The Day After the Gaza War: The View from Egypt and Jordan

On Tuesday, February 25, 2025, the Fares Center hosted Professor Khaled Fahmy, Edward Keller Professor of North Africa and the Middle East at Tufts University and Professor Malik Mufti, Professor of Political Science at Tufts University.

Jordan’s Concerns over Demographic Pressures

Professor Mufti first discussed Jordan’s apprehensions regarding large-scale displacement of Palestinians into its territory. He noted that Jordan’s population of approximately ten million—comprising both indigenous Jordanians and people of Palestinian descent—poses a delicate demographic balance. Any influx from Gaza, he argued, could destabilise the kingdom and revive long standing social and political tensions. Professor Mufti referred to episodes such as the 1990–91 Gulf War, when Jordan feared sudden Israeli decisions might force Palestinians eastward. He also discussed the present-day crisis, including heightened rhetoric from Israeli officials following the attacks of October 7th, and occasional American endorsements of a potential relocation scheme, which many Jordanians regard as a severe threat to national security. Professor Mufti stated that the Jordanian authorities remain resolutely opposed to any attempt at large-scale Palestinian resettlement.

Egypt’s Approach and Sisi’s Calculations

Professor Fahmy focused on President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi’s stance, highlighting the interplay of internal political constraints, Egypt’s relationship with Israel, and the inheritance of the 1979 peace treaty. Discussing security imperatives in Sinai, Professor Fahmy traced how Egyptian-Israeli security collaboration expanded over the past decade to address an insurgency in northern Sinai. Although the peace treaty once restricted the Egyptian military’s presence, Sisi has progressively increased troop numbers with Israel’s tacit agreement. Regarding th economic and political context: Professor Fahmy stressed the extent of Egypt’s reliance on foreign aid and regional investment, particularly from Gulf states. In his view, Sisi’s vocal rejection of a permanent transfer of Gazans into the Sinai reflects both genuine security concerns and recognition of the fragile economic situation. Professor Fahmy concluded with remarks on the balancing of internal power dynamics in Egypt, highlighting Sisi’s recent reliance on a Sinai-based tribal confederation, whose leadership has formed private militias and gained influence in both economic and political spheres. This development, he argued, signals an attempt by Sisi to offset potential friction within the Egyptian armed forces.

Resettlement Proposals and Regional Diplomacy

In addressing recent proposals to relocate Palestinians from Gaza, both presenters emphasised that neither Jordan nor Egypt appears prepared to accommodate such a plan: Professor Mufti indicated that Jordan’s royal establishment views a permanent demographic shift as a direct existential threat. Any forced arrival of large numbers of Palestinians, he suggested, would likely trigger a severe crisis. Professor Fahmy underscored the logistical and political impossibility of integrating two million Gazans into Sinai. The Egyptian military is already strained by counterinsurgency operations, and the broader public remains staunchly opposed to permanent resettlement.

The Role of the United States and Broader Implications

When discussing American policy, both professors addressed the potential impact of U.S. actions on Egyptian and Jordanian decision-making. Professor Mufti explained that Jordan has traditionally depended on the United States to dissuade Israel from drastic measures. Present U.S. signals, however, have unsettled Amman and Cairo, prompting concerns about whether American support can still be counted upon. Professor Fahmy noted that extensive defence and intelligence cooperation with Israel—backed by substantial American financial assistance—underpins the Egyptian government’s regional security posture. If U.S. aid were threatened to compel Egypt into resettlement schemes, Sisi would be left in an untenable predicament. Both presenters concluded that coercing Jordan or Egypt into absorbing large Palestinian populations could provoke regional instability, weaken existing pro-U.S. regimes, and inflame public opposition across the Middle East.

Audience Q&A Highlights

• Prospects of Military Resistance: Participants asked if Jordan or Egypt might forcibly block large-scale refugee movements. Professor Mufti noted that Jordanian officials have previously made such statements, though their practical feasibility remains unclear.
• Egyptian Domestic Sentiment: Some attendees raised questions about whether Sisi’s current popularity surge—fuelled by his adamant refusal of permanent Gazan resettlement—might endure in the face of severe economic difficulties. Professor Fahmy suggested that public support could be short-lived given persistent financial and social challenges.
• Alternative Political Solutions: Queries arose about pathways to a more comprehensive arrangement. Both professors pointed to the need for genuine international diplomacy, cautioning that failing to address root causes could leave Jordan and Egypt facing ever-pressing security dilemmas.

Conclusion

Professors Fahmy and Mufti each asserted the grave repercussions for Egypt and Jordan if any large-scale Palestinian relocation were compelled. Jordan, with its delicate demographic composition, perceives such an outcome as existentially threatening, while Egypt fears overwhelming political, economic, and security consequences. The two presenters concluded that attempts to offload responsibility for Gaza onto these neighbours would likely exacerbate regional volatility, underscoring the urgency of a broader settlement that takes into account both Palestinian rights and local state interests.