It is the military who know best the advantages and disadvantages of the peace with Israel. Therefore, it is a strategic, political and military mistake for the president of the largest Arab country, with his military and intelligence background, to say that peace with Israel should include other Arab countries as well.
Israeli aggression on Al-Aqsa Mosque, which has triggered anger across the Muslim world, would not have occurred had Egypt not been absent because it is restrained by the peace treaty with Israel.
Instead of demanding Israel to stop its aggression, the president called on the rest of the Arab countries to join the peace treaty, which has proved after decades that it was in favor of Israel.
Can anyone tell us what the benefits of the peace treaty are for other Arab countries to join it? Is what happens to the Arabs today, which threatens their very existence, not a result of the imaginary peace with Israel? Is Egypt’s isolation from all arenas not a result of the alleged peace with Israel?
Israel annexed Jerusalem as its capital only after Egypt was isolated from the Arab-Israeli conflict. It was a step Israel did not dare take even when it defeated the Egyptian army and occupied Sinai.
Israel could only dare invade an Arab capital like Beirut because the peace with Egypt is a cover for her to catch the small fish from the muddy Arab pond.
Israel would not have been able to hit the Iraqi nuclear reactor if Egypt was not handcuffed by the peace treaty.
Current attempts to break the Arab countries are but a consequence of Egypt conceding its leading role to small countries that are more cantons than nation states.
And domestically, this peace made Egypt lose any incentive for advancement and progress, unlike before, when this was a challenge because there was an enemy threatening it.
Egypt has lost its enthusiasm to other countries that were once hardly noticed on the map.
Is it wise to call on the Arab countries to surrender to Israel? Would this not be a poisonous broth?