Recent reports have sparked controversy in the Arab world, suggesting that Saudi Arabia is considering allowing the United States to establish military bases on the Red Sea islands of Tiran and Sanafir—territories transferred from Egypt to Saudi Arabia in 2016 amid widespread public opposition. This development comes days after former U.S. President Donald Trump reportedly requested free passage for American warships through the Suez Canal, raising questions about a broader regional strategy that may undermine Egypt’s sovereignty and bolster Israeli control of strategic waterways.
U.S. Base in the Red Sea?
On Thursday, the Egyptian outlet Mada Masr quoted two senior Egyptian officials claiming that Saudi Arabia offered the U.S. military a base on Tiran and Sanafir. The alleged goal: to enable Washington to control access to the Suez Canal and monitor any vessels suspected of smuggling weapons—particularly from Iran—to Gaza or Lebanon.
These revelations come amid mounting American efforts to restructure Red Sea security. According to European and regional sources, Washington aims to become the dominant overseer of this strategic waterway, pushing for deeper military integration with Gulf allies. However, Egypt, according to the same sources, has resisted the growing pressure.
Trump’s Middle East Tour: A Trigger?
Analysts link these developments to Trump’s scheduled visit to Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Qatar—trips often used to seal regional military and economic deals favoring Israel’s security.
In Egyptian media circles, former Al-Ahram editor Abdel Nasser Salama hinted that the base proposal would likely be part of Trump’s regional agenda. He also alluded to American pressure on Cairo and a veiled rejection from Egyptian officials.
In fact, talk of a U.S. base on Tiran and Sanafir first surfaced in 2017. At the time, an Israeli newspaper quoted plans to use the islands to block Iranian and Russian influence, drawing comparisons with Israel’s historical military objectives in the region.
From Egyptian Sovereignty to Israeli Control?
The legal and political status of Tiran and Sanafir has been controversial for years. Although Egypt’s High Administrative Court invalidated the transfer in 2017, other courts and Parliament later approved it, and the Supreme Constitutional Court upheld the decision in 2018.
Critics argue that the real consequence of this agreement has been to turn the strategic Strait of Tiran—once used by Egypt to block Israeli navigation in 1967—into an international waterway subject to global maritime law. In essence, Egypt relinquished the right to control Israeli maritime movement.
A Threat to Egyptian National Security?
Many Egyptian opposition figures now accuse President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi of jeopardising national security by approving the handover of the islands. Political leaders like Magdy Hamdan and Mohamed Mohy El-Din have called for judicial review, blaming the current crisis on earlier legal missteps.
Security expert Gamal Tahha argues that the reports of a U.S. base may be speculative but are part of a broader American strategy to pressure Egypt. He insists that Egypt has not yet fully handed over the islands and may be stalling in response to concerns about future American or Israeli control.
Who Benefits? Not Egypt or Saudi Arabia
Dr. Essam Abdel Shafi, head of the Academy for International Relations, believes that if these reports are accurate, the goal isn’t just Red Sea security but the reinforcement of Israeli control over the region’s maritime choke points.
He notes that the U.S. already has military footholds in Djibouti, Somalia, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Saudi Arabia, and even in Egypt itself—suggesting that a base on Tiran or Sanafir is not about necessity but about geopolitical engineering to secure Israel’s dominance.
Any foreign military presence in such sensitive waters, he warns, weakens the national security of both Egypt and Saudi Arabia.
An Israeli Priority
Maha Azzam, head of the Egyptian Revolutionary Council, told Arabi21 that maintaining open access to the Strait of Tiran is of paramount importance to Israel. Should future political tensions arise with Egypt, Israel wants to ensure uninterrupted access to its southern port of Eilat.
She added that Egypt’s control over the islands once gave it leverage over Israel’s Red Sea trade routes. But under Saudi control—and potentially U.S. oversight—that leverage disappears.
Echoes of Regional Redesign
Former Egyptian diplomat Abdullah Al-Ashaal dismissed the idea that Saudi Arabia could unilaterally offer the U.S. such a strategic base, especially as the final transfer of the islands remains legally unsettled.
However, he warned that allowing Washington to establish a military foothold there would endanger Egyptian sovereignty and could inflame popular unrest.
Others, like academic Murad Ali, believe this move—if true—is part of a larger effort to reshape the Middle East to serve Israel’s interests, a process that includes controlling trade routes, marginalising Egypt, and legitimising Israeli naval expansion into the Red Sea.
Strategic Catastrophe
Academic Amr Fayid believes Egypt’s military has long recognised the danger of this handover and has delayed its finalisation in an attempt to mitigate the damage. Yet, the loss is already tangible: Egypt has surrendered control over a vital maritime gate.
Researcher Taqadom Al-Khatib summed it up clearly: whoever controls Tiran and Sanafir controls the Strait of Tiran—the only access point to the Gulf of Aqaba. From Sinai to Eilat, this passage is a maritime lifeline. Should hostile powers control the islands, Egypt’s Red Sea coast could become isolated and its ports vulnerable.
Conclusion
This potential U.S. military presence on Tiran and Sanafir isn’t just a military issue—it’s part of a deeper strategic shift aimed at cementing Israeli control over the region’s critical waterways. It reflects a broader American-Israeli push to redesign the geopolitical map of the Middle East, often at the expense of Arab sovereignty.
For Egypt and the Muslim world, the stakes are high—and the time for strategic awareness, if not resistance, is now.
