On 27 September, Egypt’s Foreign Minister Badr Abdelatty addressed the United Nations General Assembly with a speech that transcended routine diplomacy. It was a statement rooted in history, geography, and the accumulated wisdom of decades navigating a tumultuous region.
“The Middle East is at the point of implosion,” he warned, and Egypt finds itself encircled by a “belt of fire.” This was no rhetorical flourish; it was a precise depiction of the strategic pressures that envelope Egypt on every front from Gaza, ravaged by relentless conflict, to Sudan, sliding into chaos, from Libya, mired in fragmentation, to Yemen and Somalia, threatening key maritime corridors along the Red Sea, and from the Horn of Africa to the Nile, whose waters remain vital to Egyptian survival.
The situation in Gaza, Abdelatty stressed, presents the most immediate and morally urgent challenge. He categorically rejected any plan to forcibly displace the Palestinians into Sinai, labeling it “a crime of ethnic cleansing.” Egypt, he affirmed, “is not and will not be a gate to liquidate the Palestinian cause” and “will never be a partner in a new Nakba.”
These were not conventional diplomatic statements; they were clear red lines, grounded in Egypt’s historical commitment to Palestine. Forced displacement would not only betray the Palestinian people but also destabilise Sinai, fuel extremism, and draw Egypt into a conflict with potentially catastrophic consequences.
Concurrently, he reaffirmed Egypt’s commitment to a two-state solution, welcomed the growing international recognition of Palestinian statehood, and voiced support for the Saudi-French initiative for peace, underscoring a principle central to Cairo’s foreign policy: security for one people cannot exist without security for the other.
Abdelatty’s address was a candid appraisal of international dynamics. While Egypt recognised the pivotal role of the United States and expressed appreciation for President Donald Trump’s engagement with regional leaders to end the hostilities in Gaza, it also highlighted the limitations of American diplomacy.
Washington alone cannot impose lasting peace in a fractured region. This reality explains Cairo’s parallel efforts with Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and France to achieve a ceasefire and ensure humanitarian access to Gaza, demonstrating a diplomatic approach that balances cooperation with global powers while cultivating a regional coalition capable of managing crises collectively.
Yet, Gaza is but one element in a larger regional tableau. Sudan, Egypt’s southern neighbour, teeters on the brink of collapse, with war threatening to spill instability northwards. Egypt insists that any resolution must remain “Sudanese-owned,” even as the spectre of state disintegration looms large.
Libya, to the west, remains fragmented, compelling Cairo to advocate for simultaneous presidential and parliamentary elections alongside the withdrawal of foreign combatants. Lebanon and Syria, in the north, remain fragile under repeated Israeli violations of sovereignty, underscoring the chronic instability of the Levant.
Along the Red Sea, attacks on shipping lanes have cost Egypt over $9 billion in lost Suez Canal revenues, striking at the core of the national economy while disrupting global trade. Egypt’s commitment to the African Union (AU) mission in Somalia further reflects its understanding that Red Sea security depends on stability across both shores.
Perhaps the most existential concern highlighted by Abdelatty was Egypt’s relationship with the Nile. Describing the River as an “existential interest” of the nation, he framed water security not as a negotiable policy matter but as a fundamental question of national survival. For over 109 million Egyptians, the Nile is not merely a River – it is life itself. With Ethiopia advancing its Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam (GERD) project, Cairo has signaled that while cooperation remains possible, unilateral actions that threaten Egypt’s water security are unacceptable.
Equally significant was the emphasis on Egypt’s humanitarian responsibilities. Hosting more than ten million refugees, Egypt integrates them into communities rather than confining them to camps, providing education, healthcare, and employment opportunities. While this reflects a profound humanitarian commitment, it imposes a significant burden on public services and the national economy.
Three interlinked messages underpinned the address: Egypt will not allow the Palestinian cause to be erased; it refuses to absorb the crises of its neighbours alone; and regional instability is a matter of global concern, with repercussions that extend far beyond the Middle East.
The threats surrounding Egypt extend far beyond its immediate neighbourhood. Gaza’s instability fuels extremism regionally and globally; Sudan’s civil war drives waves of refugees northward, affecting both Egypt and Europe; disruptions along the Red Sea threaten international commerce; and unresolved disputes over the Nile could ignite one of Africa’s largest conflicts.
Yet, Abdelatty’s address at the UN was more than a catalogue of dangers. It was a declaration of Egypt’s enduring role as an indispensable stabilising actor in a volatile region. Despite extraordinary pressures, Cairo positions itself as a central mediator, capable of engaging all parties, bridging divisions, and forging fragile agreements in the absence of consensus.
Egypt’s stance underscored a dual message: an unwavering commitment to enduring principles and a pragmatic recognition of the complex realities on the ground. It is a reminder that in a region defined by instability, fragmentation, and historical grievances, Egypt remains a pivotal actor – anchored in its history, aware of its responsibilities, and determined to navigate the flames that surround it, for the sake of its people, its neighbours, and the wider Middle East.
*The writer is Head of the International Relations Unit and Energy Programme at the Al-Ahram Centre for Political and Strategic Studies
Short link: