Egypt
President Hosni Mubarak became the first Egyptian head of state to
visit Lebanon in a surprise visit Feb. 19. He stood with Lebanese
president Emile Lahoud in upholding the "right" of the Lebanese
Hezbollah to continue attacks on Israeli troops stationed in south
Lebanon. Mubarak's motivation, however, lies less with any
sympathies for his fellow Muslims than with his desire to keep his
own country stable.
Islamic fundamentalism has been a major security concern for Egypt
for the past 50 years. A major fundamentalist group, the Muslim
Brotherhood, was founded as an Egyptian political movement in 1928,
but turned violent after World War II. Mubarak's predecessor, Anwar
Sadat, was assassinated by an Islamic extremist in 1981, and
Mubarak has escaped several attempts on his own life.
Fundamentalists are still active in Egypt, despite waves of arrests
by the government. In 1997, more than 60 tourists were killed near
Luxor, with blame falling on Muslim extremists supported by Sudan,
and ultimately Iran.
In combating fundamentalists, Mubarak is attempting to keep them
isolated by cutting off foreign sources of men and materiel.
However, his tactic is threatened by the Israeli-Syrian peace
process, which if resolved could cause Islamists to withdraw from
southern Lebanon and turn their resources elsewhere, perhaps to
Egypt. Currently, fundamentalist attention and resources are
focused on combating the Israeli occupation of Lebanon.
The best thing for Mubarak would be for Israel to stay in Lebanon
for as long as possible. This will keep Hezbollah occupied and away
from Egypt. Mubarak's statement is a calculated attempt to give
Israel's right-wing factions added ammunition to oppose plans for a
military pullout.
A second effect of Mubarak's visit is that it supports the moderate
regime of Iranian President Mohammad Khatami. Since 1979, Iran has
seen itself as the guardian of the fundamentalist Islamic
revolution and has supported fundamentalist movements in many
countries - including Egypt, Lebanon and Turkey. Although Mubarak
would prefer a secular regime in Tehran, the moderate position of
Khatami is preferable to those of his conservative rivals. By
supporting Hezbollah, Mubarak can show Tehran's conservatives that
the Islamic revolution is alive and well. This takes pressure off
Khatami. Greater power for Khatami, who slowly has been improving
ties with Egypt, will likely result in decreased Iranian support
for Egypt's fundamentalists.
Mubarak's statement reflects his own concern with internal
stability, but it does little to help the peace process between
Syria and Israel. This is absolutely fine with Syria, which
benefits from the current stalemate.
[http://www.stratfor.com/meaf/commentary/m9911020210.htm]
It maintains a relatively stable border with Israel and a de facto
peace, but at the same time gets Israel to handle the Hezbollah
militants and provides justification for Syria's continued presence
in northern Lebanon. Egypt benefits from the status quo as well,
because a large portion of Israel's military is tied down in
Lebanon.
Supporting the Hezbollah with mere words costs Mubarak little. It
may not amount to very much, but there is a small chance his
statements could pay off. Egypt's internal stability, Iran's
factional maneuvering and Syria's attempts to delay an Israeli
pullout all stand to benefit from Mubarak's cameo appearance. If it
doesn't work, Mubarak has lost nothing.
Iraqi Trade Minister Mohammed Mehdi Saleh announced April 30 that
his country signed contracts with Egypt to purchase products worth
close to $400 million, making Eg