing the electoral spoils.

The Salafists have been much more hardline than the MB on matters such as sharia law, banking, and codes of dress and behaviour (including for tourists).  And there was clear tension between the MB and Salafist camps in the final round of the general election.

The general feeling is that an alliance between the MB and the Salafists in the new parliament is unlikely both because of the inter-party tensions and because of the MB’s apparent desire to present itself as more moderate.  The optimists say that this might move the MB to forge an alliance with liberal elements such as the Wafd Party, and indeed discussions are said to be under way.  This is engendering some cautious optimism despite the withdrawal of al-Baradei from the presidential race. 

A meeting this week between Mohamed Morsy, leader of the MB’s Freedom and Justice Party, and US Deputy Secretary of State William Burns, has provided some further grounds for optimism.  The US is pressing Morsy on the MB’s commitment to human rights, Iran, and the Camp David accords with Israel, and it is said that the responses have so far been encouraging.  The MB has little problem on the human-rights question, as that is an area it wishes to use to distance itself from the Salafists.  Equally, on Iran, while some in the MB believe in developing a good relationship with Iran, the conflict in Syria has undermined that case.  Besides, Saudi Arabia has promised Egypt $4bn, and this would be jeopardized by any move towards rapprochement with Iran.

So that leaves Camp David.  In a recent interview with The New York Times, Essam el-Erian, the deputy chairman of the FJP, said that the treaty is a commitment of the Egyptian government, not a particular party, therefore the FJP feels bound by it. 

However, a word of caution.  If this is, indeed, the official position of the Muslim Brotherhood, it is based solely on short-term expediency, and it is very far from being universally accepted within the party.

As we reported in our 4 January edition, MB deputy chairman Rashad al-Bayumi told the Italian newspaper L’Unita on 2 January: “The Muslim Brotherhood...claim[s] the right to revise, wholly or in part, treaties such as the one with Israel.  One thing is for certain: parliament will have the last say, and, if necessary there will be a popular referendum.”  He added: “Our priority is to halt the Zionist policies which are against the whole Palestinian people.”  He also denied that the MB had given assurances to the US about the Camp David accords.  He said: “I firmly deny that...The United States knows that we are not willing to sacrifice the Palestinian cause on behalf of a ‘good neighbourly policy’ with Israel.”

It is also worth noting that one of the biggest rows between the Muslim Brotherhood and the Salafists has been over a decision by a spokesman for the Salafist Al-Nour party (supposedly more extreme than the MB) to talk to Israeli radio.  Hamdi Hasan, a senior MB figure, criticized this move as being tantamount to normalization of relations with the “Zionist enemy” and an “unforgivable political crime”.

That Israel’s Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu takes the pessimistic view was made clear in his remarks to a parliamentary committee on 16 January.  He said: “Israel is facing a growing security threat to its South because of the changes brought about by the Arab Spring which is not likely to disappear any time soon...The security problem which is deepening as a result of changes in the Middle East is getting worse and is expected to continue for years.”