Angry football fans converge on the Algerian embassy in Cairo. Photo: madmonk

Hoda Osman, a special correspondent for Worldfocus and an Egyptian-American, writes about the diplomatic crisis that followed a World Cup match between Egypt and Algeria on Saturday. She explains the intense emotions surrounding the sport and how the rivalry reflects the strains in pan-Arab relations.

It’s hard to believe, but yes a soccer match is straining relationships between Egypt and Algeria. Unfortunately, I believe this time around the animosity and hostility between the countries’ 115 million people are here to stay.

A bitter history

Egypt and Algeria have a history of soccer-related violence. In 1989, Egypt qualified for the World Cup after winning over Algeria. Riots erupted. The Egyptian team’s doctor lost an eye after being attacked with a bottle by an Algerian player.

Fast forward to 2009. Keywords: the Internet and satellite television channels.

The two countries were preparing for a crucial match in Cairo. Egypt had to win by a three-goal difference to qualify for the 2010 World Cup next summer in South Africa — and by a two-goal difference to secure a rematch.

Emotions were running high ahead of the match. Special songs and commercials were produced specifically for the game. The media in both counties was obsessed. There were some who even blamed the media for inciting hatred.

The Internet also played a big role. It was used intensively by fans of the two teams to attack each other. Edited videos and altered pictures were posted on several websites with the intention of humiliating the other team.

Upon the arrival of the Algerian team to Cairo, Egyptian fans allegedly threw stones at their bus and injured a number of players. FIFA opened an investigation into the incident.

The U.S. warned its citizens in Cairo against being on the streets on the evening of the match.

To calm things down, an Egyptian and an Algerian pop star organized a joint concert.

Egypt won the Nov. 14 match 2-0, thereby securing a rematch with Algeria in Sudan a few days later.

Millions of Egyptian celebrated on the streets across Egypt till the early hours of the following morning. If you saw the pictures you would think the whole country won some global lottery that would solve all their problems.

Violence in Khartoum

Violence was expected in Sudan. Security was intensive. Egyptian interests had already come under attack in Algiers after the first match and the Egyptian government summoned the Algerian ambassador in Cairo over it.

Algeria won 1-0 and secured its place in the coming World Cup. Life goes on, right? It’s just a game.

Unfortunately not. Algerian fans attacked their Egyptian counterparts in Sudan following the game. Some of the Egyptian fans and celebrities who were attending the match called into television programs and said they were trapped and hiding in Sudanese houses. I also got first-hand reports of the violence from people who were in Khartoum.

The Egyptian government reported 21 were injured and recalled its ambassador to Algeria for “consultations.” The Egyptian media also pointed the finger at Sudan, claiming it was unable to protect the Egyptians after the match. Sudan summoned the Egyptian ambassador in Khartoum to object.

In Cairo, security forces clashed with Egyptians who rioted and burned Algerian flags in front the Algerian embassy there.

Arab unity – an unrealistic dream

The events are unfortunate but also interesting on several levels. They elucidated the fragile relations between the two countries on the popular and the state level.

The head of the Egyptian Artists Union announced on television that he would call for canceling Algeria’s membership in the union because its artists were silent about the offenses. Numerous Egyptian celebrities called into a television show Wednesday evening calling for cutting cultural relations with Algeria, announcing they were giving back prizes they won in Algerian festivals and asking that their work not be aired in Algeria. Some media personalities were even suggesting stopping Egyptian investments in the country.

The animosity runs so deep now, that I can’t see how this can be repaired.

Arabs have always dreamed of Arab unity. Although the match was between only two of the 22 Arab countries (Sudan also got caught in the middle), to me, it’s still proof of how difficult accomplishing that goal is. Egypt and Algeria may have been frail to begin with, but relations between most other countries are not that much better.

The power of soccer

If you saw the pictures of the celebrations by the fans of the two countries you’d be amazed. Soccer is big in the Arab world.

I’ve read a lot about the game and found that nobody explained the role soccer plays in the Arab world better than the manager of a Cairo restaurant interviewed by Time Magazine. “Soccer provides an outlet for emotion, both positive and negative, that so many Egyptians so desperately crave, says Maher Gamel, manager of one of Cairo’s most popular restaurants, al-Omda.”

I remember a sociology class I took at the American University in Cairo years back. We were discussing patriotism and agreed it becomes most vivid during soccer matches.

When seeing the pictures of the Egyptian celebrations following the first match and the Algerian celebrations following the second, you might wonder why the people of those countries don’t do the same to remove their dictators or gain more rights. Is it fear? Is it lack of hope? I don’t really have an answer.

But as I was watching the story develop, I wondered about something else. How can this enormous energy be used positively. The people of the two countries are at this moment united around one issue. What if this energy was used to produce something, to build, to educate or to clean the cities? How can they be mobilized that same way, with the same enthusiasm? If we find the answer, we may find the solution to problems many countries around the world.

- Hoda Osman

They discuss Hamid Karzai’s second term, international calls to clean up corruption and the worsening security situation.

They also look at the fallout from a landmark case in Italy involving the alleged CIA abduction and so-called rendition of a Muslim cleric. An Italian judge convicted and sentenced 23 CIA agents, in their absence, of abducting the  cleric in Italy and taking him to Egypt where he says he was tortured.

Last year, the Economist magazine slotted Ethiopia as the fourth fastest growing economy in the world, ahead of China. The World Bank report “Doing Business 2010” ranks Ethiopia in the top 10 African nations in terms of the ease of doing business. The Ethiopian government is trying to strengthen local and regional businesses and attract foreign direct investment.

Martin Savidge, Ethiopian businessman Ermyas Amelga and economics professor Phillip LeBel discuss how easy it is to do business in Ethiopia, who’s investing and what this means as Ethiopia moves from an agrarian society to a more urban society. The entrenched poverty hinders the robust investment environment, saddling the country with drought, food shortages and inadequate infrastructure.

Some highlights from the show:

• Ethiopia is not a resource-based economy. The sectors that are thriving in Ethiopia are real estate, construction, services, manufacturing, textiles and commercial agriculture with arable land leasing
• A growing population topping 80 million people make Ethiopia a strong consumer society
• Major investors in Ethiopia: China, India, Turkey and Egypt — the U.S. is not a major investor
• Ethiopia’s poverty-stricken image and government-controlled electronic communications and the Internet are potential hurdles to foreign investment
• Ethiopia’s Diaspora community is driving Ethiopia’s real estate boom

Martin Savidge hosts the following guests:

Ermyas Amelga is an Ethiopian businessman based in Addis Ababa. In 1996, he returned to Ethiopia after academic training and working in investment banking in the U.S. He has founded or acquired 11 companies, overseeing more than 2000 employees in the mining, oil, agriculture and financial services sectors. Ermyas also consults investors on entering the Ethiopian market.

Phillip LeBel is an economist and business professor at Montclair State University in New Jersey. He specializes in economics of developing countries, with emphasis on Sub-Saharan Africa and East Asia. This Spring, he was a Fulbright senior fellow in Addis Ababa teaching natural resources economics. He has consulted for USAID, the World Bank, UNESCO, WHO, FAO and the U.S. State Department on various subjects pertaining to economic policy issues.

For more coverage on Ethiopia, watch Worldfocus’ signature videos on the coffee industry, a remote village and Ethiopia’s history and beauty. Watch the PBS Wide Angle film “The Market Maker” about one woman who has created a commodities exchange and revolutionized agricultural distribution in the country.

Credits:
Host: Martin Savidge
Producers: Lisa Biagiotti and Ben Piven

Anita Shawa of the United Nations Millennium Campaign to end poverty and hunger joins Martin Savidge to discuss the campaign’s goal to halve the people who suffer from hunger by 2015.

Al Jazeera English’s Amr al-Kahky reports from Egypt on the difficulty of buying the basic necessities. Rising food prices have led to increased poverty and heightened security issues.

Mohammad Al-Kassim is an associate producer at Worldfocus. He blogs here about the popularity of soccer in Egypt.

Football, or soccer as it’s called in the U.S., is considered to be one of the most popular sports in the world. Millions of people make time during the month-long World Cup — which takes place every four years — to watch the matches.

I grew up playing football as a kid in Kuwait and Jerusalem. We kids played on any vacant lot we could find, in our neighborhood or our school’s dusty field. I have many scars and a few broken bones from playing the game. Football is a game without any class separation. For me and my friends, football was and still is the cheapest game out there.

My best childhood memories are those spent with my father — who was an avid football fan himself — watching the game. It was the only time he would set aside his worries and be transformed into a kid again.

Most nations around the world (with the possible exception of the U.S.) take the game very seriously.

In 1969, following the second North American qualifying round for the 1970 FIFA World Cup, Honduras and El Salvador engaged in a brief war following their intense soccer match. It wasn’t the only reason — but the tensions surrounding the game didn’t help. 

Egyptians are no exception; it is no secret to how much Egyptians love their local football teams, especially the Ahli, and Zamalek. But their passion and devotion to their national team borders on insanity.

The Egyptian national football team’s win in the African Cup last year sent thousands of flag waving Egyptians into the streets hugging and kissing each other.

Football brings a lot of emotions out in people — emotions that they themselves may not have known they had. It’s about national pride and identity. It’s when small countries show off their muscles, playing the “bully” big countries.

Currently, Egypt is hosting the FIFA U-20 World Cup, where its team is playing in the tournament. The regular World Cup, which will be held in South Africa,  is still a year away — so passionate football fans, especially the Egyptians, are getting their football fix by watching the under-20 tournament.

This story from Al Arabiya TV caught my eye.  It’s about a wedding that almost didn’t happen because it was scheduled for the same night Egypt was playing in that under-20 tournament.  The bride and groom found a novel solution.

I’ve translated it from Arabic.

Please view the original post to see the video.

The decision prevents the female students from attending class and proceeding with their studies. Outlawed women contend that their personal freedom has been compromised.

Earlier this week, the head of the Islamic Al-Azhar Univeristy, Mohammed Tantawi, announced his intention to ban the niqab. An Egyptian lawmaker has called for the resignation of Tantawi, who also serves as the nation’s top religious authority. But the Minister of Higher Education defended the ban, saying that the decision was intended to protect the students.

Jamal El-Shayyal of Al Jazeera English reports from Cairo.

Should governments and other institutions rein in freedom of expression by dictating what people can wear?

Tell us what you think in the comments section below. Please remember to be respectful and on-point in your comments. Malicious or offensive comments will be deleted and repeat offenders will be banned.

But Egypt’s future is murky. Mubarak is now 81 years old and, by some accounts, is in failing health — and no successor has been named.

Salameh Nematt, a columnist at The Daily Beast, joins Martin Savidge to discuss U.S.-Egyptian relations and issues that are likely to be on the agenda when Mubarak meets with U.S. President Barack Obama on Tuesday.

Jon Jensen and Theodore May of Worldfocus partner GlobalPost report from Egypt.

Jon Jensen of Worldfocus partner GlobalPost reports on what may be one of the world’s ultimate yard sales.

People all over the the Middle East — from leaders and radical groups to students and shopkeepers — reacted to Obama’s speech. See below for blogger reactions to the speech. 

Shibley Telhami, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution and the Anwar Sadat Professor for Peace and Development at the University of Maryland, joins Martin Savidge to discuss the speech, its intended audience and Obama’s other efforts to reach out to the Muslim world.

Blogger Noha Fawzy in Egypt reacted positively:

I was impressed with all that came in his speech.  It felt as if he really feels our real and deep pains and what we suffer from daily.  However, my only disappointment that he mentioned the nuclear power in Iran, but no mention of Israel that owns already nuclear power and can be threatening to the whole region. 

I must say that his speech was structured, well presented and very well accepted by the majority of the people and his call for peace as in all religions is so much needed.

We, Egyptians, thank you Barack Obama for choosing Egypt to be your platform while addressing the Muslim World, well advised and Egyptians are the most sympathetic people who will wait for you to fulfill your commitments as you promised.

We hope you enjoyed your visit, we did and we look forward for longer visits. 

I love Egypt and Egypt will prevail.

Peter Daou, a blogger at UN Dispatch, takes a more critical tone: 

I know many will gush over President Obama’s Cairo speech and I’m likely swimming against the tide of the media and my fellow Democrats and progressives. But reading the transcript, I was struck by two things:

1. Aside from a few platitudes, it is disappointingly weak on human rights and specifically women’s rights.

2. It betrays a naiveté, perhaps feigned, about how the Arab world works.

I sometimes preface my posts by explaining that my Mideast perspective is that of an American-Lebanese-Christian-Jew who grew up in Muslim West Beirut at the height (or should I say depth) of the Lebanese civil war. The tumultuous and bloody intersection of religions and geopolitical interests is painfully real to me.

Yes, Obama is targeting the Arab ’street’ and global public opinion - but to the corrupt regimes that dominate that region of the world, his oration means virtually nothing. Repression and suppression will go on uninterrupted. And to those whose abiding hatred of Israel (and thus America) is absolute, Obama’s words will be seen as empty and hypocritical.

Blogger “Ali” shares reactions from friends across the Middle East, including “Duha” in Jordan, who thinks the speech alienated many:

I think, he spoke to the average person, to the moderates and the educated, the silent majority if you may. He spoke to people’s minds and needs for peace and prosperity which are so much needed in the Muslim world, but at the same time I think he alienated so many against him mainly the extremists from all parties arabs, israelies, muslims, even in the US. I hope he stays safe, and more important I hope he delivers.

The same blogger posts a short reaction from “Noam” in Tel Aviv:

Liked the speech but might not be very realistic. 

Further brief reactions could be found on Twitter:

diptychal in Egypt: Obama is clearly playing both sides of the fence. Couldn’t really expect otherwise

NadiaE in Egypt: Audience claps to Islamic refs: are we that desperate for recognition of our faith?

donchad in Egypt: wise speech from obama

The impending speech has generated controversy over everything from choosing the authoritarian state as a location to what the president may say about Israel and the Palestinians. 

But as Worldfocus partner Link TV’s Mosaic program reports, Egyptians are working hard to make their capital picture perfect, right down to the street level.

Below, Worldfocus contributing bloggers break down what may come from Obama’s speech.

Michael A. Cohen and Brian Katulis of World Politics Review examine the signficance of Obama’s forthcoming speech. 

Obama in Egypt: A Vision for Democracy Promotion

President Barack Obama’s historic address to the Muslim world in Cairo tomorrow offers a prime opportunity to outline a new U.S. vision for democracy and human rights in the region. To accomplish this goal, Obama must firmly reject the notion that safeguarding America’s strategic interests in the Middle East somehow runs counter to the goal of advancing political reform. Instead he must craft a balanced message that recognizes that reform is synonymous with U.S. interests in the region.

Unfortunately, if early signs are any indication, the president seems to be striking the wrong balance. The delayed appointments of key democracy promotion and human rights officials — including the administrator for the Agency of International Development and the assistant secretary of state for Democracy, Human Rights and Labor — suggest that the issue is simply not a high priority.

Policy statements and decisions by top officials are sending a more disturbing signal. In February, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said that China’s adherence to global human rights standards, or lack thereof, can’t interfere with larger economic and security concerns. The administration has even acceded to Egyptian demands that economic assistance not be used to support civil society groups and has slashed funds for democracy promotion by 60 percent. The Obama administration seems to be falling into the same trap that has plagued U.S. foreign policy for decades: placing short-term strategic concerns above the long-term imperative to press for reform.

In fairness, Obama has offered a broad and progressive approach to the Middle East aimed at tackling the region’s most intractable challenges. In his first overseas interview with Al Arabiya and his historic address in Turkey, Obama signaled that the United States would do more listening and less dictating in the region.

But it is not enough to engage with the region’s often unaccountable and autocratic leaders. Obama must also reach out to those advocating for change. The right words from a new American president can have a powerful impact on the cause of political reform in the Middle East. Of course, given America’s stained image and complicated strategic interests in the region, striking the proper balance is often easier said than done.

To read more, see the original post.

The views expressed by contributing bloggers do not reflect the views of Worldfocus or its partners.

Lebanese pop singer Suzanne Tamim was found murdered in July 2008. Photo: Official Web Site

In a case that has captivated the Arab world, multimillionaire Egyptian businessman Hisham Talaat Moustafa was sentenced to death on Thursday for his role in the killing of a former lover, Lebanese pop singer Suzanne Tamim.

Many had wondered if Moustafa would go free, thanks to his wealth and connections to President Hosni Mubarak’s family. 

Blogger Will at “Notes from the Underground” disagrees with the verdict, arguing against the death penalty:

I’m against capital punishment, and even more so with fishy cases like that of the guy who killed Layla Ghoufran’s daughter and most recently Hisham Talaat Moustafa. The problem with such cases is that it’s obvious there is something wrong with them, something doesn’t add up and that presents what is referred to as reasonable doubt. 

The fact that there is reasonable doubt is enough to set someone free, and perhaps I’m not even asking that, only asking that he not be put to death.

[...]The death of a businessman reflects an extremity that is so characteristic of our country. In Egypt so many bad deeds go unpunished and when the law is implemented, it can take an extreme of being implemented with too much viciousness according to the whim of those entrusted with its implementation. We’re extremists in our lethargy and in our viciousness. We turn a blind eye to many evils and when it comes to punishing, we kill even if there isn’t enough proof and we burry alive those poor pigs who have done us no harm.  

But user “3abirsabeel” disagrees, responding in the comments: 

It is good that finally one of Egypt’s corrupt businessmen will be punished instead of the usual way of buying their way out of trouble with big bucks and framing somebody else who didn’t have quite the right wasta or enough money to counter.

The “7starsdubai” blog writes that the verdict suggests that even the well-connected are not beyond the rule of law in Egypt:

When a crime is committed in the Middle East and nobody is punished, invariably the explanation is that the rich and powerful have proved once again that they are beyond the reach of the law.

For years the shady activities of Gulf sheikhs, powerful ministers and rich businessmen have been swept under the carpet. But something profound could be changing in the Arab world.

Thanks in part to the advance of technology, satellite news channels and internet blogs, the elite are no longer shielded from public scrutiny. Now they may also have to answer to the law.

Now we have the case in Egypt of Hisham Moustafa, a businessman and member of Cairo’s elite being sentenced to death for ordering the murder of Suzanne Tamim.

The actions could give renewed hope to others seeking justice in the region, like the family of Martine Vik Magnussen, the Norwegian student who was murdered in London last year. Police want to question Farouk Abdulhak, the son of an Arab billionaire, who left Britain soon after the murder in Mayfair and is now in Yemen.

A blogger at “Egyptian Chronicles” agrees, stating that the verdict has political and social significance in Egypt: 

I expected this verdict somehow because of its political and social significance:

1) The Egyptian Government does not protect its men, the NDP men, the businessmen tycoon regardless of how big they are and how strong their connection with Mubarak’s family is.

2) There is no difference between a businessman tycoon, former state security officer and a poor man who are accused of murder, they will face the death penalty judgment.

3) There are three countries involved in the case besides Egypt : UAE , UK and Lebanon , already there were rumors in UAE last year that Egypt wanted to prosecute both men in the country in order to give an opportunity to Hisham to flee the punishment.

‘Swine’ flu has the pork industry worried.

The World Health Organization said on Thursday that it will stop using the the term “swine flu,” claiming the term was misleading consumers and causing some countries to slaughter pigs needlessly. The WHO will call the virus by its technical name, H1N1 influenza A.

As countries around the world debate over what to call “swine flu,” Worldfocus anchor Martin Savidge writes about the influenza name game.

A couple of days ago when the flu story was really beginning to move, I remember seeing a report from Israel on the wires about how many Jews wanted the name of the outbreak changed because it was offensive to their faith. Muslims, as well, wanted a different name for the same reason. I thought that was rather amusing and potentially confusing.

Then I read yesterday that the U.S. government wanted to make a name change as well — but it had nothing to do with faith; rather, the economy. Specifically, the negative impact “swine” flu was having on the pork industry. Pork farmers fear the market could take a dive, perhaps with good reason.

Even though scientists have said there is no way to catch the flu by eating pork chops or any other pork products, a number of nations have moved to ban the importation of pork from the U.S. and Mexico. They include the Philippines, Kazakhstan, Ukraine and Ecuador.

In Jordan they are shutting down pig farms, while Egypt has ordered every pig in the country destroyed — some 300,000 of them. In the newsroom, we were struck that Muslim countries like Egypt and Jordan would even have pigs as livestock. As our associate producer Mohammad al-Kassim pointed out, it’s for their Christian residents, who have no religious problem with ham or bacon.

So what name should replace “swine,” since it is so problematic? The U.S. suggests referring to the flu as H1N1, its scientific name. Thailand says it will start calling the disease the “Mexican flu” — a name Israel liked as well — but not one that Mexico is likely to like.

In Europe, Androulla Vassiliou, the European commissioner for health, said that the commission would refer to the disease as “novel flu.” I don’t quite get that name. Is it because this is said to be a totally new flu?

The WHO continues to refer to the virus as swine influenza. Meanwhile, the World Organization for Animal Health, which handles veterinary issues around the world, issued a statement suggesting that the new disease should be labeled “North American influenza,” in keeping with a long medical tradition of naming influenza pandemics for the regions where they were first identified, e.g. the Spanish flu of 1918 to 1919, the Asian flu of 1957 to 1958 and the Hong Kong flu of 1967 to 1968.

So what name would you call it?

It’s worth noting that this is another story, like the economic meltdown, which shows how we are all globally connected. And like the recession, the only way to combat the problem is by working together. No one is immune — regardless of where you live or what language you speak.

- Martin Savidge

Photo courtesy of Flickr user The Pug Father under a Creative Commons license.

More than 90 cases of the disease have now been reported throughout the United States, and the first U.S. death attributed to swine flu was reported. Of course, Mexico is where the disease started — or so it seems — and where it continues to do the most harm. At least 150 people there have died from the disease. 

Laurie Garrett, a senior fellow for global health at the Council on Foreign Relations, joins Martin Savidge to discuss the origin of the flu. She also discusses various government responses to the flu, including discouraging public gatherings in Mexico, slaughtering pigs in Egypt and shutting down pig farms in Jordan.

Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak.

U.S. special envoy George Mitchell has begun a two-week trip to a number of Middle East and north African countries, including Egypt.

Jon Alterman is director and senior fellow of the Middle East Program at the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies. He writes at “World Politics Review” about the changing relationship between the United States and Egypt, arguing that relations have been damaged over the past several years and need rebuilding.

U.S.-Egypt: The Magic is Gone

It’s no secret that the U.S.-Egyptian relationship is ailing. As his term went on, President George W. Bush seemed to go to Egypt principally to deliver stern lectures. After years of visiting Washington every spring, Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak stopped coming to Washington at all. Despite — or perhaps because of — $2 billion per year changing hands, the mutual resentment has become palpable.

The hostility among the two leaders reflects a deeper divide between their governments and even among peoples. More than three decades after U.S. and Egyptian presidents together changed the landscape of the Arab-Israeli conflict, the U.S.-Egyptian relationship has grown stale. Egyptians feel unappreciated, and they complain that they have sold off their foreign policy for meager reward. Americans feel that their aid has been taken for granted, and they are embarrassed that so close an ally has such a checkered record in treating its own people. Although the two sides continue to cooperate on a wide array of shared interests, the amount that is done out of goodwill continues to dwindle.

The relationship has been drifting downward for years, and it can drift downward still. Yet the way in which the relationship continues to disappoint expectations is corrosive. It makes even things that Americans and Egyptians agree upon harder to accomplish, and that exacerbates differences. Both countries have an interest in redefining the relationship, in one of two ways.

One option is to reinvigorate the relationship by giving it a renewed sense of purpose. The modern Egyptian-American relationship was forged in the depths of the Cold War when Egypt pivoted out of the Soviet embrace, aligned itself with the United States, and defied the Arab consensus by making peace with Israel. The consequences of Egyptian policy were truly strategic not only for Egypt, but also for the United States. Egypt was a clear regional leader, and its actions helped reshape the Middle East.

Now, there is no grand project that the two countries share. With no Cold War, a much less defiant Arab consensus, and Arab governments’ grudging acceptance of Israel in the Middle East, Egypt is harder pressed to play the role of a vanguard, while the United States is less in need of one. Today’s geopolitics lend themselves to small and incremental moves rather than bold strokes. Egypt’s help fighting the “small wars” of the twenty-first century, for example, is important but probably insufficient to be truly strategic. In other areas where the United States has an interest, Egypt is not the most likely agent of change. It is hard to imagine Egypt leading an economic transition in the Middle East, and its political culture does not lend itself toward dramatic shifts in politics and governance.

None of this is to suggest that a grand project cannot be found, only that one is not evident. But what is clear is that the current relationship is predicated on having a grand project, and the absence of such a project makes the relationship hollow.

The other option is for both Egypt and the United States to agree that the current relationship has outlived its usefulness, and the time has come for both countries to invest in diversifying their relationships in the Middle East and around the world.

To read more, see the original post.

The views expressed by contributing bloggers do not reflect the views of Worldfocus or its partners.

Photo courtesy of Flickr user World Economic Forum under a Creative Commons license.

Egyptian and Palestinian negotiators met again on Wednesday in Cairo and came out of their meetings with the first public statements on a proposed cease-fire. While no Israeli representatives participated, an Egyptian official said they were “working with the Israeli side.”

At a brief news conference, a Hamas spokesman said his government still has reservations about the agreement.

Another spokesman for Hamas told reporters he was “optimistic now because there is no other choice for us.”

Daniel Levy, the director of the Middle East task force at the New America Foundation, joins Martin Savidge to discuss the Egyptian plan for a cease-fire, the Israeli military’s position and other prospects for bringing an end to the conflict.

Tamara Cofman Wittes, a senior fellow with the Saban Center for Middle East Policy at The Brookings Institution, joins Martin Savidge to discuss the effects of the Gaza war on moderate Arab governments allied with the U.S. and how this will impact American interests in the region as President-elect Barack Obama prepares to take office.

The U.S. abstained from voting as it waited for the results of talks between Hamas and Israel mediated by Egypt.

Countries like France and Turkey are also involved in trying to mediate an end to the conflict.

Robert Pastor, a professor at American University and senior advisor to the Carter Center on conflict resolution in the Middle East, joins Martin Savidge to discuss diplomatic efforts by the United Nations and others to end fighting in Gaza. They discuss the rejection of the cease-fire resolution, communication with Hamas and the level of American influence in the region.

People in Cairo demonstrated against the Israeli assault on Gaza.

Escalating violence on the Gaza strip has renewed pressure on Cairo, which maintains a blockade on the territory. Thought the Egyptian public largely opposes the blockade, the government continues to restrict movement of people and goods to and from Gaza.

Egypt, while condemning the current Israeli assault on Gaza, has also come under fire from some Arabs and Muslims for its links with Israel, including efforts to broker a new truce. The previous ceasefire — one that Egypt helped bring about — expired on Dec. 19.

Read more of our ongoing coverage of the escalating violence in Gaza.

Steven A. Cook is a senior fellow for Middle Eastern Studies at the Council on Foreign Relations at writes at the “Middle East Strategy at Harvard” blog about the effect of the violence in Gaza on Egypt.

War in Gaza: No upside for Egypt

The events in Gaza over this weekend present a number of internal and external challenges for the Egyptian government, again raising questions about Cairo’s capacity to deal effectively with regional crises. Needless to say, the Israeli Air Force’s offensive against Hamas coming soon after Israel’s Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni rebuffed Egyptian President Husni Mubarak’s pleas for restraint in Gaza, reminds Egyptians of their manifest weakness. It also plays right into the hands of the Egyptian opposition, whether it is the Muslim Brotherhood, neo-Nasserists, or the nationalist left, who all believe that Cairo’s alliance with Washington has brought Egypt to its knees, unable to oppose effectively Israeli policies in the region no matter how predatory. Israel’s attacks in Gaza will inevitably radicalize Egypt’s political discourse in much the same way they did after the July 2006 war in Lebanon, which placed Mubarak on the defensive.

In an effort to insulate itself from the domestic criticism sure to come and the inevitable calls to take some sort of punitive action against Israel, the Egyptians almost immediately summoned Shalom Cohen, Jerusalem’s ambassador in Cairo, for a dressing down with Foreign Minister Ahmed Aboul Gheit. In addition, in order to avoid the public relations disaster they experienced when Hamas breached Egypt’s border with Gaza last January, the Egyptians swung open the Rafah crossing to facilitate evacuation of the wounded. Still, these actions are unlikely to mollify Mubarak’s many domestic critics, especially since Aboul Gheit—at the same time he was seething about Israeli murder in Gaza—was implicitly laying a good deal of the blame for the outbreak of hostilities on Hamas, who resisted Egyptian entreaties to resume a dialogue with Mahmoud Abbas’ Fatah.

Beyond the domestic difficulties that are likely to result from Israel’s airstrikes, a weakened Hamas is likely going to be more difficult for Egypt’s General Intelligence chief, General Omar Suleiman, to corral. The June 18 ceasefire was predicated in part on Hamas’ ability to prevent other militant factions like Islamic Jihad and the Fatah-affiliated Al Aqsa Martyrs brigade from launching rockets on Israel. When the dust settles in Gaza, however, Suleiman and his emissaries are likely to find a significantly altered political environment in which Hamas is unable to impose its will on others or is even amenable to any efforts to reestablish the ceasefire. In other words, the Egyptians are going to be confronted with turmoil, lawlessness, and the increased possibility of factional violence Gaza.

To read more, see the original post.

The views expressed by contributing bloggers do not reflect the views of Worldfocus or its partners.

Photo courtesy of Per Bjorklund under a Creative Commons license.