WATANI International 18 October 2009
The file of normalisation with Israel is a thorny one. What can be more telling than the barrage of fierce criticism which was directed at Hala Mustafa, editor-in-chief of Al-Ahram’s quarterly Democracy because she conducted a recent meeting in the Al-Ahram office with Elli Shakid, the Israeli ambassador in Cairo? Dr Mustafa was branded a traitor who wished to normalise relations with Israel, making light of Palestinian suffering at the hands of the Israelis.
Cold peace
Ever since the signing of the Peace Treaty in 1979, relations between Cairo and Tel Aviv have been by no means stable.
Observers call the period between 1979 and 1982 the “cold peace”. In 1982 Cairo reacted to the Israeli aggression in Lebanon by withdrawing its ambassador in Tel Aviv. He was sent back only after Taba was handed over to Egypt in 1989. The 1993 Oslo accords and subsequent agreements worked to ameliorate relations, but the outbreak of the Al-Aqsa Intifada in 2000 pushed Egypt to recall its ambassador without caving in to public pressure to expel him and sever ties with the Hebrew State. The year 2004 was a turning point given the signing of the Qualified Industrial Zone agreements, which allowed Egyptian products easy access to the US market on condition of industrial and trade cooperation with Israel—and an agreement to supply Israel with natural gas. In 2007, however, the admission by Israeli officers to killing Egyptian prisoners of war in 1956 and 1967 outraged Egyptian public opinion and left dark shadows on the bilateral relations.
Psychological barrier
Fakhri Othman, Egypt’s former ambassador to the UAE, says that formal ties between two nation states are usually reflected in relations between the peoples of the two countries. “The Israeli case is different”, he continued. “The psychological barrier is impossible to overcome as long as Israel continues to occupy Palestinian territories and kill Palestinian people. Normalisation will never be a fact on the ground, although some young people go to Israel and even marry Israeli women.
The editor of Al-Ahram’s monthly Israeli Selections magazine, Emad Gad, indicates that normalisation with Israel varies on the formal and the popular levels. “Formally, Cairo and Tel Aviv are bound by diplomatic ties, and encounters between officials of the two countries take place all the time,” Dr Gad says. “However the media’s position vis-à-vis the issue is far from consistent. If relations between the two countries are going well, the media follows a sober attitude when addressing questions in relation to Israel—and vice versa. The security apparatus sometimes take a tough position just for the sake of pulling the rug from under the Islamists. It was the security apparatus that opened the case of Egyptians married to Israeli women, which made the public demand that they be stripped of their Egyptian citizenship on grounds of doubted loyalty to Egypt in case of war.”
“The public,” Foreign Ministry spokesman Hossam Zaki stresses, “are strongly sympathetic with the Palestinians, and nobody can coerce them into interacting with Israelis”.
Public outrage
Farida al-Naqash, editor-in-chief of Al-Ahali, the mouthpiece of the Tagammu left-leaning party, says that by rejecting normalisation, the Egyptian people express outrage over Israeli practices in Palestine. “We will not have any relations with Israel until it leaves the territories it occupies and recognises the legitimate rights of the Palestinians,” she says.
“Those involved in normalisation practices despite the incessant Israeli aggression should be ashamed of themselves”, Gamal Fahmi, a member of Journalists’ Syndicate board says. The anti-normalisation decisions taken by all Egyptian syndicates and unions, he says, reflect an overreaching public stance.
According to Diaa’ Rashwan, a strategic expert with the Al-Ahram Centre for Political and Strategic Studies, a handful of Egyptian intellectuals claim that normalisation is part of individual freedoms that should not be transgressed. However, he says, “Individuals have to respect the decisions of the bodies and institutions they belong to. If the Journalists Syndicate bans normalisation, the members should abide by the decision”.
One of the basic tenets of the peace treaty is economic cooperation. “This has to do with interests rather than emotions,” economic expert Mukhtar al-Sherif argues. “Peace with Israel served to create economic stability and ameliorate people’s living conditions. Normalisation could be used to fulfil our interests. Israel has good experiences in many fields, including agriculture, and this could be very helpful to Egypt,” he says.
Dual culture
For her part, Hala Mustafa says that the Arab culture is characterised by duality when it comes to sensitive issues, whether political or social. This applies to questions in relation to religion, women’s rights, citizenship, interaction with the West and many others. Dr Mustafa adds: “There are two approaches when dealing with Israel: should we boycott the other or open channels of communication? The State has no consistent stance, a situation which creates confusion and triggers absurd battles.
“All parties have to reconsider their positions towards normalisation and answer the urgent questions. Did Egypt achieve any benefits from boycotting Israel? Does cultural normalisation pose more serious threats than those posed by economic normalisation—which is actually in force? Is it better to have a space of disagreement and allow for dialogue among those with different views or to let the majority impose its will on all others?”