Le New York Times a donné la parole à une série de spécialistes de la région pour tenter d’esquisser les changements à venir. Diagnostics prudents, variés, mais qui convergent dans la même direction : la révolte égyptienne est une mauvaise nouvelle pour Israël (où très rares ont d’ailleurs été les voix à se féliciter des événements en cours.)
Fragilisation de la frontière sud, risque de devoir coopérer avec un régime égyptien moins agressif vis à vis du Hamas à Gaza. Les autorités israéliennes risquent de regretter longtemps les rencontres de Charm Al-Cheikh où le président Moubarak organisait le statu quo.
Florilège ( en anglais) :
Michele Dunne senior associate au Carnegie Endowment for International Peace :
If there is a major change in the Egyptian government, the main peace process issues to be concerned about are a change in Egypt’s policy toward Gaza and its role in the Arab League. A new leadership probably would be more responsive to Egyptian public opinion and accordingly less cooperative with Israel in terms of restricting goods going into Gaza — although it will probably still restrict Palestinians coming out of Gaza into the Sinai because that is critical to Egyptian national security. A new government also might not be as cooperative with the United States in terms of managing the Arab League and the positions it takes on Arab-Israeli issues.
Amjad Attalah, directeur du Middle East Task Force à la New America Foundation :
The U.S. and Israel can expect any new Egyptian government to respect the Camp David Accords as it afforded a real benefit to Egypt – the return to Egypt of the Sinai Peninsula from Israeli occupation. However, it is equally likely that no representative Egyptian leader will be able to continue the siege of the Gaza Strip, support efforts to keep the Palestinians divided or tolerate another Israeli attack on Gaza. Like Turkey, a representative government in Egypt would be likely to demand real freedom for Palestinians as a result of Israeli-Palestinian negotiations and would place greater emphasis on Palestinian unity and human rights.
Gil Troy, Shalom Hartman Research Fellow in Jerusalem :
This week’s hysterical headlines in the Israeli press about the potential loss of Egypt, the dip in Tel Aviv stocks, the debate about whether President Obama can be trusted to support American allies, all suggest that Israel’s strategic doctrine is being hastily rewritten. The prospects of peace become even more unlikely if Egypt turns Islamist. Israel’s safest border will suddenly look menacing. Hamas will look stronger in Gaza with an Islamist Egyptian regime not even pretending to try to stop the flow of arms. The Palestinian Authority in the West Bank will look like a less viable peace partner with fundamentalism ascendant, and any pro-peace or pro-Western Palestinians demonized as collaborators. Moreover, Israeli policymakers will feel caught, doubting Mahmoud Abbas as another unelected autocrat while fearing the popular Palestinian street more than ever.
Shibley Telhami, université du Maryland, senior fellow à la Brookings Institution :
No one will be rushing to make a deal with the Palestinians. Mubarak was one of Mahmoud Abbas’s key allies and the Palestinian leader has already been reeling from the Al Jazeera-leaked documents from the Israeli-Palestinian negotiations, and from the general perception that he had failed to make progress in the negotiations or to secure a freeze on Israeli settlements. Without an agreement with Hamas, he is in an even more difficult position to deliver and sell an agreement given the inevitable compromises. The U.S. will undoubtedly have to re-assess its policies. Washington can exploit the uncertainty to put together a comprehensive plan that can refocus regional attention on diplomacy — but the risks of failure may be too much to handle. It can also sit back until things settle down but that may be seen as support for Israel and play into the hands of angry publics. It can pursue a policy less focused on immediate results and more on the sort of principles of foreign policy— human rights and international law — that inspired the hopes of many around the world in the first months of the Obama administration. But it is impossible to put any new initiative in place before deciding how to interpret the regional events and deciding how to deal with them.