SOCIAL POST: Why won’t Egypt accept displaced Palestinians from Gaza?
Egypt’s stance isn’t pro-Palestinian or pro-Israeli. It’s pro-regime survival.
Because past decisions trap today’s choices. Two Concepts: path dependency & institutional lock-in explain Egypt’s dilemma: collapse from within if it accepts them, or collapse from without if it refuses.
1. Path Dependency: Egypt’s Security-First Gaza Policy Since Camp David, Egypt has securitized Gaza- viewing it not as a humanitarian issue but a national security threat. That framing was institutionalized under Mubarak and Sisi. How?
Three forces cemented Egypt’s rigid Gaza stance:
-A military doctrine that sees Gaza as a source of Islamist extremism
-Dependency on US military aid ($1.3B/year)
-A regime model built on internal control, not regional instability
Each reinforces the other.
This is classic path dependency: Once Egypt locked into a containment model for Gaza, every new choice reinforced that path. Now, deviating from it could shatter the internal security state that underpins the regime.
2. Institutional Lock-In: Why Displacement Is Existential
Allowing large-scale Palestinian displacement into Sinai would rupture Egypt’s core institutions:
-Territorial sovereignty
-Military dominance
-Nationalist legitimacy
The risks are existential:
-The military sees Sinai as a red line
-The regime’s identity depends on resisting Zionist expansion
-Hamas-linked populations could import resistance into Egypt’s own borders
Refusal has a price, Egypt relies on: -US aid & IMF access -Israeli military coordination (esp. in Sinai) -Gulf funding from UAE & Saudi Arabia All can be weaponized if Egypt resists Western/Israeli displacement plans too hard.
The US holds the keys to Egypt’s economic and military lifelines. If it pushes back too far, Washington can stall aid, block IMF deals, lean on Gulf partners or stir internal dissent, as it’s done in other fragile states.
Trapped between two dilemmas, Egypt must: Reject displacement to preserve regime survival and accommodate Western-Israeli pressure to avoid punishment.
It's crisis management born from decades of rigid policy. The outcome is symbolic resistance and backdoor coordination: harsh rhetoric, minor aid gestures, and working to limit displacement. Egypt’s stance isn’t pro-Palestinian or pro-Israeli. It’s pro-regime survival.