Cairo’s Independent Approach Sparks Diplomatic Sensitivity
Beirut – According to the Lebanese newspaper Al-Akhbar, citing an unnamed Egyptian official, tensions have emerged between Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates regarding “the mechanisms of negotiation with the Israelis.” These disagreements reportedly prompted Cairo to act independently in the talks and to inform Riyadh and Abu Dhabi of the outcomes only after concluding its own discussions.
The report added that this divergence caused visible diplomatic friction, even reflected in the order of names within official joint statements, which appeared “unconventionally arranged” — a subtle indication of strained coordination.
Accusations and Differing Agendas
According to the same Egyptian source, Riyadh and Abu Dhabi accuse Cairo of offering excessive support to Hamas, despite what they perceive as a “historic opportunity” to dismantle the movement. Egypt, however, rejects this view, arguing that excluding Hamas from the equation is unrealistic, given its deep popular and political presence among Palestinians and its role as a central actor in any post-war scenario.
This divergence underscores the complex dynamics among Arab capitals in approaching the Gaza file — where political calculations often outweigh collective solidarity, and where each regime pursues its own strategy in dealing with both the Palestinian resistance and the Israeli occupation.
Positive Momentum in Cairo Talks
Meanwhile, Agence France-Presse (AFP) reported that indirect negotiations between the Israeli occupation and the Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas) in Egypt have been described as “positive.”
According to a source close to the talks, the first round on Monday lasted around four hours and focused on laying out “a roadmap and mechanisms” for the broader negotiation process. Discussions are set to resume in Sharm el-Sheikh on Tuesday afternoon.
The source added that the key points under discussion include:
- The exchange of prisoners, encompassing both living and deceased Israeli captives, in return for prominent Palestinian detainees.
- Israeli withdrawal maps and the introduction of humanitarian aid alongside the commencement of a ceasefire.
- The formation of a Palestinian technocratic committee composed of independent professionals to manage Gaza’s administration following the cessation of hostilities.
Hamas’s Demands and Conditions
Another informed source told AFP that Hamas has insisted on several conditions to ensure the success of any agreement, including:
- The complete cessation of air raids and reconnaissance flights, and the withdrawal of Israeli troops from urban areas, to enable access to captive locations.
- The movement’s readiness to finalise a comprehensive deal, provided the occupation shows genuine commitment and international (especially U.S.) guarantees are secured.
However, the source acknowledged that negotiations remain difficult, with numerous details yet to be agreed upon.
Israeli Inflexibility and Resistance Counterpoints
The Hebrew daily Maariv reported that large gaps still separate the two sides. According to the paper, “Israel demands the full release of all captives before any truce can begin,” insisting it will “not withdraw from its positions in Gaza” and will “ensure the continuation of disarmament measures even after hostilities end.”
Conversely, Hamas seeks international guarantees for a long-term ceasefire, a broad release of Palestinian prisoners, and an Israeli pledge not to resume aggression before reaching a comprehensive arrangement regarding Gaza’s future.
Broader Regional Involvement
CNN cited an informed official stating that talks in Sharm el-Sheikh are expected to continue for several days. The source revealed that previous negotiations collapsed over sequencing issues, but this time mediators are “consciously trying to avoid such pitfalls.”
Furthermore, discussions are underway regarding the formation of an international stabilisation force, with Egypt, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Jordan, Turkey, Pakistan, and Indonesia listed among the potential contributors. While the framework is still under negotiation, the initiative highlights the growing regional and international involvement in shaping Gaza’s post-war landscape.
Analytical Context
This emerging Egyptian-Saudi-Emirati rift over the approach to Hamas and Gaza reflects deeper Arab divisions regarding the Palestinian resistance. Cairo’s stance — pragmatic yet firm in recognising Hamas as an unremovable political and social reality — contrasts sharply with Riyadh and Abu Dhabi’s vision of a post-Hamas Gaza aligned with Western and Israeli strategic goals.
As negotiations continue in Egypt, the situation underscores that Palestinian resistance remains a decisive factor, capable of reshaping regional calculations and exposing the fragility of Arab consensus. Despite political manoeuvres and diplomatic friction, Hamas’s endurance has forced even its rivals to acknowledge that Gaza cannot be “reconstructed” without resistance at its core.
