Courcy’s Intelligence Brief

When, on 12 August, Egypt’s President Muhammad Mursi dismissed the army top brass and annulled a constitutional declaration by the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (Scaf) curbing the powers of the presidency, it is said that Israel’s Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu reacted by saying that Mursi would prove to be far more dangerous for Israel than Turkey’s Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan.  He said that Mursi could be expected to continue to produce “dangerous surprises”.  The reaction in Egypt would appear to corroborate Netanyahu’s fears, with the majority agreeing with the sentiment expressed by the commentator Fahmi Houeidi in the Egyptian daily Ashurouq, who wrote on 16 August: “If these decisions have caused such shock and exasperation in Israel, then this can only mean that they are leading us in the right direction and that they will serve to lay the foundations for a new Egyptian regime that will wash away the shame of the phase in which our country was viewed as ‘Israel’s strategic asset’.”

The “dangerous surprise” that Israel most fears is a move by Egypt to regain full sovereignty over the demilitarized Sinai peninsula  - and on 13 August Al-Masri al-Youm quoted a legal adviser to Mursi, Mohamed Gadallah, as saying that Mursi intends to “ensure Egypt’s full sovereignty and control over every inch of Sinai”.

This rhetoric has been supported by actions on the ground, with Egypt taking military steps in the Sinai beyond the scope of what had been agreed with Israel for the combating of militants.  On 19 August Israel’s state-funded Israel TV reported that Egypt had deployed a battalion to the Sinai without the requisite permission from Israel.   On 21 August, a senior Israeli defence official told Maariv: “Israel is worried about the tanks in northern Sinai.  This is an outright breach of the peace agreement.”

Although, on the face of it, Egypt’s strong response against the militants in the Sinai is helpful for Israel – which is the main target of the militants – it does nevertheless indicate a disregard for the terms of Camp David.  The feeling in Israel is that while there is no immediate threat to the Camp David accords, Egypt is purposely testing the boundaries and that an eventual demand for the renegotiation of the terms of the Sinai demilitarization – which is a cornerstone of the peace agreement - is all but inevitable.

Of particular note was the comment by “an Egyptian military source” quoted by the Reuters news agency on 21 August.  Discussing the deployment of Egyptian troops and armour in the Sinai, and the lack of co-ordination with Israel, he said: “We don’t need to issue a daily report to Israel on the operation as it is a matter of sovereignty and national security.”

Beyond the specific question of the Sinai, the feeling that Egypt under Mursi will not be friendly to Israel is hardening, and it has been noted that Mursi’s new chief of staff, Mohamed Fathi Refaat El-Tahtawi, a former ambassador to Libya and Iran, once described Israel as “the greatest threat to the security of Egypt”.

Nor is it just the Israelis who think this.  On 21 August, the editor-in-chief of the pan-Arab al-Quds al-Arabi, Abdelbari Atwan, wrote: “We have said it before, we say it again today and we shall continue to say it loud and clear in the future: Egypt is changing and in the right direction.  That is the direction of regaining its dignity, sovereignty, and independent decision; the direction of rejecting US/Israeli diktats.”

The militant threat from the Sinai has, naturally, also produced a military reaction from Israel, which deployed its Iron Dome air-defence system west of Eilat on 19 August and has been conducting intensive military exercises.  This prompted the Palestinian Maan news agency to report on 20 August that Israel has been undertaking “intensive” and “unprecedented” military training in the Negev desert “as if Israel was preparing for a major war with Egypt”.

Israel is now waiting to see if Mursi will indeed travel to Iran for meetings of the Non-Aligned Movement at the end of August, as is currently planned.  If he does go to Tehran, it will be the first visit to Iran by an Egyptian head of state since the 1979 Iranian revolution.  But even if Mursi takes the cautious view, sending his deputy Mahmoud Mekki instead, it is clear that Iran is continuing to make big efforts to mend fences with the Mursi regime in Cairo.

Observers who saw the encounter between Mursi and Iran’s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on the margins of the Mecca Islamic summit last week say that it was noticeably warm and confirmed the impression that a resumption of diplomatic ties between the two countries was just a matter of time.

And in a little noted initiative on the Syrian crisis, Egypt has put forward the idea of forming a ‘contact group’ including Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Iran.  Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and the international community have pretty much ignored the initiative, but even if it plays no role in the future of Syria it is perhaps indicative of Egypt’s more accommodating attitude towards Iran.  Iran, not surprisingly, has reacted positively to the idea, wanting not only to do anything it can to save the Assad regime in Damascus, but also to draw closer to Egypt and to capitalize on Saudi animosity towards the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood.

Finally, it is worth noting that these unwelcome developments from Egypt have all come since the 9 August warning from Israeli chief of staff Benny Gantz that Israel now has to “prepare for every scenario – even a multi-front confrontation”.   A “multi-front confrontation” is, of course, code for a war that involves Egypt.  JdeC.