It is not enough when considering the truth behind what is happening in Sinai and the events this strategic area has witnessed to only analyse the January 29 bombing as well as the subsequent bombings. We must go back to the alleged peace agreement between Egypt and Israel, which evacuated the Sinai Peninsula from its people and made it a breeding ground for the Zionists and the corrupt, allowing them to do with it what they please. Over a period of 30 years, the Mubarak regime reinforced this situation by announcing large plans for development in Sinai that remained ink on paper, never implemented. After the January Revolution, the people of Sinai rejoiced and expected freedom and hope that would later allow them more rights and liberties. However, the two phases of the military regime, the first from February 11 2011 to June 30 2012, and the second since July 3 2013, escalated the situation in light of the oppressive and displacement acts carried out by the army in Sinai. Thus, Sinai suffered two forms of terrorism, terrorism from the Zionists who have been wreaking havoc since 1948, and terrorism from the Egyptian military council since 1952. In this context, we must address fundamental considerations that can shed light on the reality of the situation in the Sinai Peninsula:
First, the violence witnessed in Sinai was a response to the practices carried out by the army in the Sinai. It is not logical for there to be unjustified displacement, killings, tyranny and oppression without there being a response to all of this. There was also potential for foreign intelligence agencies to take action aiming to cause instability in the region, along with the Zionists’ activity in the Sinai Peninsula, who are not concerned with the stability of Sinai, as it would ensure their control over the peninsula.
Second, post-coup Egypt, and its military authority, is living through a phase of coordination that is in its greatest days. It is enough that Egypt lost its role as an honest mediator that can be relied on in negotiations between the Arabs and Israel. This has become clear, not only during the latest war on Gaza (July/August 2014) but also since the military coup in July 2013. This was also true even before the coup, as evidenced by dozens of reports which indicate the presence of intelligence coordination and cooperation between the Egyptian military and Israel aiming to overthrown Dr Morsi and then eliminate Hamas. The security visits between the two sides’ delegations is an indication of this.
Third, the “Sinai Operation” announced by the Egyptian army after Egyptian soldiers were killed in August 2012 after the inauguration of President Morsi had no value in terms of what it was labelled as, i.e. a confrontation with terrorism. This is because it is being implemented with no clear plans; they are just random operations and procedures carried out as reactions surrounded by a provocative media halo. These operations focus on bombings using planes that cannot distinguish targets, which cause civilian casualties and increase the hatred of the military and the soldiers’ actions.
Fourth, what happened in Sinai after the military coup confirms that the plans and policies of the coup’s military and security arms failed to establish a buffer zone with the Gaza Strip. However, this is not the only criterion for failure, because they have continuously failed since the beginning of the process and the reports and statements issued by military spokespeople and leaders are often characterised by contradictions, a lack of clarity and inaccuracy.
Fifth, the Egyptian army cannot eliminate what it calls the “terrorist groups in Sinai” nor does it want to. The army does not want to do so because it uses these so-called terrorist groups as scarecrows to scare regional and international backers. However, the army is unable to do so because its capabilities, capacities and the nature of the terrain in the Sinai Peninsula is not helpful to them, besides the fact that focusing on security solutions will only escalate and worsen the situation and increase their failures.
Sixth, the continuation of the coup’s military and security arms’ destructive policies in Sinai could be a gateway for the international coalition to strike the Sinai under the pretext of combating Ansar Beit Al-Maqdis who declared their loyalty to the Islamic State (ISIS). This intervention would be based on the direct calls for this by the leader of the coup in Egypt, who has already called for this in the African Summit (July 2014) and the United Nations (September 2014), as well as during his visits to the United States, Russia, China, Italy, France and others.
Seventh, in the context of the “desperate times call for desperate measures” policies that have failed in Sinai, the coup-led government relied on accusing foreign parties, beginning with the Palestinian resistance movement Hamas, followed by its military arm (Izz Ad-Din Al-Qassam Brigades), this indicates that Egypt’s role as a mediator in negotiations between the Palestinians and Israel has ended. There is no room to talk about mediation without integrity or justice. In addition to this, the Egyptian coup-led government banned Hamas in March 2014, and then they sat down with Hamas’s leaders in July 2014 in order to propose an initiative for a settlement between them and Israel. Moreover, while Egypt considered Gaza and its factions its strategic enemies, the government hosted the Gaza reconstruction conference in October 2014, without taking any real action in this regard. This confirms that there is a true imbalance between what is being announced and what is actually being done.
Ultimately, we can conclude that Egypt, under its present authority and military, cannot be an honest mediator in the future and that by continuing to accuse Hamas and its military wing for the events in Sinai, the crisis will not be resolved. Instead, Egypt will complicate the situation even more and will push the country towards a civil war that will start in Sinai given its strategic importance, its natural topography and in response to the actions of the coup’s military and security arms.
The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.