Camp David peace treaty is the mother of all evils

The Israeli genocidal war on Gaza, which is expanding into a full-blown military occupation, has focused discussion about Egypt’s role and how much leverage it has over Israel because of the peace treaty between the two countries. Many Arab observers and global Palestinian supporters think the Camp David Accords of 1979 give Cairo greater say in the Palestinian issue.

Article 1, under the West Bank and Gaza clause of the treaty, says “there should be transitional arrangements for the West Bank and Gaza for a period not exceeding five years” to full “autonomy.” Meaning: both Palestinian territories of Gaza and the West Bank, including East Jerusalem-referred to in the treaty as Arab Jerusalem- should have been enjoying self rule since at least 1984. This never happened which is now history.

Critics of Cairo also point to the provisions on the Sinai Peninsula and its return to Egypt. Every year Egyptians celebrate what the government calls Sinai Liberation Day on 25 April. The festivities include military parades, cultural programs and wide media retrospectives on Sinai its importance to Egypt and its supposed liberation. What the larger public does not know is that indeed Egypt gained access to Sinai but its sovereignty over the strip of desert is limited and sometimes very restricted.

Expulsion and Occupation: Israel’s Proposed Gaza Plan

Limitations on Egyptian Sovereignty

Egypt’s sovereignty over the region is subjected to significant limitations, particularly, regarding military deployment. Annex I (Security Arrangements) divides up Sinai into three zones and each one has its own governing principles on what Egypt can or cannot do in each of the three zones. Here is what Egypt can deploy in each of the three zones:

• Zone A: which is close to the Suez Canal, Egypt can only deploy one mechanised infantry division which is a ground force not enough to even defend the Canal given its importance to Egypt. Any change to this limitation is not allowed.
• Zone B: comprising central Sinai, permits four border security battalions equipped with light weapons. Their makeup is less than 5,000 personnel lightly armed. Their task, usually, defending and guarding important assets.
• Zone C: this is the area adjacent to Gaza which is the most critical and important in the current Israeli war on Gaza. Sometimes referred to as Egyptian Rafah, opposite to Gaza’s Rafah, is completely demilitarized meaning not a single soldier is permitted there at all times. Only lightly armed Egyptian civilian police is permitted. This zone includes key Egyptian locations including Taba, Sharm el-Sheikh and the Straits of Tiran. The Straits themselves require much more force to be safe at all times.

On top of that there is the Multinational Forces and Observers (MFO) made up of some 1,200 personal with the one third from the US. The MFO’s annual budget is estimated around $77 million and Egypt pays around one third of that. Despite the great economic and financial challenges facing Cairo it still pays every year adding another burden to the many it already has. On top of that MFO operates entirely in the Sinai and not on the Israeli side of the border line; its mandate is only to observe the peace not to engage any violations. Instead, it only reports them to Israel and Egypt. The most bizarre fact about this MFO is the fact that it is not a UN mission which means it is not authorised by the UN Security Council which, usually, monitors ceasefires and peace treaties. A UN mission would not only identify violators but also assign blame, identify penalties when appropriate and impose certain restrictions or sanctions when needed. Moreover, UN forces are created and deployed according to clear legal mandates incorporating international law. This is not the case in Sinai which is not only curious but legally questionable by the critics of the whole arrangement.

Implications of Camp David’s for the Palestinian issue

The recent announcement by apartheid Israel that it will expand its offensive in Gaza with plans to “capture” and, indefinitely, hold it. In reality this means to reoccupy the Philadelphia Corridor, the place where Israel is likely to violate the Camp David Accords. Many believe it has already done so several times. The treaty designates the 14-kilometer-long buffer zone, along the Egypt-Gaza border, as a demilitarized zone. Israel is not allowed to have troops in the area but its forces are already stationed there after they captured the corridor in January 2024. It was supposed to withdraw during the January ceasefire but it never did. In the same year, Egypt framed this as a violation of the peace treaty and protested to Israel first in January, then in May and again in September. The MFO is not authorised to enter Gaza so it cannot monitor the current Israeli violation and nobody, really, is in a position to take action except Cairo; the party to the peace treaty.

Last February, Cairo told Washington the peace treaty with Israel will be at risk if the Trump Administration went ahead with his announced plans to relocate the Gazans out into Egypt and other countries. Yet, Israel never really cared about Egypt’s protests and the risks its actions pose to the peace treaty. While Trump appears to have given up on the idea of ethnically cleansing Gaza, his friend Netanyahu is seriously rethinking the idea again.

READ: Unveiling Nasser’s secrets: Arabs, Palestine and crucial timing

Gaza in the context of Camp David Accords

In effect, Israel has already violated the peace treaty many times; first and foremost, when it failed to grant the Palestinians the promised self-rule as dictated by treaty provisions. With the issue of the Philadelphia Corridor still unresolved and the actual Israel occupation of it, Israel, clearly is not keeping its side of the bargain.

Notwithstanding, Cairo has so far failed to take any meaningful actions to penalise such violations. In the absence of any UN authorised monitoring of the treaty, and other internal issues as high dependency on aid from Israel’s allies like the US, Cairo appears to be helpless.

Palestinians are also disadvantaged greatly by Egypt-Israel peace it treaty. It not only excluded them from the negotiations but it also weakened their position in any future deal like the Oslo Accords. They also lost the strong Arab position historically led by Egypt since the Accords were signed.

For the larger Arab population and the Palestinians in particular, the Camp David Accords have been widely regarded as the mother of all the evils that befell them in the last 46 years.

The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.