Quiet tensions threatening Israeli-Egyptian cold peace

Since the signing of the Camp David Accords in 1978, peace between Egypt and Israel has resembled more of a strategic ceasefire than a warm partnership. However, the ongoing war in Gaza has exposed real fractures that are now pressing against the foundations of this long-standing peace.

Relations between Cairo and Tel Aviv have entered an unprecedented phase of strategic coldness, with behind-the-scenes accusations exchanged over treaty violations and Israeli claims that Egypt has been building a military infrastructure in Sinai that exceeds what the peace agreement permits. Behind these allegations lies a complex web of conflicting interests, pressures and national priorities.

Israel is demanding that Egypt dismantle the military infrastructure it has built in Sinai over the past decade, claiming it is a direct violation of the military annex of the Camp David treaty. Israeli sources say that Egypt has not only increased its troop presence but is also building infrastructure that includes airbases, fuel and ammunition depots, antitank fortifications and even tunnels under the Suez Canal. Cairo, on the other hand, insists that all of this has been done with prior coordination with Israel and solely for national security reasons.

But to understand this, one must first ask: why has Egypt increased its military presence in Sinai?

Over the past decade, Egypt has faced threats from multiple fronts. In the northeast (Sinai), its military waged an open war against terrorist organizations that relied on logistical support via tunnels from Gaza. In the west (Libya), state collapse allowed armed groups to smuggle large quantities of weapons across the border. In the south (Sudan), smuggling networks and terrorist activities have continued along the border. And again in the northeast, Egypt was forced to counter Hamas’ destabilizing efforts through an extensive tunnel network connecting Gaza and Sinai.

Israel is demanding that Egypt dismantle the military infrastructure it has built in Sinai over the past decade

Dr. Abdellatif El-Menawy

In response to these threats, Egypt rebuilt its military posture along all its borders. This included upgrading the Sidi Barrani airbase and establishing an advanced naval base near the Libyan border, in addition to boosting its presence in Sinai. These moves were not aimed at Israel, but rather at protecting Egyptian national security from multiple directions.

Militarily, Egypt’s capabilities have grown significantly during President Abdel Fattah El-Sisi’s tenure, especially in his second term. This includes Rafale fighter jets from France, submarines and frigates from Germany, naval systems from Italy, helicopter carriers from Russia and annual joint drills with European and American forces.

But more important than the size of Egypt’s arsenal is how it is used. Cairo frames these developments as tools to support its regional and diplomatic influence — not offensive assets. President El-Sisi has repeatedly reaffirmed Egypt’s full commitment to peace with Israel, most recently during last month’s Arab League summit, where he called the treaty a “model for transforming war into diplomatic partnership.”

Israeli concerns operate on two levels. Strategically, Israeli security hard-liners fear that permanent military infrastructure in Sinai may become a future threat if political conditions change. And politically and in the media sphere, many analysts believe that part of Israel’s escalation is designed for international audiences — to deflect attention from its alleged war crimes and mass displacement in Rafah. By focusing on Egypt, Israel can portray itself as a committed treaty partner, while shifting blame for violations onto Cairo.

Cairo has responded with measured political finesse, asserting that it has not violated the Camp David treaty. On the contrary, Egypt says it is Israel that has crossed the line, especially with its deployment of forces in the Philadelphi Corridor, which is a direct violation of the agreement. Egypt has also been sidelined as a ceasefire mediator and excluded from coordination regarding operations in southern Gaza.

Egypt understands that Israel is trying to distract it with secondary issues at a highly sensitive time. Cairo, meanwhile, is working to prevent the forced displacement of Palestinians from Gaza and is active diplomatically to de-escalate the situation at the international level.

This is not an open crisis between Israel and Egypt, but is rather mutual pressure beneath the surface

Dr. Abdellatif El-Menawy

Could this tension spiral into a crisis that threatens peace?

So far, there has been no indication that either side intends to abandon the peace treaty. However, there are signs worth noting: Egypt has downgraded its diplomatic representation in Tel Aviv to charge d’affaires and official Egyptian statements criticizing Israeli actions in Gaza, the West Bank and Syria have increased significantly.

In short, no one wants the peace deal to collapse, but the growing tension could send the relationship into a cycle of mutual suspicion — especially if Israel continues to violate agreements while Egypt strengthens its defenses, which it considers a sovereign right.

This is not an open crisis between Israel and Egypt, but is rather mutual pressure beneath the surface. Israel wants to limit Egypt’s defensive capacity east of the Suez Canal, while Cairo sees its national security as incompatible with a conditional peace. Both sides recognize the value of the peace agreement, but they are now testing its boundaries.

The real question now is not whether the peace will collapse, but whether it can survive without its rules being redefined. The months ahead will provide the answer, amid a raging war in Gaza, a rapidly shifting Middle East and alliances being quietly reshaped in the shadows.

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