Egyptian Columnist:: Develop Relations with Israel

[drdon326]

Leading Egyptian Government Daily Columnist: Develop Relations with Israel and Drop the Negative Attitudes Towards Her


"Egyptian-Israeli relations occupy an important place in Egypt's foreign policy and the first serious signs of openness in relations that we are now observing are important.

"Enhancing relations with Israel also increases Egypt's ability to influence Israel's policy towards the Palestinians in the territories in a way that will fulfill the national aspirations, right to self-determination, and the establishment of a state for the Palestinian people. It is obvious that under conditions of a 'cold peace,' no such opportunity exists. This is because when relations diminish or stagnate, the ability to take advantage of them in order to influence also diminishes or stagnates.

"In addition, the development of relations with Israel and interest in can open a window that will free Egyptian-Israeli relations from any form of reliance upon relations with the U.S. It is not natural, necessary, or essential for relations with Israel to be influenced by relations with the U.S. Namely, we hope that relations with Israel will be strong, self-sufficient and completely independent from relations with the U.S.

"The same should hold true for relations between Egypt and the Arab countries because we should not allow relations with the Arab countries to negatively impact relations with Israel. Moreover, the development of Egyptian-Israeli relations could step up the impact of the Arab factor in relations with Israel. This is a very important point because through these relations, the Arabs can achieve positive results.

http://www.memri.org/bin/articles.cgi?Page=countries&Area=egypt&ID=SP82704

[Paleocon]

1. Well...

"In addition, the development of relations with Israel and interest in can open a window that will free Egyptian-Israeli relations from any form of reliance upon relations with the U.S. It is not natural, necessary, or essential for relations with Israel to be influenced by relations with the U.S. Namely, we hope that relations with Israel will be strong, self-sufficient and completely independent from relations with the U.S. "

Not sure how that can happen if they both insist on receiving billions in US aid every year...

Israel:

The USAID Program: The United States, acting through USAID, will provide $360,000,000 ESF in FY 2005 to Israel as a cash transfer. These funds will be used by Israel to repay debt to the U.S., including re-financed Foreign Military Sales debt, and to purchase goods and services from the United States. The U.S. will continue to encourage Israel to reduce government spending and deficits, improve tax and public wage structures, increase privatization, reform labor markets, and continue to liberalize its trade regime.

http://www.usaid.gov/policy/budget/cbj2005/ane/il.html

Egypt:

USAID's program in Egypt began in 1975. In 1979, following the Camp David Accords, Egypt became the beneficiary of one of the largest U.S. economic assistance programs in the world. For the 28-year period beginning in 1975, the United States Congress has allocated approximately $815 million annually to Egypt, or about $25.5 billion in total, aimed at enhancing stability, democracy and prosperity in Egypt and the region.

http://www.usaid.gov/locations/asia_near_east/countries/egypt/egypt_brief.html

360 million here, 25 billion there... Pretty soon you are talking about real money and real INFLUENCE... Or at least you would hope so...

[pelsar]

2. Paleocon??????

quite the contrary the article is stating that the US is NOT needed for their relationship, the way it is now.

its seems your trying awfully hard to find something wrong with the idea that Egypt would want to have a real neighborly relationship with Israel.

you know reduce tensions in the middle east, promote trade, information, culture between countries...you seem to think that something is wrong with that?...but feel free to correct me.

[Paleocon]

4. Quite the contrary...

Actually it is my opinion that countries should work together in their own "sphere of influence" to promote diplomacy and understanding.

My point is that if these two countries (Israel and Egypt) trully want to work alone at promoting peace between them that is great. Meanwhile, let's cut the billions of dollars in aid that goes to them every year and use some of that money at home. Many here would advocate using the money to provide universal healthcare, improve schools, provide better for seniors, etc...

Personally I would use the money to strengthen border security and the INS. But I would also advocate pulling our troops out of many other spots (Japan, Germany, Korea, etc...) so as to free up some much needed resources and to limit our exposure to terrorism overseas.

[IndianaGreen]

3. Egypt has no free press

nor does it tolerate any political view not officially sanctioned by the Mubarak regime. Keep that in mind whenever you read anything attributed to the Egyptian press.

[newyorican]

5. No "article" from MEMRI is complete without...

proper background.

Selective MEMRI

Repressive MEMRI

[pelsar]

6. newyorican...

you seem a bit upset that the article was listed from MEMRI...its as if your trying very hard to claim the article isnt real since the internet source is one you dont like.

if you dug just a bit deeper you would find that it came from the paper:

Al-Ahram (Egypt), December 8, 2004
your comment should be directed in that direction.....? But since i get the impression that you dont know arabic...

this took me all of 2 minutes: arabnews.com

http://www.arabnews.com/?page=7§ion=0&article=56013&d=14&m=12&y=2004

Your trying very hard to debase israel, and now when a major egyptian journalist in their main paper says its time to normalize with israel, you seem to have trouble with that?

I actually find it somewhat amusing, I believe that soon the arab world/palestenians are going to accept israel and start to normalize relations with her...and that will leave all those who love to demonize israel a bit "out of step"

[newyorican]

8. Me? Upset?

Not even a bit. Your Tarot cards need re-shuffling madam.

Just providing background on MEMRI, that's all.

Debasing? Not sure at all what you're driving at. Does background information disturb you? Perhaps you should take it up with the actual authors instead of making failed attempts to mindread the messenger.

Demonize? No party in this conflict needs any help through demonizing. Their actions have defined them well enough.

[pelsar]

10. newyorican....good point

Perhaps you should take it up with the actual authors

i happen to agree with the authors of the article, i believe its you who doesnt. Perhaps you could explain to what exactl you object to?

(i'm male-no madam)...and a poor mind reader, just writing my impression

[eyl]

7. newyorican

First of all, I suggest reading MEMRI's rebuttal (linked in the Guardian article). More importantly, while I've seen MEMRI accused of cherry-picking articles, I've never seen anyone claim its translations are innacurate (which is what is important when dealing with single articles, rather than trying to determine a trend)

[newyorican]

9. Single articles in a vacuum, eh?

OK, if you want to play ostrich, go for it.

Nothing happens in a vacuum.

[Igel]

11. Actually, the NYT tried to take issue with

a MEMRI translation back in fall 1991 (maybe spring 2002); MEMRI reported a speech by the then head of Al-Azhar had said. It somehow involved 9/11.

NYT hired a few translators and had them independently translate the text of the speech. The translations came back as expected--a lot of differences among the translations commissioned and between them and MEMRI's, none meaningful.

I was fascinated that the NYT thought it necessary to report this. I had to assume that since the Al-Azhar rector's speech was generally supportive of 9/11, and the general impression was that no Muslim in his right mind could possibly think that 9/11 was anything less than a crime against humanity, the NYT wanted to defend themselves against accusations of Muslim-bashing.

edited to add: My understanding of MEMRI is that it serves as a sort of counterbalance. They're not trying to be fair, but to report what is under-reported. Sort of like when Arafat denounced the killing of some Israelis in English, but then calling for a million martyrs to march on Jerusalem in Arabic. NYT, LA Times, WaPo, etc., report the one; but most reporting of the other resulted from MEMRI and like organizations work. Everybody is so busy trying to say that everybody loves peace, justice, multiculturalism, yada-yada, that they don't want to report when some prominent official or imam comes out clearly on the side of war, oppression, ethnocentrism (yada-yada). Unless it's Boykin or Sharon.