The crisis between Cairo and Tel Aviv might have been contained but it is no longer business as usual in post-revolution Egypt, writes Amira Howeidy It took only four days for Egyptian and Israeli officials to settle the diplomatic crisis that erupted when the Israeli occupation army killed five policemen manning Egypt's northeastern border in Rafah. The public was left in the dark as to what exactly happened on 18 and 19 August. The only details published of how five Egyptians lost their lives was that it happened during Israel's retaliation for an attack on Thursday by suspected Palestinian militants in Eilat which left eight Israelis dead. While the Israeli press has published its side of the story on an almost daily basis -- hinting at "close coordination" with the Egyptian army -- until Al-Ahram Weekly went to print on Wednesday Egyptian officials had yet to produce a consistent version of events. Emotions ran high on Thursday evening as the names of the Egyptian conscripts killed were revealed one by one. The scene in front of the Israeli embassy in Cairo -- the last two floors of a 23-storey residential building near Cairo University -- was reminiscent of a smaller Tahrir Square. Thousands poured into an area that under the Mubarak regime had been unapproachable, a red line that no demonstration ever succeeded in crossing. Their chants laid out clear demands: recall Egypt's ambassador to Israel, expel the Israeli ambassador to Egypt and cancel the Egyptian-Israeli peace treaty. Late on Friday angry crowds in front of 6 Ibn Malek Street poured over to the flyover facing the building housing Israel's embassy, bringing traffic on one lane of the bridge to a halt as they roared "Sinai! Sinai!". By the early hours of Saturday the government had issued a statement condemning the attacks, demanded an apology from Israel and an immediate investigation into what happened. It was not enough to calm the crowds. Two hours later the government issued a second statement, this time announcing the recall of the Egyptian ambassador. The crowds were jubilant. But it was not to last. Soon anonymous officials were being quoted in the media saying the second statement had been a mistake. It was, they claimed incredibly, a draft of the first statement before it had been edited. No one seemed sure what was happening. Even state-run TV ran a news bar throughout Saturday saying Egypt would recall its ambassador. The confusion, say commentators, was most likely a result of divisions over how to respond between the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (SCAF) and Prime Minister Essam Sharaf's cabinet. But if there were arguments at the top of the state, they were not reflected in the street. The demonstration continued with zeal in front of the Israeli embassy. As protesters unsuccessfully targeted the flag on top of the embassy building with fireworks one young man took matters into his own hands. He decided to climb up the building, remove the blue and white symbol of Israel and replace it with the Egyptian flag. By the time he climbed down safely "flagman", as he had been dubbed on Twitter and Facebook, was a national hero. His name, Ahmed El-Shahat, was suddenly everywhere. The 24-year-old carpenter later told the hysterical media fighting over him that he has no political affiliations and was acting simply as "an Egyptian". At home millions of his compatriots related to his words; across the Arab world millions more cheered. El-Shahat, as the Lebanese daily Assafir succinctly put it, had "scored a victory for Arab dignity". El-Shahat's story recalled the memory of Suleiman Khater, the 25-year-old conscript who opened fire at eight Israelis for illegally crossing the border near his military post in 1985. He received a life sentence for his vigilance but was found dead in his cell a year later. The official cause of death was suicide, though many believe he was murdered. It is the second time since the revolution that Khater's story has been resuscitated in social media and his black and white photo is now a recurring avatar for users on Twitter and Facebook. The connection between the revolution, issues of national independence and anti-Israeli sentiments, goes back at least to 2000, when demonstrators showed solidarity with the second Palestinian Intifada by defying the emergency laws for the first time under Mubarak, paving the way for the growth of the dissent movements that 11 years later would overturn the regime. As the revolution received a new dose of nationalism, the situation in Sinai was suddenly at the forefront of public interest. Questions were voiced in the press and on TV. Just what is happening on the peninsula? What did the 1978 Egyptian-Israeli agreement stipulate, and why can't we change it? The 1978 Camp David treaty between Egypt and Israel limits the number of Egyptian forces in area C, which runs along the eastern border of the Sinai and covers approximately one-third of the peninsula, to a lightly-armed police presence. It is in this zone that most Israeli attacks resulting in Egyptian casualties have occurred, including last week's. According to the treaty Egypt cannot change anything related to its military or police presence and equipment in the area without Israel agreeing. After Israel's withdrawal from Gaza in 2005, Egypt was allowed to deploy 750 additional guards to secure the border. From Israel's viewpoint, their mission was to protect its southern flank. Their number was doubled in 2007 after the Hamas takeover of Gaza. More recently, Israel agreed to the deployment of an additional 2,000 Egyptian troops in Sinai for an operation targeting militant groups. The SCAF has thus far been silent about the scope and duration of this operation. It was after the new troops arrived that the attacks on Eilat occurred and Israel retaliated, breaching the Egyptian-Israeli border. It had done so repeatedly in the past, but such incidents were either hushed up, or ignored altogether, by Egypt's state-run media. As Al-Ahram Weekly went to press Wednesday morning Israel had not issued an official apology and "official sources" in Tuesday's papers were quoted as saying Cairo will not recall its ambassador and will eventually return the Israeli flag to the embassy once tensions subside. The scene at the Israeli embassy remained vibrant, but not as intense as earlier in the week. In the evening street vendors were busy selling firecrackers "five pounds only to hit the Israeli embassy!" or "get a grad rocket and hit Israel." But otherwise, is it back to business as usual, succumbing, as ever, to US pressure? Gamil Matar, an ex-diplomat and director of the Arab Centre for Futuristic Studies, dismisses such a scenario. The street might not have succeeded in forcing the SCAF to withdraw Egypt's ambassador, he told the Weekly, but it conveyed an unprecedented message: "Foreign policy matters to us and we are going to take part in shaping it." According to Matar, amending Camp David is seriously being discussed in official quarters, something unthinkable under Mubarak, who was often described by Israel as its "strategic asset". The issue is also on the table in Tel Aviv. Israeli press reports on Tuesday quoted a senior official alluding to the necessity of allowing Egypt better control over Sinai.
