Changes are caused by the changes in Cairo
Reader comment on: Egypt Fully Remilitarizing Sinai - with US Help
Submitted by Jerry Blaz (United States), Aug 22, 2012 18:55
I would believe that the priority Israel gives to the Sinai is indicated in the pace of completing the fence between Sinai and the Negev from the Gaza to the Red Sea, a distance of around 233 kilometers, if my memory serves me right. It has been years in its construction, and only the changes in Cairo gave the fence construction some impetus. Since the changes in Cairo, there have been around 15-16 times when the pipeline delivering gas to Israel and Jorden has been bombed, depriving Israel and Jorden with gas and depriving Egypt of income plus the costs or rebuilding the pipeline each time. Sinai (largely thanks to the former occupation of the territory by Israel) has become a tourist attraction for Egypt, with beach, swimming, boating, diving and many other attractions at Taba and at Sharm ash-Sheikh.
Recently, Sinai had become a passage to Israel by African refugees and jobseekers who paid the native Bedouin Arabs to bring them safely through the Sinai desert, and then Israelis began to object because of social problems that arose. Now they are trying to figure out what to do with the 60,000 or so Africans from many countries.
The infiltration of jihadists into the Sinai, who are able to pay the Bedouins to help them and even to participate in actions, was the latest problem to occur in Egypt. After they killed 16 Egyptian soldiers, creating great problems locally for President Mohammed Morsi, he realized he had to control the Sinai with armed forces. In coordination with the Israeli government, he introduced greater numbers of police and army with armor. According to some reports, the Israelis are having second thoughts of having Egyptian tanks so close to Israel. While it is in the northern part of the Sinai that the refugees traveled, the pipeline was bombed, and most of the jihadist actions have occurred there, putting the entire Sinai is at risk. Yet it give the town of El Arish on the Mediterannean coast that is of most importance both to the Egyptians and the jihadists.
Egypt has placed stronger controls on the border between Gaza and Egypt because they are convinced that Gaza is the source of the jihadists. There is no doubt that the two sides are going to have to consider what steps they must take to pacify the Sinai and keep the Egyptian-Israeli peace treaty in force.
Note: Reader comments are screened, and in some cases edited, before posting. Gatestone Institute reserves the right to reject anything found to be objectionable. Reader comments, including the one above, represent solely the opinion or viewpoint of the readers that submitted them and do not represent the opinion or viewpoint of Gatestone Institute. Gatestone Institute takes no responsibility for the content of reader comments.
Other reader comments on this item
|⇒ Changes are caused by the changes in Cairo [401 words]||Jerry Blaz||Aug 22, 2012 18:55|
|Now Obama scrapes Camp David [72 words]||Art||Aug 22, 2012 07:55|
|Israel mustn't allow Egypt to unilaterally void obligations to their own advantage [99 words]||Raymond in DC||Aug 20, 2012 22:55|
|Trust and confidence [236 words]||Hans||Aug 20, 2012 18:10|
Comment on this item
by Khaled Abu Toameh
The "Arab Spring" did not erupt as a result of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Rather, it was the outcome of decades of tyranny and corruption in the Arab world. The Tunisians, Egyptians, Libyans and Yemenis who removed their dictators from power did not do so because of the lack of a "two-state solution." This is the last thing they had in mind.
The thousands of Muslims who are volunteering to join the Islamic State [IS] are not doing so because they are frustrated with the lack of progress in the Israeli-Palestinian peace talks.
The only solution the Islamic State believes in is a Sunni Islamic Caliphate where the surviving non-Muslims who are not massacred would be subject to sharia law.
What Kerry perhaps does not know is that the Islamic State is not interested in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict at all. Unlike Kerry, Sunni scholars fully understand that the Islamic State has more to do with Islam and terrorism than with any other conflict.
by Steven J. Rosen
Palestinian officials have generally been silent about security cooperation with Israel. They are loath to acknowledge how important it is for the survival of the Palestinian Authority [PA], and fear that critics, especially Hamas, will consider it "collaboration with the enemy."
"You smuggle weapons, explosives and cash to the West Bank, not for the fight with Israel, but for a coup against the Palestinian Authority. The Israeli intelligence chief visited me two weeks ago and told me about the [Hamas] group they arrested that was planning for a coup... We have a national unity government and you are thinking about a coup against me." — Mahmoud Abbas, PA President, to Khaled Mashaal, Hamas leader.
According to Israeli Defense Minister Moshe Ya'alon, if the IDF leaves the West Bank, Hamas will take over, and other terrorists groups such as the Islamic Jihad, Al-Qaeda and Islamic State would operate there.
In recent months, Abbas has been making a series of threats against Israel. If Abbas becomes another Arafat, it could be the Israeli side that loses interest in security cooperation.
by Burak Bekdil
It was the Islamists who, since they came to power in the 2000s, have reaped the biggest political gains from the "Palestine-fetish."
But the Turkish rhetoric on "solidarity" with our Palestinian brothers often seems askew to how solidarity should be.
by Raheel Raza
One blogger writes that Malala hates Pakistan's military. I believe it is the other way around.
I would so like to see the day when Malala is welcomed back in Pakistan, with the whole country cheering.
by Francesco Sisci
Democratic evolution in China was being seriously considered. The failures of U.S. support for democracy in Afghanistan, Iraq, Egypt and Libya gave new food for thought to those opposed to democracy. Lastly, the United States did not strongly oppose the anti-democratic coup d'état that overthrew a democratically elected government in Thailand.
On the other hand, Russia -- dominated by Vladimir Putin, a new autocrat determined to stifle democracy in Russia -- provided a new model.
The whole of Eastern Europe and most of Latin America, formerly in the clutches of dictatorships, are now efficient democracies. This seems to indicate that while democracy cannot be parachuted into a country, there is a broader, longer-term global trend toward democracy and that its growth depends on local conditions.
As economic development needed careful planning, political reforms need even greater planning. The question remains: is China preparing for these political reforms?