Ali, Sabbahi, Abouel Fotouh and Morsy all assert Egypt’s need to honor its
treaties, but also hold the view that Israel has not kept its end of the
bargain, which could potentially nullify the agreement. Shafiq does not even
hint to there having been anything wrong with Egypt’s stance and actions on
the issue during the Mubarak years.Moussa, who was Mubarak’s most vocal
foreign minister in criticizing Israel, seems more hesitant to engage in
unilateral support of the Palestinian cause, but would like to focus on
bolstering Palestinian statehood through existing accords and coordinated
efforts with other Arab countries. He does say that he would like for Egypt
to be more vocal on supporting the Palestinian cause “as an ethical
obligation.”

Foreign policy, a blank slate for candidates to draw on
Mohamed Elmeshad Egyptian Independent Tue, 22/05/2012 - 20:02
http://www.egyptindependent.com/news/foreign-policy-blank-slate-candidates-draw

During the Mubarak years, Egypt lost a great deal of its international clout
as the main regional power broker and — during the Nasser years — the
reference point for Arab politics. Most presidential candidates see that
Egypt has reached a state of political subordination, especially to the US,
on issues such as the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and has lost much of its
former regional significance.

The foreign policy section of presidential campaign platforms gives
candidates a chance to show how they would like Egypt to be seen vis-à-vis
its relationship with the world. It also provides ample opportunity to
garnish their platforms with glorifying terms and a relative perspective of
the development they intend to undertake internally, since Egypt’s
bargaining ability externally will be largely affected by its development
internally.

Muslim Brotherhood candidate Mohamed Morsy centered his foreign policy
platform around “achieving international leadership.” Nasserist Hamdeen
Sabbahi says that Egypt’s dignity abroad would be restored only through the
“independence of Egypt’s will.” Independent candidate Abdel Moneim Abouel
Fotouh used the same words as Sabbahi to describe the prerequisite needed to
restore Egypt’s significant strategic role in regional politics.

Lawyer and activist Khaled Ali underpins his foreign policy with the need
for it to be “befitting of a great revolution and deep-rooted people who
deserve better.” Former Minister of Foreign Affairs Amr Moussa takes a more
sober approach to his foreign affairs platform, saying that the revolution
must have “positive reflections on Egypt’s foreign policy.”

Moussa is the only candidate who integrates the prerequisite need for hard
power in the form of military might and a robust economic standing in order
to enhance Egypt’s soft power with regards to its political standing
worldwide.

Former Prime Minister Ahmed Shafiq’s program does not say much of anything
besides broadly affirming the need for Egypt to have an “active role on the
international scene.”

Beneath the foreign policy headlines lies a host of important considerations
for Egypt on the foreign policy front that most candidates did not fail to
address in their own way. The main issues for candidates this time around
are Israel-Palestine, the Nile Basin and African relations, Egyptians
abroad, Egyptian-American relations, and strategic bilateral partnerships.
Some assign different degrees of importance on each and attach differing
levels of national security concerns to each issue.

As a popular issue and consistent matter of concern for Egyptians, every
candidate had to address Camp David, and Egypt's stance towards Palestine
and the Palestinians. Khalid Ali calls Egypt’s position with regard to
Palestine during Mubarak’s reign disappointing. Ali, Sabbahi, Abouel Fotouh
and Morsy all assert Egypt’s need to honor its treaties, but also hold the
view that Israel has not kept its end of the bargain, which could
potentially nullify the agreement. Sabbahi is the most radical in his
assertions, refusing to use the word Israel in his program, preferring to
call it the “Zionist entity.” These candidates all look for a pointed
departure from Egypt’s previous policies towards Palestinians, which Abouel
Fotouh likened to a “lying down position” during one television interview.
They do not discount the possibility of unilaterally supporting Palestinians
by opening the Rafah border crossing and working with Islamist Hamas as well
as secular Fatah, whereas the Egyptian government before preferred dealing
with Fatah.

Shafiq does not indicate anything profound or any change regarding how he
would handle the Palestinian situation. Unlike all of the other candidates,
he does not even hint to there having been anything wrong with Egypt’s
stance and actions on the issue during the Mubarak years.

Moussa, who was Mubarak’s most vocal foreign minister in criticizing Israel,
seems more hesitant to engage in unilateral support of the Palestinian
cause, but would like to focus on bolstering Palestinian statehood through
existing accords and coordinated efforts with other Arab countries. He does
say that he would like for Egypt to be more vocal on supporting the
Palestinian cause “as an ethical obligation.”

For Moussa, the immediate Arab sphere of influence is Egypt’s most important
one. He would call for the implementation of a “new Arab order, through
which Egypt would return to its regional leadership.” Sabbahi’s platform
also states the need to build a new Arab order, however, for him this new
order is built around the Arab Spring and the tide of change going through
many Arab countries presently.

He shares Abouel Fotouh’s priority of recalibrating the Arab League in a way
that would make it effective. Abouel Fotouh would like to transform the
organization in a way that would help achieve “unity; Arab political,
economic and political integration.”

Morsy sees the Arab sphere as the only truly important one in which Egypt
should aim to play a role, calling for a “Joint Arab Defense Force.” Morsy
seems the most eager to strengthen relations with the Gulf Cooperation
Council (GCC) countries. During a television interview he said that as
president, Saudi Arabia would be the first country he visits.

However, the Brotherhood’s Renaissance project, which is the platform Morsy
represents, also focuses on Egypt regaining its footing in African politics.
The project calls for a general plan including diplomatic missions, enhanced
trade agreements, and aid to the more impoverished countries as a way to do
this.

Sabbahi once said during a March television interview that he would focus
mostly on Egypt’s sphere of influence in Africa before the Arab world. “I
would especially focus on Nile River Basin countries, because securing water
for Egypt is one of the most important things now,” he said.

Sabbahi was a member of the Egyptian delegation that went to Ethiopia to
dissuade its government from building any dams that might affect Egypt’s
water supply. He believes that bilateral partnerships with East African
countries are the way to go to enhance Egypt’s diplomatic standing with
them. Sabbahi has the most robust plan for increasing African relations that
includes details on every method of cooperation between Egypt and the rest
of the continent.

Shafiq’s platform says the same thing but in much more simple terms.

It must be noted that, while most of the candidates here have articulated
some robustness in their platforms, Ahmed Shafiq’s written platform only
offers bullet points on issues he has rarely addressed or elaborated on
during interviews. He does see Sudan and Libya as the major venues for
regional partnerships, given their proximity and trade potential.

Others see Iran and Turkey as major potential partners. Sabbahi, Ali, and
Moussa would like to develop trade agreements with both industrial giants in
tandem with other agreements. Moussa sees the Organization of Islamic
Countries as the perfect venue to solidify these attachments. Morsy
specifies the need to focus on improving relations with Islamic countries,
but both in his interviews and his platform does not single out Iran for
bilateral relations.

On the other hand, most candidates found it difficult to deviate from the
same line towards the United States. They all indicate a need to depart from
being the US’s subordinate in the region, instead engaging on mutual
interest. The sentiment in Egypt is decidedly anti-American, the latest
evidence of which was the caustic dialogue surrounding the alleged American
citizenship of the mother of former candidate Hazem Salah Abu Ismail. Even
so, Shafiq repeatedly stated the importance of the current Egyptian-American
relationship, and said on television that the US would be the first foreign
country he would visit as president. In his program, which came out
recently, Shafiq is ironically the only candidate who doesn’t mention the US
in his foreign policy section.

Another element of universal concern among the candidates is the status of
Egyptians abroad. Moussa points to the absence of any political or legal
support for Egyptians abroad now to help them with problems they may face as
labor in foreign countries — especially in the GCC — and allow them to
actively participate in Egyptian politics.

What is abundantly clear in going through most of the candidates’
platforms — except for Shafiq's — is that there is a lot of work to be done
on the foreign policy front. Most candidates treat every issue as a blank
slate and opportunity for a new beginning of Egypt’s relationship with the
world.