Ahmed Kamel – Egypt Daily News
A recent article published by Israel’s Maariv newspaper has triggered sharp reactions from Egyptian experts, who condemned the report as a blatant attempt to sow discord between Egypt and other Arab and Islamic nations. The report, which discusses Egypt’s military movements in the Sinai Peninsula, was described by Egyptian analysts as part of a psychological warfare campaign aimed at pressuring Cairo and reshaping regional perceptions.
The Report and Its Claims
The Maariv article claimed that the Egyptian military has been actively redeploying and strengthening its presence in Sinai, a move the Israeli outlet described as coordinated and monitored by the Israeli army. It suggested that the two countries maintain ongoing military cooperation despite recent diplomatic tensions, and that Egypt’s actions are primarily focused on preventing the movement of Palestinians from Gaza into the Sinai region.
The report further noted that despite Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s harsh rhetoric towards Cairo and his decision to freeze a $35 billion gas deal with Egypt, the overall relationship between the two countries remains strategically significant. It emphasized that both Egyptian and Israeli security institutions value the peace treaty signed in 1979 and maintain close coordination, even as public expressions of solidarity between the nations remain limited.
Egyptian Experts: Psychological Warfare, Not Strategic Insight
Egyptian security and strategic affairs expert Mohamed Makhlouf responded strongly to the Maariv article, dismissing it as Israeli intelligence propaganda designed to provoke a response from Egypt.
“This is not journalism, it’s a message from the Mossad. It aims to manipulate Egypt into declaring that it will not respond militarily to Israeli provocations, thereby dragging Cairo into a plan for the forced displacement of Palestinians,” Makhlouf said in an interview with RT.
He firmly rejected the suggestion of any military or intelligence coordination with Israel, accusing Tel Aviv of being the true violator of the peace treaty through its occupation of the Philadelphi Corridor, obstruction of humanitarian aid to Gaza, and its military actions against civilians.
“Israel is the one breaking the peace agreement, not Egypt,” Makhlouf stressed. “Egypt has never and will never conspire with Israel against any Arab or Muslim country.”
A Shift in Egypt’s Tone
Makhlouf highlighted what he sees as a major shift in Egypt’s official stance toward Israel, citing President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi’s use of the word “enemy” to describe Israel during a recent Arab-Islamic summit.
“This is a turning point. No Egyptian president has officially used such language since the Camp David Accords. The message is clear: Israel has crossed red lines, and peace is no longer sacred if those violations continue.”
He argued that the Israeli media campaign is part of a broader effort to mitigate the fallout from this rhetorical escalation and deflect attention from its own failures in Gaza.
Cairo Denies Blocking Aid to Gaza
Makhlouf also pushed back against Israeli accusations that Egypt is obstructing humanitarian aid to Gaza, stating that the Palestinian Prime Minister himself confirmed that the Rafah crossing is open on the Egyptian side, and that thousands of trucks are ready to deliver aid, but are being blocked by Israeli forces.
“Egypt has provided over 80% of the aid, while Israel maintains a systematic blockade. These accusations are false and meant to shift blame,” he said.
Forced Displacement Is a Red Line
While ruling out an all-out war between Egypt and Israel, Makhlouf warned that any attempt to forcibly push Palestinians across the border into Sinai would provoke a firm response.
“For Egypt and for Jordan and the rest of the Arab world, forced displacement is a red line. The Egyptian military is prepared for all scenarios. What we show in public drills like Bright Star is only a fraction of our capabilities. What remains unseen would surprise everyone.”
He described Israel’s actions as psychological warfare, designed to confuse the Arab position, externalize blame for the humanitarian crisis in Gaza, and pressure Egypt into strategic concessions. But he emphasized that Cairo is fully aware of these tactics and is acting with calculated strategic restraint.
Legal Perspective: Egypt’s Sovereign Rights in Sinai
International law expert Dr. Mohamed Mahmoud Mehran echoed Makhlouf’s sentiments, categorically denying any requirement for Egypt to coordinate its military operations in Sinai with Israel.
“These troop movements are within Egypt’s full sovereign rights to protect its national security and borders. The Camp David Accords do not restrict Egypt from taking necessary defensive measures,” Dr. Mehran said.
He dismissed Israeli suggestions of military collaboration as “delusional” and part of a psychological campaign meant to distort Egypt’s steadfast support for the Palestinian cause.
“Mentioning joint security arrangements or cooperation is a blatant attempt to tarnish Egypt’s position. Egypt will not and does not coordinate its national defense with Israel,” he asserted.
Gas Deals and Political Optics
Dr. Mehran also questioned Maariv’s reference to stalled gas deals between Israel and Egypt, calling it an attempt to falsely project the illusion of deep economic interdependence.
“Citing gas agreements is a way to suggest that Egypt is economically bound to Israel in a way that would prevent escalation. This is misleading. Egypt retains full sovereignty in its decisions and will not be pressured into compromising its regional position.”
He concluded by emphasizing that attempts by Israel to exploit regional instability to insinuate hidden alliances will fail. “The Egyptian leadership and people know the nature of the Zionist enemy. Egypt will remain at the heart of the Arab world, defending its just causes,” Dr. Mehran said.
Final Takeaway: Strategic Patience, Not Submission
Both experts agree that Israel is engaged in an orchestrated media campaign to reframe Egypt’s actions and pressure Cairo into political passivity. However, Egypt’s response has so far been measured, assertive, and aligned with long-standing national and regional principles.
As Makhlouf summed it up: “We are not seeking war. But peace is not unconditional. If the red lines are crossed, Egypt will act and the response may be far more than Israel expects.”
