Why Egypt refuses to administer Gaza

Egypt has firmly rejected the proposal made last month by Israeli opposition leader Yair Lapid that suggested Egypt take over the administration of the Gaza Strip for up to 15 years in exchange for the cancellation of its external debt. The Egyptian response was clear and decisive, with the Foreign Ministry stating that such proposals are an “attempt to circumvent Egypt’s and the Arab world’s firm stance,” emphasizing the need for Israel to withdraw from occupied Palestinian territories and for an independent Palestinian state to be established.
This rejection is not just a passing political stance but a continuation of Egypt’s long-standing position on the Palestinian issue. Egypt has consistently opposed any proposals that reinforce the occupation or undermine the Palestinian cause. Previously, it also refused to participate in international forces within Gaza, further demonstrating its firm stance against assuming security or administrative responsibilities in the enclave.
The idea of Egypt managing Gaza is not new, as Egypt governed the territory between 1948 and 1967. Initially, Gaza was under the administration of the All-Palestine Government, which was supported by Cairo but lacked effective international recognition. As a result, Egypt later placed Gaza under direct military rule without formally annexing it.
During this period, Gaza faced severe economic and humanitarian challenges, worsened by the influx of more than 200,000 Palestinian refugees after the Nakba in 1948. Egypt never had a long-term political plan for governing Gaza; rather, it saw its administration as a temporary responsibility until a comprehensive solution to the Palestinian issue was found.
Egyptian rule in Gaza ended after the 1967 war, when Israel occupied the enclave along with the West Bank and Sinai. Since then, Egypt has not played a direct role in Gaza’s administration but has remained a key player in security matters and political mediation.
Egypt’s rejection of Lapid’s proposal is rooted in multiple concerns, with national security being the most critical. Cairo fears that assuming control of Gaza would create a significant security burden, particularly given the complex internal dynamics of the enclave and the presence of armed factions outside the control of the Palestinian Authority. If Egypt were to take administrative responsibility, it might find itself in direct confrontation with resistance groups, leading to unwanted conflicts that could destabilize Egypt’s internal security.
Additionally, Egypt is wary of Gaza becoming an unstable zone that extremist groups could exploit as a base for attacks on northern Sinai. To avoid such scenarios, Cairo is keen to prevent any situation that would entangle it in a complex security challenge on its eastern border.

Egypt has consistently opposed any proposals that reinforce the occupation or undermine the Palestinian cause.

Dr. Abdellatif El-Menawy

Egypt also rejects any role that would make it act as a security enforcer for Israel. From Cairo’s perspective, Lapid’s proposal is an attempt to shift responsibility for Gaza onto Egypt, allowing Israel to evade its obligations. Instead of shouldering the costs of reconstruction after the devastation caused by Israeli military operations, Tel Aviv appears to be seeking to offload the burden onto Egypt.
This aligns with Egypt’s policy of refusing to serve as an instrument for implementing Israeli strategies that do not contribute to a comprehensive resolution of the Palestinian issue. Cairo understands that any direct involvement in Gaza’s administration could be perceived as serving Israeli interests at the expense of Palestinian rights.
Egypt is also deeply concerned that taking over Gaza’s administration could serve as the first step in a larger plan to permanently separate the enclave from the West Bank, effectively dismantling the Palestinian cause. If Gaza is removed from the broader Palestinian equation, it could pave the way for initiatives aimed at resettling Palestinians outside the West Bank — an idea that Egypt has consistently opposed.
There is also a strong fear that accepting control over Gaza could lead to a broader plan of relocating Palestinians from the enclave into the Sinai Peninsula. Egypt firmly rejects such a scenario, as it would not only undermine its national sovereignty but also pose a serious threat to its stability.
Another key factor in Egypt’s rejection of the proposal is the belief that its economic challenges do not justify compromising its national policies. Despite the economic incentives included in Lapid’s proposal, particularly the offer to cancel Egypt’s debts, Cairo has made it clear that it will not trade its strategic positions for financial relief. Egyptian officials have repeatedly emphasized that, despite the country’s economic difficulties, accepting such an offer could lead to political and security repercussions that far outweigh any temporary economic benefits.
Lapid’s proposal was not the first attempt to persuade Egypt to take on Gaza’s administration. In 2023, the US made a similar suggestion of Egypt temporarily overseeing Gaza’s security, but Cairo rejected that as well. Then-CIA Director William Burns discussed the idea with Egyptian President Abdel Fattah El-Sisi, who firmly declined the proposal.
Moreover, Egypt has refused to participate in any international forces inside Gaza, believing that such involvement would make it a direct party to a prolonged conflict, leading to unpredictable consequences.
Egypt has not merely rejected the idea of governing Gaza but has also proposed alternative solutions that focus on Palestinian self-governance. One such solution is reinstating the PA’s control over Gaza as a step toward Palestinian unity and an end to internal divisions.
Additionally, Cairo has suggested forming a nonpartisan Palestinian government to oversee both the West Bank and Gaza — a proposal that Israel has opposed. Egypt has also offered to provide limited security and logistical support, such as border monitoring and training Palestinian security personnel, while firmly refusing any direct administrative role.
Egypt’s position on Gaza is clear and strategic: it refuses any direct administrative role within the enclave and opposes any plans that could undermine the Palestinian cause. This stance is evident in its repeated rejection of Israeli and American proposals, despite political pressure and economic incentives.
From Cairo’s perspective, the solution to Gaza’s crisis does not lie in Egyptian administration but in a comprehensive settlement that includes ending Israel’s occupation, restoring PA control over Gaza and ensuring the Palestinian people’s right to establish an independent state. Egypt remains committed to its role as a mediator, but it refuses to become a direct party to a crisis that it believes should not be its responsibility.

• Dr. Abdellatif El-Menawy has covered conflicts worldwide. X: @ALMenawy