By Dina Ezzat It is a quarter of a century ago that Egypt and Israel fought their last war. The subsequent peace, though, has been cold, and often punctuated by diplomatic battles -- if it is not the peace process, then it is regional economic cooperation or Middle Eastern military alliances. And according to some analysts and officials, the diplomatic war is likely to intensify in the near future. "The issues of the peace process and the Israeli-Turkish alliance are two examples of the political conflict between Egypt and Israel. But this conflict does not centre on these issues alone. The conflict is triggered by Israel's wish to establish itself as the regional super-power. Egypt is not prepared to allow this to happen," said Abdel-Alim Mohamed, editor of the monthly Israeli Digest, published by the Al-Ahram Centre for Political and Strategic Studies. It is generally accepted that a military alliance between Turkey, Israel and possibly Jordan, as well as a political settlement that secures for Israel its expansionist ambitions would amount to a threat to Egypt's regional interests. "Obviously this is what Israel is trying to do now, to move in the areas that would disturb and threaten Egypt most," argued Mohamed. On the week marking the 20th anniversary of the Camp David Accords, Egypt finds little cause for celebrating. Dennis Ross, the US special envoy to the Middle East, returned to the region to make a fresh attempt at narrowing the gap between Israel and the Palestinians, which has paralysed peace-making for 18 months. "What Ross tried to do was to get the Palestinians to accept Israel's idea of a deal, albeit with a bit of face-saving phraseology that he suggested," said one source. On Sunday Ross visited Cairo -- accused by Israel of blocking a deal by encouraging the Palestinians to take a hardline position. The American envoy seemed to be arguing the Israeli position, which is to pressure Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat into accepting a deal that would severely limit the territory restored to the Palestinians while at the same time extracting security arrangements at enormous political cost. According to one source, "what the Israelis wanted Ross to do is to get Cairo to support Arafat in accepting a deal that would allow the Israelis to take security measures in most of the territories without his approval or even a green-light from the US." Egypt not only rejected this argument but tried to persuade Ross that a deal at any price would not last and would only lead to more complications. According to informed sources, Cairo's impression is that Ross was sympathetic to Egyptian concerns. "The US is a key player. We understand the nature of its relations with Israel but this does not mean that we should always be arguing with the US; this is not a tripartite relation," said one source. While Ross seems to be leaving the region empty-handed Egyptian policy-makers have not discounted the possibility that Arafat might choose to follow the advice of those advisers who argue that any deal is better than nothing. And certainly the signing of a deal in Washington soon would be something that President Bill Clinton would appreciate. To minimise this possibility Egypt, which did not grant Arafat his wish for an Arab summit, is working with France to raise support for an international peace-saving conference to put pressure on Israel to honour its commitments. Cairo, in making it clear that it is not prepared to offer political cover for a bad deal is extending support to those Palestinian negotiators unwilling to make further concessions. And though the battle over a Palestinian-Israeli deal is not over yet, Cairo appears to have won the latest round. But coming rounds may be even tougher. By cementing its military ties with Turkey and involving Jordan in the alliance Israel is piling on the strategic pressure. "These relations could be tactical co-operation, or a strategic alliance but they add to Israel's bargaining chips, particularly if Jordan decided to be more involved in this setup," an official said. Israel attempted to neutralise Egypt by offering it, along with Jordan, observer status at last year's joint Israeli-Turkish military manoeuvres but, unlike Jordan, Egypt refused and expressed scepticism over the nature and objectives of the war games. This year Cairo took a more aggressive position when Israel suggested that it might invite Egypt along with Jordan to take part in future exercises. "They better not send such an invitation," said Foreign Minister Amr Moussa. "It looks like a negative development at a time we are trying to revive the peace process." "It is no secret that Egypt is very annoyed by what could well be a strategic alliance between two militarily privileged states to contain the Arab countries," said one official. Egypt, officials argue, does not wish to escalate the confrontation in the region and will not rush to forge a counter-alliance with Syria and Iran, though relations with the two countries are warming. If the Turkish-Israeli alliance manifests itself more flagrantly, then Egyptian officials may feel that they have no choice but to seek the counter-alliance. According to one source, "this is not our first option. Our first choice is to convince the Jordanians they should give priority to its Arab ties. We are also trying to enhance relations with Turkey...In the meantime, we are closely consulting with the Syrians." Some critics blame the current situation on the Camp David Accords. Abdel-Alim Mohamed is one of them, arguing it was Camp David which spawned the idea of Palestinian autonomy on which the Oslo Accords were based. And by signing Camp David, Egypt acted unilaterally, shattering all dreams of Arab military cooperation. "There are other regional and international factors, but Camp David is to blame, at least in part, for what is happening today," he said.
