How Did Cairo Handle the Most Dangerous Crisis on Its Border Without Firing a Shot? Egypt and Sudan: The Long-Breath Policy in Times of Collapse
By Dr. Abdelnasser Salm Hamid
Since the outbreak of war in Sudan between the Sudanese army and the Rapid Support Forces in April 2023, Egypt has found itself in direct contact with one of the region’s most dangerous crises in the past decade. While regional and international powers closely follow the events, Egypt chose to act as a stabilizing force, adhering to a “long-breath” strategy—refraining from siding with any party and instead prioritizing regional security and stability.
The border between Egypt and Sudan stretches over 1,200 kilometers, making it one of the most fragile frontiers in the absence of a functioning Sudanese state to ensure security on the other side. Based on this, Egypt adopted a policy of “containment without involvement,” focusing on enhancing security without direct military intervention, and engaging diplomatically without taking a military side in the conflict. This approach reflects Cairo’s commitment to regional stability without being drawn into unpredictable conflicts, similar to its stance in Libya, where it maintained influence without deep involvement in the conflict.
Amid the military escalation, Egypt received over 1.2 million Sudanese refugees—about 57% of the total refugee population on its territory, according to UN data. The refugees dispersed across various Egyptian cities, including Greater Cairo, Alexandria, Aswan, and Giza. Despite the economic burden imposed by this large influx, the Egyptian government made significant efforts to provide healthcare, shelter, and humanitarian support, in coordination with international and local organizations such as the Red Crescent. Notably, this response extended beyond the government, as Egyptian civil society institutions also played a key role, treating the refugees as permanent residents rather than temporary guests.
From the onset of the crisis, Egypt pursued a proactive policy aimed at containing the Sudanese conflict without contributing to its escalation. Cairo framed its national security within a broader context that went beyond bilateral relations to encompass regional security as a whole. Egypt understood that Sudan’s collapse would pose serious security threats, including the risk of the country becoming a haven for cross-border militant groups.
In this context, Egypt moved quietly through diplomatic channels, asserting influence via cooperation with regional and international organizations like the African Union, while avoiding externally imposed solutions. This was part of a broader Egyptian policy of supporting political solutions that originate from within Sudan itself, backed by regional and international will.
While the humanitarian and political dimensions were central, the economic aspect of the crisis also significantly influenced Egypt’s policy. Cairo recognizes that Sudan’s stability is not only essential for national security but also a strategic necessity to sustain economic integration between the two countries. Sudan and Egypt are linked through several joint projects, such as cross-border electricity connections and agricultural supply chains that play a key role in maintaining stability in the Egyptian market. These projects underscore the importance of Sudan’s stability and the integration of its economy with Egypt’s, making it vital to support solutions that prevent the collapse of Sudanese institutions.
Through a multi-pronged approach, Egyptian diplomacy relied on indirect tools such as security and intelligence cooperation and humanitarian aid. Egypt also played a vital role in coordinating with neighboring countries such as Chad, South Sudan, and Eritrea. This coordination led to the establishment of a trilateral platform for information sharing and more effective monitoring of developments in Sudan. This regional cooperation enhances Egypt’s ability to address the consequences of the Sudanese crisis in partnership with its neighbors.
On the international stage, Egypt has called on the global community to assume its responsibilities regarding the Sudanese crisis—particularly in areas of refugee assistance, reconstruction, and support for the Sudanese economy. Cairo has warned that abandoning Sudan in a state of chaos and instability will worsen the situation and create fertile ground for foreign interventions that could escalate the crisis. Hence, Egypt has stressed the need for the international community to bear part of the responsibility to ensure a long-term resolution to the Sudanese crisis.
Amid the complex regional and international landscape, Egypt has maintained its position as a balancing bridge between various regional and international powers, allowing it to move with equilibrium without getting entangled in regional conflicts. The “containment without involvement” strategy adopted by Egypt reflects a strategic vision aimed at preserving regional stability, protecting national interests, and ensuring the security of the broader region. This policy indicates a mature political mindset and a deep understanding of geopolitical realities and the importance of prudent action during times of crisis.
The question now is: who will follow its lead?
