Hamidati and Egypt: when the state becomes the enemy … a reading in the background of rhetorical climbing – something for the house
Since the outbreak of the conflict in Sudan in April 2023 between the army and the rebel militias of rapid support, Egypt was not only a neighbor, but was and was still a regional pivot player who cannot be crossed in any equation linked to the security and stability of Sudan. However, climbing the military conflict experienced the departure of the rapid support commander, Muhammad Hamdan Daglo, “Hamidati”, with direct accusations of Egypt to support the Sudanese army. But the most important question that is essential is: why now? And why exactly Egypt?
The Egyptian approach to the Sudanese crisis goes beyond the support of a particular political or military party. It is based on a firm principle which is to preserve the institutions of the Sudanese State, in particular the army, as the only remaining entity capable of ensuring sovereignty and stability. On the other hand, rapid support forces are an irregular entity that has been built outside the official system and would have well -known external support. This fundamental contrast in the nature of the two entities explains why Egyptian policy is based on the support of the State to its institutions.
Hamidati’s speech Towards Egypt is not absurd or spontaneous, but rather serves an accurate calculated agenda on oven mains that include the removal of the sudanese army, so hamidati sought to stigmatize the sudanese army with external support, in an attempt to weaken its Legitimacy in the Eyes of Internal and International Public Opinion, Besides The “External Enemy” Industry, This Escalation Aims to Create An “external enemy” used to fill the internal political discourse of rapid support forces the ranks of his supporters.
Hamidati aims to cause Cairo to push it towards a direct reaction, which could justify the internationalization of the conflict and the increase in external interventions.
Despite Hamidi’s attempts, no international or regional authority has adopted his speech to Egypt. The African Union, the Arab League, nor the United Nations, has not recognized these accusations. On the contrary, Cairo continued to present itself as a silent mediator, refusing to slip into polarization and maintains a rational diplomatic position aimed at reaching the long -term stability of Sudan. This balanced position reflects a clear and future Egyptian vision.
Cairo policy is radically different from the policies of certain other regional parties which may have been involved militarily, or manufactured drones, or facilitated smuggling corridors. Egypt has maintained the policy of “red line” without direct involvement in the conflict. This wise policy stems from the deep consciousness of Egypt that Sudan is not a transient file.
For Egypt, the post-conflict stage is no less important than its course. Unified and stable Sudan represents a guarantee of water safety, borders and economic for Egypt. Consequently, its policy is based on the support of the Sudanese state with its institutions, without supporting people or factions. In the end, Egypt is not an adversary of the Battle of Hamidati, but rather the institutional symbol of the idea that it tries to bring down: the idea of a sovereign national state.
Thank you Egypt !!!!!
Follow us
