The future of Sinai must be reassessed, not least in the face of Sharon's designs on the peninsula, writes Hassan Nafaa* Speculation is rife over the identity and aims of those responsible for the Sinai bombings. Israeli officials were quick to implicate international terror organisations, pointing the finger of suspicion at Al-Qaeda. The Americans followed suit. Egyptian officials, though, have remained sceptical, preferring not to jump to conclusions or discount any possibilities -- including the involvement of Israeli, Palestinian or Egyptian extremists -- in the absence of any firm evidence. Analysts are divided. Most Israeli and US analysts echo the views of their governments, highlighting circumstantial evidence pointing to Al-Qaeda's involvement. While some Egyptian and Arab analysts entertain suspicions of Mossad involvement, others have ruled out that possibility, pointing out that Al-Qaeda, and Palestinians and Egyptian groups, have sufficient motive. Accusations of Al-Qaeda involvement are based on the similarities between the Sinai bombings and other attacks claimed by Al- Qaeda and its associates, and tend to focus on the complex logistics of the operation. Israel's haste in blaming Al-Qaeda is interesting. In the past Tel Aviv has avoided blaming attacks, even against Israelis living outside the occupied territories, on Al-Qaeda. Yet this time the Israeli government has acted as if it is sure Al-Qaeda is to blame, citing as evidence a statement aired recently by Arabic satellite stations in which Ayman El-Zawahiri called on his followers to target Israelis. Those who suspect Mossad involvement point out that Al-Qaeda has no known history of targeting Israelis. The operation, they argue, could not have been successful without some form of inside help. And while Al-Zawahiri was once head of Egyptian Jihad, that organisation has been effectively neutralised. Israeli insistence that Al-Qaeda was responsible has served simply to exacerbate the suspicions of some that the bombings were a covert operation mounted by Mossad, which deliberately left Al-Qaeda fingerprints. The aim of the operation, these analysts argue, is to portray Egypt as a hapless country, incapable of maintaining security over its own territories let alone in Gaza following Israel's planned disengagement. If Al-Qaeda is seen to be attacking Egypt, the argument goes, then Cairo will be obliged to assist Israel and the US in their war against terror, perhaps even to the point of confronting those Palestinian resistance groups Israel and the US view as terrorist. Investigations into the bombings are continuing and it is unlikely that any conclusive evidence will surface in the near future. So rather than waste time on a hypothetical whodunit, it would be more useful to examine the significance of the bombing and its ramifications in terms of regional developments and the Arab-Israeli conflict. In doing so, though, it is important to bear in mind that those who benefit from the incident need not be the perpetrators. Israel is clearly seeking to use the bombings to further its own interests, and is doing so in a manner most Egyptians will find repulsive. The Egyptian public daily witnesses scenes of the murder of Palestinian children, women, and old people, scenes of people buried beneath the wreckage of their homes, of Palestinian men hunted down and murdered because Israel suspects they might constitute a threat. Yet despite this backdrop of barbarity the US vetoed a UN Security Council resolution asking Israel to halt its Days of Penitence campaign in Gaza, once again showing that it is now virtually impossible to distinguish between Washington and Tel Aviv. Regardless of who was behind the bombing most Egyptians saw them as being anti-Israel rather than an attack on Egypt's stability or tourist industry, and consequently have ruled out the possibility that Islamic groups have once again taken arms against the government. The Taba bombings also served to remind the Egyptian public of the terms of the deal signed with Israel after international arbitration returned Taba to Egypt. Then Egypt signed an agreement offering financial compensation for what is now the Taba Hilton, and granted Israelis the right to enter Taba and travel as far as Sharm El-Sheikh without having to obtain a visa. This deal, signed in the euphoric days following the arbitration, passed almost unnoticed, despite the fact that it contains serious concessions on Egypt's part. The significance of these concessions became obvious in the immediate aftermath of the bombings, when Israel behaved as if Taba was still under its sovereignty. Egypt, out of humanitarian or political concern, acted in self- effacing manner, cooperating with Israel to the fullest. Yet Sharon falsely claimed Egypt could have been more cooperative and have done more to save Israelis. This despite the fact that Egyptian casualties outnumbered Israeli. Reports in the international media have surfaced suggesting that a document on the desk of the Israeli prime minister discusses the possibility of Israel purchasing, or renting, areas of north Sinai. These reports, along with the way Israel conducted itself in the aftermath of the Sinai bombings, should give Egyptians food for thought. Sharon, it seems, is seriously thinking of using Sinai as an area for expansion, as a natural continuum of Gaza, perhaps even as a place to relocate large numbers of Palestinians. And he is thinking of this in the context of a lasting settlement, a settlement that would underpin the separation wall he is building in the West Bank and which annexes vast tracts of Palestinian land, taking it inside what Sharon hopes will be Israel's lasting borders. The events in Taba demand a review of security arrangements in the peninsula, both those contained in the Egyptian-Israeli peace agreement and in the post-Taba arbitration deal. If the US and Israel want Egypt to do more to fight international terrorism they will have to allow the Egyptian army and security forces to deploy in adequate numbers in the areas where Egypt most needs to impose its sovereignty and tighten its control. Sinai is currently a smugglers paradise, a channel for weapons, explosives, and drugs -- all of which are now seen as a threat not just to Egypt but to the region and the world. The Sinai bombings made it clear that the peninsula has become, due to Israeli actions, the soft underbelly of Egyptian national security. The Taba crossing particularly threatens Egyptian national security. Security reports suggest the Taba crossing point has become the main artery for drugs entering Egypt, with Israeli gangs involved making full use of the privileges accorded Israeli individuals and vehicles crossing into Egypt. And if large quantities of drugs can be smuggled through the Taba crossing point then other contraband -- weapons, explosives, perhaps even terrorists -- can. Following the peace agreement with Israel Sinai became a security threat. Now, to make matters worse, Israel is thinking of using the peninsula as a possible receptacle for "excess" Palestinians, for those who must make room for the emergence of Greater Israel. The Egyptian government and people have a right -- and a duty -- to be concerned. * The writer is professor of political science at Cairo University.
