This intensive diplomatic activity is not ceremonial. It reflects a deliberate effort to coordinate positions, reaffirm Egypt’s established constants in the region’s most volatile files, and advance political and diplomatic solutions capable of restoring stability and security.
The foreign minister speaks not in his personal capacity, but as the voice of Egyptian state policy and the directives of a political leadership whose positions are defined by clarity, consistency, and firmness. The stronger and more balanced Egypt’s stance, the clearer its language becomes. Cairo does not repackage its message, does not alter its principles, and does not compromise on any file connected, directly or indirectly, to its national security or strategic interests.
The regional environment surrounding Egypt is crowded with overlapping crises. President Abdel Fattah El-Sisi has defined for each of these files a set of constants and priorities that guide the work of the diplomatic institution and the foreign minister, in coordination with other national bodies that possess deep expertise and long professional experience. Many of these institutions operate quietly, but they remain essential pillars supporting the state’s comprehensive approach.
At the forefront stands Gaza, a file that has extended far beyond expectations and grown more dangerous than many assume, because it is linked to a clear Israeli project that has never been abandoned. Despite reaching an important turning point through the formation of a Peace Council, the establishment of a national committee to administer Gaza, and U.S. President Donald Trump’s declared commitment to ending the war entirely, Egypt believes further movement and intensified contacts remain necessary to ensure that no party circumvents the peace agreement.
Sudan represents a second central file whose future remains uncertain amid successive crises and destructive interventions that threaten the unity and stability of a state inseparably linked to Egypt’s national security and strategic depth. Libya follows, fragmented by foreign interference that implanted mercenaries and militias now controlling large areas and obstructing any genuine internal consensus to restore the state.
Yemen remains trapped in recurring cycles of escalation, each more dangerous than the last, threatening the country’s existence and sovereignty. The Horn of Africa has emerged as a real source of concern in light of an Ethiopian-Israeli alignment that Egypt views as aimed primarily at exerting pressure on Cairo. Closely connected to this is the file of Red Sea security, which, although linked to many of these crises, constitutes a distinct strategic arena requiring specialized understanding and firm arrangements.
Syria’s future remains ambiguous despite perceptions of relative calm, while Lebanon stands at a decisive crossroads: either it becomes a unified state that monopolizes arms and authority through its national institutions, or it risks renewed division if Hezbollah insists on preserving its previous status.
Iran constitutes another pivotal file. Egypt views Tehran as a central Islamic state and believes that any war involving Iran and a regional actor would represent a loss for all, while any escalation between Iran and either Israel or the United States would impose enormous costs on the entire region.
The most dangerous of all files, however, is Nile water security. For Egypt, this is an existential issue. Cairo will not accept the loss of a single drop of its water and will not tolerate unilateral actions on the Blue Nile that harm its historical rights.
These ten files dominate the vast majority of Egypt’s diplomatic consultations with sisterly and friendly states and with international organizations. Yet Egypt does not treat any of them as a single-issue dossier. Gaza is not only about a cease-fire, but also about humanitarian access, reconstruction, Palestinian-Palestinian reconciliation, future governance arrangements, and the realization of the two-state solution.
Sudan’s file similarly encompasses ending the war, addressing the fate of the Rapid Support Forces, achieving civilian political consensus, clarifying the role of the Sovereign Council, addressing Darfur, and considering Sudan’s position in Nile Basin issues. The same pattern applies to every other file. Egypt often finds itself managing several intertwined crises simultaneously, because it does not seek temporary calming of situations, nor does it pursue narrow interests regardless of consequences for others. Instead, Cairo seeks comprehensive solutions and broad stability within each state and across the region as a whole.
Egypt approaches these challenges through constants that have become widely recognized and respected. As President Abdel Fattah El-Sisi has repeatedly stated, what Egypt says publicly is exactly what it says behind closed doors. Its priorities and principles are not tools for posturing or bargaining, but instruments for collective stability and the common good of the region—and beyond.
This is the message conveyed with clarity and persistence by the foreign minister, who maintains continuous daily communication with international partners, even when contacts with the same parties are repeated within short intervals. Egypt does not leave a single negative development without attempting to contain it, nor a single positive opening without trying to invest in it in service of the higher objective: building regional stability.
Egypt’s foreign policy is, at its core, a policy that seeks calm, stability, and regional security as the gateway to collective development. Preserving the national state and its institutions is viewed as the most reliable way to protect countries, while confronting militias is regarded as a necessity to protect peoples.
In Gaza and the Palestinian cause, Egypt has affirmed from the first day clear historical constants: absolute rejection of any attempt to liquidate the issue or forcibly displace the people of Gaza; affirmation of Palestinians’ full right to an independent state after more than seventy-six years of unjust deprivation; and insistence that a comprehensive and just peace based on the two-state solution is the only path to stability in the Middle East. Egypt also rejects any attempt to separate Palestinian territories, which constitute an indivisible whole, and maintains its firm demand for halting Israeli aggression, stopping the bloodshed, beginning full reconstruction of Gaza as quickly as possible, and allowing unconditional humanitarian and relief assistance.
While Egyptian efforts have culminated in a historic peace agreement signed in Sharm El-Sheikh and in steps now leading toward the start of a second implementation phase with direct support from President Trump and the formation of a Peace Council, Cairo stresses that it will not halt its movement to prevent any party from undermining the agreement and to ensure that the dream of peace is realized.
At the same time, Egypt works to repair the Palestinian house from within through reconciliation and Palestinian-Palestinian dialogue, reunifying factions under a single national banner. The national committee to administer Gaza, operating from Cairo, represents an important beginning on this path, and Egypt continues to intensify its contacts to support it.
On Sudan, Egypt’s movement is governed by constants shared by every Egyptian and Sudanese who fears partition, fragmentation, and chaos. Division of Sudan is unacceptable. Unity is a red line. Attempts to create or recognize parallel entities are also rejected. Egypt insists that a political solution, not war, is the best path forward, and that foreign interference is what has driven Sudan to its current tragic condition.
In Libya, Egypt’s constants remain unity, territorial integrity, and a political solution based on previous consensus outcomes among Libyan forces, alongside the withdrawal of foreign fighters and mercenaries and the rapid holding of presidential and parliamentary elections.
In Yemen, Egypt’s constants are equally clear: unity of territory, rejection of partition, respect for the legitimate government, and non-interference by regional and international powers.
In the Horn of Africa, Egypt places the stability of the region’s states at the top of its priorities. These are sisterly countries whose peoples deserve stability, and their security directly affects Egyptian, Arab, and global security. Egypt therefore categorically rejects any unilateral recognition of the so-called Somaliland entity or any attempt by states to seize the rights of regional countries and use them as an entry point to the Red Sea. Egypt also supports Horn of Africa states in rebuilding their security and economic capacities.
Red Sea security is a cornerstone of regional stability. Egypt’s constants here are explicit: governance of the Red Sea belongs exclusively to the littoral states; no other state has the right to intervene, impose itself, or establish bases; and the sovereignty of the eight coastal states over their territorial waters is an exclusive right.
On Syria, Egypt supports stability, respect for the will of the Syrian people, and their right to choose their leadership, while stressing that Syria must not become a source of threats to neighboring states or a conduit for terrorism. Egypt calls for the participation of all political components without exclusion, because Syria’s stability is inseparable from regional stability.
Regarding Iran, Egypt supports political dialogue, resolution of disputes on the basis of non-interference in internal affairs, and efforts to resume nuclear negotiations. Cairo has worked to restore dialogue between Tehran and the International Atomic Energy Agency and continues to seek to prevent any escalation between Iran and Washington, recognizing that the situation is dangerously close to explosion.
On the Nile, Egypt will not concede a single drop of water, will not accept unilateral Ethiopian measures on the Blue Nile, and will not tolerate any attempt to harm its water rights. Egypt affirms its right to take whatever measures it deems necessary to protect these rights, which are a matter of life or death. Egypt supports development for its African brothers, but not at the expense of its national security or legitimate rights. Cairo is not opposed to dams, but insists on a binding agreement governing filling and operation.
These are the constants that guide Egyptian diplomacy and shape the foreign minister’s engagements across the ten files. They rest on core principles: respect for each state’s historical rights; rejection of interference; preference for political solutions; preservation of national institutions; a responsible role for major powers, especially the United States, in promoting peace rather than chaos; and recognition that terrorism and militias destroy states rather than serve them.
This is Egypt’s wise foreign policy—one that seeks only calm, regional stability, and security as the foundation for collective development.
Finally, the appointment of former foreign minister Sameh Shoukry as chair of the House of Representatives’ Foreign Relations Committee adds a valuable new dimension: parliamentary diplomacy. His extensive experience will help reinforce and complement the work of the Foreign Ministry and confirm that Egypt’s diplomatic message is the message of the state, the leadership, and the people together.
*The writer is the editor-in-chief of Al-Gomhuria newspaper.
Short link: