Ahmed Kamel – Egypt Daily News
An Israeli minister’s warning that Egypt could lose the Sinai Peninsula if it attacked Israel has triggered a wave of angry responses from Egyptian television hosts and a lawmaker, raising the temperature around remarks that touch on Egyptian sovereignty and the two countries’ long-standing peace treaty.
Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich made the comments in an interview with the ultra-Orthodox news outlet Hashtiblach. He asked what would prevent Egypt from attacking Israel and said the answer was that “there will be no Sinai” if it did. He added that such a scenario would not happen again and invoked former Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin, who signed the 1979 peace treaty with Egypt.
The warning drew particularly strong reactions because Sinai is Egyptian territory that Israel occupied in 1967 and returned under the peace agreement after Israel’s defeat during the 1973 war. The treaty ended the state of war between the two countries and established security arrangements for the peninsula. Smotrich’s remarks presented the prospect of losing the territory as a deterrent to a hypothetical Egyptian attack, but Egyptian commentators condemned the statement as a threat to national security.
Television host Amr Adib responded on MBC Egypt by arguing that Cairo had worked to keep the border stable and warning that an Israeli attack would bring severe consequences. He said there would be no Tel Aviv, Ben Gurion Airport or Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, adding that Israel would face destruction before it could defeat Egypt. His comments reflected the forceful tone adopted by several prominent Egyptian media figures after Smotrich’s interview.
Ahmed Moussa, host of the program Ala Mas’ouleety on Sada El Balad, also issued a stark warning. He said Israel would pay a heavy price if it took any action threatening Egyptian national security and insisted Egyptians were prepared to defend their country. Referring to the 1973 war, Moussa recalled that Egyptian forces captured more than 200 Israeli soldiers. He warned that Sinai was not open to Israeli encroachment and said Egypt would not allow a repeat of the 1967 outcome.
Moussa portrayed the comments as coming from Israeli hardliners rather than reflecting a desire for peace between the two countries. He also argued that a future conflict would not end with a prisoner exchange, using language that underscored how sharply the exchange had escalated.
Parliamentarian and journalist Mustafa Bakri denounced Smotrich as an extremist and accused him of treating Egypt as if it were an open arena for Israeli action. Bakri said Egypt’s armed forces were ready to confront anyone who threatened the country’s national security. He invoked past Egyptian-Israeli fighting to argue that Egypt could again resist an Israeli military challenge.
Political scientist Hamed Fares, speaking to Sky News Arabia, described Smotrich’s words as “political adolescence” and said they crossed a red line for Egypt. Fares suggested that the minister’s rhetoric could be intended to reinforce a hardline political image ahead of Israel’s next election. He also argued that depicting neighboring countries as threats could help justify territorial expansion in the name of security.
Smotrich’s comments extended beyond Egypt. In the same interview, he advocated Israeli control over at least half of Gaza and discussed taking land in Lebanon, saying residents of those areas would not return. The remarks framed territorial acquisition as a consequence of war and intensified concern about the scope of the minister’s ambitions.
The Sinai statement carries particular weight because of the history behind the peninsula. Israel captured Sinai during the 1967 war. The 1979 peace treaty provided for an Israeli withdrawal in stages and the return of the territory to Egyptian sovereignty, alongside limits and arrangements governing military deployments. The agreement remains the foundation of formal relations between Egypt and Israel.
The public response described here has come primarily from media figures and a lawmaker; reports said there was no immediate official Egyptian government response specifically to Smotrich’s warning. President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi had said that Egypt’s armed forces were prepared to defend the country, its resources and national security under any circumstances.
For now, the exchange consists of a provocative warning from an Israeli cabinet minister and forceful Egyptian media responses. But the language is politically consequential: Sinai is not merely a strategic buffer or bargaining point, but territory whose return is central to the peace agreement between the two countries. The Egyptian reactions make clear that any suggestion of threatening it is likely to provoke a strong public backlash, even as the peace treaty remains in place.
