Cairo is betting on the role of mediator and political partner, not a member of alliances that could lead to a confrontation with Iran.
Egypt's absence does not necessarily mean a break with the new alliance.. An Egyptian philosophy based on the separation between political partnership and military involvement.
Afrasianet - Egypt's absence from the trilateral alliance recently announced by Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Pakistan has raised questions about the reasons for its non-accession, especially since Cairo has participated over the past months in most of the ministerial meetings that paved the way for the birth of this framework, which strengthened the belief that it will be one of its pillars.
But Egypt's decision reflects in large part a firmness of a foreign policy approach rather than a divergence with its partners. Cairo appears eager to maintain a high level of political coordination with Saudi Arabia, without turning into a military commitment that could put it at the center of a regional confrontation that does not align with its current priorities.
Egypt's approach is based on the simple principle of separating political solidarity from military partnership. For years, Cairo has become more conservative toward engaging in regional military alliances, preferring to manage its relations through bilateral consultation and diplomatic coordination, while avoiding any alignments that might impose obligations beyond its strategic calculations.
This policy is even more important in light of the delicate economic phase that the country is going through, as the Egyptian state focuses on restoring economic stability, attracting investments, and strengthening development partnerships with the Gulf countries, as a priority that takes precedence over any engagement in security arrangements that may drain resources or increase the risks surrounding the economy.
Therefore, Egypt's absence from the trilateral alliance does not appear to be an expression of difference with Saudi Arabia, as much as it reflects a difference in the tools to manage regional challenges. Cairo is ready to provide political and diplomatic support to the kingdom, as it has repeatedly done in recent weeks, but it does not appear ready to move to the level of direct military commitments.
Political contacts between the two countries confirm the continuation of this understanding. During a phone call on Monday, Egyptian Foreign Minister Badr Abdel Aty and Saudi Prince Faisal bin Farhan stressed the need for an immediate cessation of military escalation and to prioritize political and diplomatic solutions, while stressing the continuation of close coordination to preserve the security and stability of the region.
Following the attacks on Saudi Arabia in late July, Cairo was quick to condemn the threats to the Kingdom, affirming its full solidarity with it and its support for the measures it is taking to protect its security and sovereignty, in a position that reflects the continuation of the political rapprochement between the two countries despite their different approaches to some security files.
Egypt's caution is also based on a clear desire to avoid appearing in any axis that could be interpreted as directed against Iran. Since the outbreak of the war in Gaza and the subsequent escalation in the Red Sea, Cairo has been careful not to join the U.S.- and British-led international coalition to counter Houthi attacks, even though those attacks have directly inflicted economic damage on Egypt as a result of the decline in shipping in the Suez Canal.
Cairo was aware that its participation in that coalition could be interpreted as an indirect defense of Israel in light of the war on Gaza, which would have put it in a complex political position internally and regionally. It therefore preferred to stay at a distance from the parties to the conflict, while constantly calling for de-escalation and the search for political solutions.
But this policy has not prevented economic losses. Suez Canal revenues have fallen significantly as many ships diverted their routes away from the Red Sea, and official estimates indicate revenues have fallen by about 60 percent during the escalation.
Still, Cairo does not seem ready to change this approach. Egypt's assessment is that any new tension in the Red Sea will affect navigation whether Egypt participates in military alliances or stays out of them, so joining any alliance will not guarantee the recovery of revenues, but it could add new political and security burdens.
Cairo prefers to maintain a broad margin of flexibility in its regional relations, maintaining its close partnerships with Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states, while avoiding direct confrontation with Iran or appearing as part of an anti-Iran axis.
The Egyptian leadership also seems convinced that its regional position gives it a more effective role when it moves as a mediator or a party pushing for settlements, rather than as a member of military alliances. This trend was reflected in Cairo's hosting on June 21 a meeting of the foreign ministers of Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Pakistan to discuss efforts to contain the war between Washington and Tehran, after three similar meetings in Riyadh, Islamabad, and Antalya.
These meetings indicate that Cairo is not far from security and political consultations, but it prefers that its role remain within the framework of diplomatic coordination rather than military commitment. It is one thing to participate in dialogue, and it is another to join a defense alliance that may entail direct military intervention.
This approach is in line with Egypt's foreign policy in recent years, which has been characterized by avoiding engaging in open regional disputes and focusing on protecting economic interests and internal stability, in light of financial challenges and living pressures that make any military adventure a costly option.
Thus, it seems that Cairo is betting on a delicate equation based on a combination of maintaining its strategic partnership with Saudi Arabia and avoiding becoming a party to regional polarization. This equation may not exempt it from the economic repercussions of the surrounding tensions, but it does give it more room for political maneuver and keep its domestic priorities in line with its external orientations.
In this context, Egypt's non-accession to the trilateral alliance can be understood as an extension of a consistent policy of supporting allies politically, while avoiding military commitments that could drag the country into conflicts that it does not see serving its immediate interests, at a stage where it places economic recovery and the promotion of internal stability at the forefront of its priorities.
As a result, Egypt's absence from the trilateral alliance does not reflect a lukewarm in its relations with Saudi Arabia or a retreat from its commitments to Gulf security, but rather an Egyptian philosophy based on separating political partnership from military engagement. Cairo believes that promoting internal stability and restoring economic momentum is now the first line of defense for its national security, and that avoiding regional alignments gives it greater room for diplomatic action and protecting its interests.
While other countries are betting on building new deterrence alliances, Egypt seems to be betting on a policy of "partnership without alliances," arguing that preserving strategic freedom of decision is as important as building alliances themselves.
________________
