Egypt is working alongside the Palestinians. To do otherwise is inconceivable, writes Ibrahim Nafie There is a lot of alarmist talk these days about Egypt's role in the Palestinian cause. Some have gone so far as to suggest that Egypt is acting against the will of the Palestinian people, suggesting it is lending itself to Israeli aims or even pursuing ends of its own. Such fears and allegations are, at the very best, ill-informed and groundless. Egypt has and will always work towards the best interest of the Palestinian people and their cause. In so doing it has consistently operated in accordance with a close examination of the relative advantages of available alternatives in conjunction with meticulous calculations of their impact on considerations of Arab national security, which is an extension of Egyptian national security. At the same time it should be stressed that Egypt has never taken an action on the Palestinian cause without first clearing it with the Palestinians. That this principle was applied in our handling of the Israeli plan for the unilateral withdrawal from Gaza is indisputable. Egypt did not set into motion its recent initiative on this plan until after it obtained the written approval of Palestinian President Yasser Arafat. Of course there will always be those who will counter that Arafat does not represent a Palestinian consensus. These, and similar such remarks, are music to Israeli ears. But, just for the record, let us recall that Arafat is the leader of the PLO, the longest established movement in the history of the Palestinian struggle, and that he is now the Palestinian president, elected by his people in free, fair and internationally monitored polls. At the same time, however, Egypt will not continue its initiative unless it receives approval based on an agreement between all the Palestinian factions. This is why Egypt continues to encourage and promote Palestinian-Palestinian dialogue and has offered to host this dialogue in Cairo. The Palestinians must hammer out among themselves a common vision for a peace settlement and an approach to the plans and initiatives that are on the tables. Egypt will then act in accordance with the perceptions and demands the Palestinians present. If, for example, the Palestinian factions opt to sustain the resistance and to reject the unilateral disengagement plan and efforts to link it with the roadmap, Egypt will call a halt to its initiative. I believe the foregoing is sufficient to lay to rest any qualms concerning the Egyptian role. It should also put paid to claims aired on some Arab satellite stations to the effect that Egypt's recent initiative is prompted by ulterior motives. Particularly abhorrent is that allegation that Egypt was lured by the promise of $300 million from the US, a flagrant falsehood that is all the more offensive in light of Egypt's lengthy record in defending Arab causes and the sacrifices the Egyptian people have made over the years on behalf of those causes. It should be borne in mind that the commentators who made such charges based them on statements issued by Israeli officials or "reports" in the Israeli press. It cannot be emphasised enough how important it is to treat Israeli news sources with extreme caution. Anyone familiar with the Israeli media realises that more often than not statements, commentaries and news releases are calculated to test the Arab pulse or to spark tensions in Arab countries. Egypt habitually comes under attack in the Israeli press at times when Egyptian and Israeli views diverge sharply over a particular issue, as is the case these days with regard to the unilateral disengagement plan. Egypt perceives a number of inherent dangers in the Israeli perception of this plan. To the Israelis "unilateral" means excluding the Palestinians from the process on the grounds that "there is no Palestinian partner" with which to negotiate. They are also averse to any linkage with withdrawal from other occupied territories. Egypt fears that the plan as it stands will enable Israel to further isolate the Palestinian leadership, on the one hand, and retain the upper hand in ordering conditions in the West Bank, where it wants to press ahead with the construction of the separating wall and retain the freedom to lash out against the Palestinian people, on the other. Indeed, this is why Israel is keen to exclude major international powers from the process of reconstruction in Palestinian territories, not to mention to bury the roadmap. For these reasons Egypt is determined to ensure that the Gaza withdrawal plan is incorporated into the roadmap and that it proceeds on the basis of Palestinian-Israeli negotiations. Egypt will then contribute in political and security capacities to the implementation of this and other phases of the roadmap and work closely with various international powers, and the Quartet in particular, to revive the negotiating process and to commence full scale reconstruction in the Palestinian territories. I have no doubt that Israeli awareness of the import of the Egyptian initiative is behind the current anti-Egyptian campaign in the Israeli media. After all, Egyptian and Israeli views on the Gaza disengagement plan could not clash more strongly. This, in turn, should compel us to scrutinise with care what appears in the Israeli press. A case in point is the report that Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon refused to meet Head of Egyptian Intelligence Omar Suleiman during his recent visit to Tel Aviv. The fact is, Sharon could not have "refused" since no such meeting was scheduled to begin with. Suleiman's schedule in Tel Aviv, set well in advance of his visit, was to meet with Israeli Minister of Defence Shaul Mofaz and Minister of Foreign Affairs Sylvan Shalom. The purpose of these meetings was to discuss the status of the Philadelphia corridor and an amendment to the Egyptian- Israeli peace treaty which might enable Egyptian border forces to take the place of police in Zone C. Sharon had met with Mofaz and Shalom in advance of Suleiman's visit and they, in turn, conveyed the Israeli government's approval of this amendment. Sharon also appointed Mofaz and Shalom as heads, respectively, of the Israeli military and political subcommittees that are dealing with the modifications to the status of Zone C, over which negotiations are still in progress. The Egyptian head of security is to visit the US at the end of this month, after which he is indeed scheduled to meet with Sharon. The foregoing should drive home how important it is to have a solid grasp of the facts before spouting off. The facts tell us that the Egyptian role will not be restricted to the security dimension alone and that, even with regard to this dimension, Egypt will not be sending military personnel, but rather a team of experts in security affairs. Nor is it accurate to suggest that Egypt is acting as a "mediator". A mediator is a go-between, a facilitator, a transmitter of messages between two sides. He is also presumably impartial. This is not, nor can it be, the Egyptian role on matters pertaining to the Palestinian cause, in the advancement of which, as Arafat himself has said, Egypt is a full partner. Indeed, this is why Egypt is so intent that the Palestinians reach a consensus on a common vision and why we have given the PA and the factions the months of July and August to work out the ways they want Egypt to support them. That Egypt has Palestinian interests foremost in mind is further demonstrated by the fact that our recent initiative has stimulated a similar move on the part of the Quartet, which met in Taba over a week ago and which will meet again this month. In addition, Egyptian diplomacy has inspired many international parties to reassert their commitment to the peace process and to offer to help promote the current drive. For example, US Secretary of State Colin Powell issued an assurance that even if Washington is caught up in an election year it will not ignore the Middle East and that his country was still committed to the roadmap and the creation of an independent Palestinian state. In addition, EU officials issued several statements of support for the current drive and France offered to participate in any international peacekeeping force sent to the occupied territories. At the moment Egypt is waiting to see the consensus the Palestinians reach at the end of August if, indeed, they reach one. If the consensus is to work with the disengagement plan Egypt will begin the training of some 40 to 50 Palestinian security officers. Then, in September, there will be another round of Palestinian-Palestinian dialogue, followed by Palestinian-Egyptian talks in Cairo. In October US, Egyptian, Israeli and Palestinian representatives will meet in the US to affirm the incorporation of the withdrawal from Gaza into the roadmap and to establish their respective obligations. In November a timetable for withdrawal will be drawn up and, in accordance with it, additional Egyptian experts will go to Gaza. Simultaneously reconstruction projects will begin as the search for international donors continues. This is not to suggest that the foregoing is set in stone. What is important is that others stop claiming to speak for the Palestinians and let the Palestinians speak for themselves. This is the voice that Egypt is waiting to hear and once it does it will do all in its power to work in the direction the Palestinians choose. At the same time it should be stressed that not all is contingent upon the Palestinians. If the Sharon madness -- the targeted assassinations of Palestinian leaders, the demolition of Palestinian homes, the bulldozing of fields and all the other acts intended to bring Palestinians to their knees -- is allowed to persist, the cycle of violence and counter-violence and the murder of innocent civilians on both sides will never end.
