There has been much talk and commentary about the Egyptian role, initially ambiguous, in attempts to reach a long-term truce between the Israeli occupation and Palestinian resistance factions in the Gaza Strip. Some observers welcomed the Egyptian efforts and praised Cairo's pivotal role in the Palestinian issue, while others saw the Egyptian mediation as a deviation from the fundamental rights of the Palestinian people and an attempt to empty the resistance of its content.
The truth is that the Egyptian role has gone through multiple stages since the start of the crisis. In the early days of the war, Egypt was the first to call for a ceasefire and put forward an Egyptian initiative for calm based on stopping the fighting first and negotiating second. The resistance factions rejected the initial Egyptian initiative as they saw it as ignoring their legitimate demands to ease the siege on Gaza imposed for years.
Egypt, led by the current regime, views Hamas as a dangerous proxy movement derived from the Muslim Brotherhood, which Cairo classifies as a terrorist organization. This classification has made relations between Egypt and Hamas tense and completely severed. Despite this, Egypt has made efforts and sought to achieve a truce and alleviate the suffering of the besieged people in the Gaza Strip.
The parallel Qatari movement and negotiations held in Doha represent attempts to infiltrate the Palestinian file and restore Qatar's role, which declined after regional shifts. Qatar, which supports Hamas financially and politically, found in the crisis an opportunity to return to the scene. The Qatari-Egyptian competition for the role of primary mediator was clear in recent months and continues.
The Palestinian factions themselves are divided over the proposed options. Hamas tends to favor Qatari mediation, while some factions see the Egyptian efforts as a better guarantee to open crossings and lift the siege. The brigadier in the new national unity government finds himself between the hammer of regional contradictions and the anvil of internal division.
The post-truce period requires genuine efforts to rebuild, open crossings, and operate the destroyed infrastructure. The promised reconstruction conference in Cairo gathered only paper pledges, and international promises remain shelved. The Palestinian people in the besieged Gaza Strip pay the heavy price for all this procrastination and regional competition at the expense of the cause.
What is required from the resistance factions and national forces is unity of ranks and escalation with clear demands and a unified program. What is required from Egypt, Qatar, and regional countries is to separate the Palestinian cause from favoritism and regional rivalry. What is required from the international community is real pressure on the occupation to lift the siege, open crossings, and allow reconstruction materials.
The ceasefire is not an end in itself but a means to build trust and create prospects for a just comprehensive solution that ends the suffering of the Palestinian people and achieves their legitimate rights to freedom, independence, and a state with Jerusalem as its capital.
