Who are the friends and who are the enemies?

Who are the friends and who are the enemies? Why the estrangement between Egypt and Iran and is Iran a real enemy of Egypt?! Where is Egypt in the regional arrangements that are taking place now? Have we determined who the historical enemy is and our eyes are on the transformed friend? All these thoughts crossed my mind as I thought about the philosophy of our future politics. I asked a former distinguished Egyptian foreign minister: Who makes Egypt’s foreign policy? How are directions made and goals set? He said: The Presidential Palace, the General Intelligence, and the Foreign Ministry. The role of the Foreign Ministry depends to a large extent on the personality of the minister, so he offers thoughtful alternatives or only implements what the President of the Republic and his work team dictate. There are some issues that one institution prevails over another in taking on its own, according to Sakhona. The events brought them together.. I wondered once again to myself, about the institutionalization of decision-making, since we know nothing as active citizens about why we approach a country and why we sometimes move away? And we find yesterday’s enemy a friend, and yesterday’s friend an open enemy, or from “from below to below,” as they say in Proverbs. As I know, interests are reconciled, and the balance of power changes according to our economic strength and our internal cohesion without the fragility of exposing the country to dangers for the most trivial reasons, and the extent of our military strength influencing events.
So our foreign policy changes according to the quality, extent, and intensity of our need for others, and the extent to which others need us as the largest commercial market in the region, and with manpower that transcends geographical borders, and according to our ability to confront military threats, or our hypothetical ability to threaten other countries.
When Egypt was at war with Israel, in light of global bipolarity, the United States placed us in its priorities because of our influence on the security of the region, and Israel in particular. And when we reconciled, we did not find an alternative to this influence, and Egypt lost its priority with the West to a great extent, unfortunately. We did not We fill the void left by the transition from a state of war to a state of peace with sustainable development that makes the demand for Egyptian labor greater, and not with economic development that makes everyone gasp after the vast Egyptian market… and now by reconciling the rich Gulf, which is on a distinguished path of modernity with the traditional enemy, and even opening areas of cooperation. We closed it with him [despite taking the peace initiative before him], and the global balance of power changed, with uni-polarity and dualism according to the standards of the United States and Britain in particular, which led to the destruction of Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Libya, and Sudan. I believe that Egypt must create a role for itself that is different from what it was, and put future considerations in Take it into account. My question here is: Can an individual alone, regardless of his capabilities as a president or king, and even if he has assistants, determine the steps of the future? The changes have become daily. Is it not our duty to establish specialized research and study institutions, and for the decision maker to have dozens of studies, current and future? I would even go further than that and say that with multiple approaches and actions, artificial intelligence, its devices, and means must be introduced with the human mind to absorb a lot and imagine the possibilities for every future situation. Let me go further than that again, and say that it is sometimes necessary, as others do, to create impressions and work to make them facts, as the propaganda and intelligence services did to us in various circumstances, and led to revolutions and the destruction of economies that could have led development in the region. I have dozens of experiments that prove the validity of the theory and even its effectiveness. We must think and take the initiative and not remain standing still waiting for events to occur so that we can merely react to them, which reduces our ability to take initiative.
This means that we have a philosophy in managing our internal and foreign policy. What is it?
It is definitely not a philosophy of mediation, and certainly not a philosophy of submissiveness and latency, and I imagine that our Gulf, Arab and African circles need to have color in them and we must find our competitive advantage with each circle.
What is our own strength that makes Egypt heavier in the scale?!
At one time, Egypt’s philosophy was to export the revolution against traditional colonialism, which created for us supporters and enemies. At a time in recent times, Egyptian soft powers were the creators of the conscience of all Arabs, and Egypt’s philosophy was to spread and develop this, and even finance it and open the door to freedom of creativity in it.
Egypt’s philosophy was to export Egyptian labor, and it began with teachers who spread throughout all Arab countries and taught their children. Most of the first generation of Arab and African leaders studied in Egyptian universities and graduated there.
Education and culture were our means of influence, which gave Egypt a position. As for technical labor, it was the mainstay of development in the Arab countries due to its adequacy, efficiency, and cheap price. Egypt had millions of farmers and workers in that country.
What now?
Who is now studying, analyzing and researching the creation of new influence approaches, African, Arab, and even European and global?
We have a great deal of work ahead of us to build internally so that we can have value abroad, and we need a philosophy, a plan, and follow-up implementation, but before that we must have a flexible vision that maintains direction.
It is presented in a positive context.