Food factories instead of weapons: The real reason Egypt remained outside the "Mecca Pact"
Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Pakistan signed a joint defense agreement under which an attack on one of them would be considered an attack on all, but Egypt did not join. Conflicting reports present two versions of the reason.
Last week, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Pakistan signed the "Mecca Agreement for Joint Defense," a new and significant military alliance in the Middle East declaring that an attack on one of the countries will be considered an attack on all. However, Egypt's absence from the agreement is causing ripples in the international arena. Conflicting reports reveal the geopolitical rifts behind the scenes, as the "Middle East Eye" website, identified as pro-Qatari, and the Lebanese newspaper "Al-Akhbar," identified with the Hezbollah organization, present opposing narratives regarding the reasons that left Cairo outside the alliance.
Anger in Riyadh: "Egypt only takes and does not give"
According to an investigation presented as an "exclusive" by the pro-Qatari "Middle East Eye," it was Saudi Arabia that vetoed Egypt's inclusion, despite pressure from Turkey and its Foreign Minister, Hakan Fidan. Saudi officials, including a former senior advisor to the royal house, revealed that the decision stems from deep frustration in Riyadh with the regime of Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi. They concluded that Egypt has lost its strategic and military value and no longer functions as a reliable partner.
Since the 2013 military coup, Saudi Arabia has poured about 25 billion dollars to stabilize the Egyptian economy. However, the investment did not yield the expected security return. "Egypt has always been dependent on us and the United States. It returns nothing, only takes," the former advisor criticized. Saudi frustration peaked due to the "minimal and unreliable" role Cairo played in Saudi Arabia's war against the Houthi rebels in Yemen, as well as the lack of backing during the recent conflict between the United States, Israel, and Iran.
An army of food factories and rapprochement with the UAE
Another central point of friction noted by "Middle East Eye" is Cairo's increasing subordination to the UAE. Riyadh is watching with concern Egypt's alignment with Abu Dhabi's policy, which is perceived as harming both Saudi and Egyptian interests, ranging from the UAE's involvement in Somaliland to support for the RSF forces in Sudan.
Beyond political disputes, the Saudis are sharply criticizing the competence of the Egyptian army. Unlike Turkey and Pakistan, which possess advanced defense industries, the Egyptian army is perceived as being mired in managing a civilian economy. "The army's role should be investing in military production capabilities, instead of engaging in managing food factories," one of the Saudi sources noted, casting doubt on the combat readiness of the Egyptian forces.
Cairo's version: Fear of military commitments
On the other hand, the newspaper "Al-Akhbar" provides a different picture, presenting Egypt as having chosen to avoid joining the alliance. According to this report, Cairo does not intend to enter the joint defense agreement anytime soon. Egypt did participate in the "quadripartite coordination mechanism," but sources emphasize that this does not oblige it to agree to a rapid transition to a military formula with mutual commitments.
According to "Al-Akhbar," the goal of Egypt's participation was consultation regarding regional crises and coordination of diplomatic positions. Turning the mechanism into a "joint defense agreement" poses dangerous dilemmas for Cairo: what is required of a member state if its ally is attacked? For Egypt, the fear of losing strategic independence and being dragged into foreign wars outweighed the temptation of joining the new alliance.
