The Egyptians and Iranians are talking once again. Their friendship could be good news, for the entire region, says Hassan Nafaa* At last, a historic meeting between the two largest countries in the Middle East. Mubarak and Khatami did not meet in Cairo or Tehran; it was in Geneva, on the sidelines of the World Summit on the Information Society, that the Egyptian and Iranian heads of state finally sat together -- the first presidential encounter since the Islamic Revolution broke out in Iran in 1979. I am all for closer ties between Egypt and Iran. But I somehow doubt that the ruling elites of either country have learned their lessons and are ready to open a new chapter in bilateral ties and face together the threat to their common interests and regional status. It is a known fact that the conservative current in Iran has dictated, and still does, the shape of relations with Egypt. Likewise, Egyptian security services have influenced, and perhaps still do, the course of ties with Iran. Both Iran's conservatives and Egyptian security services approach bilateral relations with a baggage of obsessions and fears. Iranian conservatives have treated the rupture with Egypt as one would a holy text, just because it was the much-revered Khomeini who severed the ties between the two countries. For their part, Egyptian security officials could see nothing other than Iran's tendency to "export" the revolution, as if societies never grow out of revolutionary zeal to qualify for mature politics. This unhealthy approach, on both sides, has undermined all sincere initiatives exerted on both sides of the divide by people wanting to rescue Egyptian- Iranian ties from their dismal state. Ties remained virtually frozen, for no apparent reason, even after it became clear that Iran had transcended its revolutionary stage and was on good terms with most world nations, including the Gulf states -- at one point the main target of Iran's attempts to "export" the revolution. The Mubarak-Khatami meeting suggests that things are about to change, and that the conservatives and security services are relaxing their grip on bilateral ties. This is good news, for it is time for both nations to straighten out their relations. We need a methodical and scientific approach to Egyptian-Iranian relations. And we need the input of those who are genuinely interested in the future of the Arab and Islamic worlds. Let's look further than the restoration of diplomatic ties and the exchange of ambassadors. In the wake of 9/11, Arabs and Muslims face an uncertain future -- less because of Westerners trying to pick up a crusader-style fight with our region than because of extremist Arabs and Muslims trying to get a jihad going against a crusading West that exists solely in their narrow minds. At the current phase in the development of the world order, the stage is set for a new political role, one that transcends the abilities of individual leaders and states. What we need is a special form of alliance, of "core" states acting with a mature sense of direction. Egyptian-Iranian relations can provide this sense of direction, but only if freed from the misconceptions and abnormal patterns of the past. A brief glance at the history of Egyptian-Iranian relations would demonstrate how erratic, immoderate, and inconsistent they have been. The two countries became very close, to the point of inter-marriages between the ruling families, only to relapse into total rupture. Interestingly, rapprochement tended to occur at times when both countries were governed by conservative elites, whereas estrangement happened when one country was conservative and the other radical. It never happened that both countries had radical regimes at the same time. While Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi (whom the CIA brought back to power following Mosaddeq's revolution, but failed to do so following the Islamic Revolution) was in power, Egypt had three regimes: a conservative monarchy, Nasser's radical regime, and Sadat's conservative government. The shah had a peculiar affinity with Egypt. He married into the Egyptian royal family, became a sworn enemy of Nasser, then a close friend of Sadat. One cannot help wondering what would have happened had the Iranian Islamic Revolution occurred while Nasser was in power. History offers few, if any, examples of healthy long-term relations between Third World radical regimes. Now is perhaps the best time to build healthy ties between mature regimes in Egypt and Iran. Egypt's 1952 revolutionary regime, having experienced numerous setbacks and disappointments, is now sailing steadily to constitutional legitimacy and true democracy. And the Iranian revolution, after years of adventurism, is approaching the same shores. Although neither is on firm ground so far, there is little doubt that they will move steadily ahead, as the alternatives are too risky to consider. Were the two countries to forge healthy and reliable ties, this could bring them closer to the political shores of maturity. I believe Egypt and Iran should turn over a new leaf and exchange ambassadors right away. The exchange of ambassadors is not an end, but a means to unblocking the channels of official and non-official exchanges. The two countries may not necessarily have identical interests or views on every single regional and international issue. But by working together, the two nations may foil the attempts of those who want to undermine their relations. The two countries have a clear interest in maintaining normal ties, and plenty to discuss. Egypt and Iran need to uphold the distinction between terror groups and national liberation movements; agree on a way to manage the conflict with Israel; formulate a common stand on the US occupation of Iraq; and take a firm stand on the matter of nuclear proliferation in the region, particularly with regard to Israel's atomic weapons. The two countries need also to discuss the Iranian- UAE conflict over the Emirates' occupied islands. And they have to review security in the Gulf and cooperation in international forums, especially the UN and the Group of 15. For all these issues to be placed in a long-term perspective, Egyptian and Iranian intellectuals should discuss such momentous topics as Arabism versus Islam; the rapprochement among Islamic sects; Gulf security versus Arab and Muslim security; the dialogue of civilisations, etc. These issues may seem too broad for Egyptian-Iranian dialogue and some would argue that they should be discussed in an Iranian-Arab or even Islamic-Arab framework. This may be true, but major efforts are like trains -- they need engines to pull them along. In my opinion, Egyptian-Iranian ties may serve as an engine for many of the topics of concern to the Arab and Muslim world. This is particularly true at this crucial phase of the development of the international order, when the Arab systems seem unable to accomplish anything on their own, and the Islamic world lacks a centre of gravity. Egyptian-Iranian relations could serve as a centre of gravity for the Arab and Islamic worlds. Is this a chauvinistic and non- egalitarian premise? I believe not, for the Arab world cannot confront the challenges facing it without Islamic backing, and the Muslim world cannot get ahead without Arab action. Egypt and Iran are qualified, for purely objective reasons, to be an engine of unity in the Arab and Muslim worlds. Egypt is the biggest Arab country; Iran is the biggest neighbouring non-Arab Islamic country. Egypt is the centre for Sunni Islam; Iran is the centre for Shi'ite Islam. The two countries share a depth of civilisation, harbour regional ambitions and know how to talk in a language the world can understand. Were these two countries to resolve their disputes, many contradictions between, and within, the Arab and Islamic worlds, may disappear. A few days ago, 25 European countries gathered to discuss a draft European constitution. No agreement has been reached, but one is expected within the next few months. Apparently, European unity has passed the point of no return. So, have we learned anything from it? Have we understood how this European dream turned into reality? Here is the answer: the Europeans have found their engine. Without a French-German agreement on how to deal with various security issues, there would have been no engine to pull them along the course of European integration for the past half century. The European coal and steel community was the first wagon of European integration, and the rest just fell into place. Are the differences among and rivalry between Arab and Islamic countries worse today than Europe's were a half century ago? Obviously not. The journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step. It also begins with a clear mind. Can the intellectual elites of Egypt and Iran provide a political vision enabling both countries to become an engine for Arab and Muslim integration? This may seem far-fetched, but not more so than European unity was a half century back. * The writer is professor of political science at Cairo University.
