Interview: U.S. policies exacerbate unrest in Mideast, says Egyptian expert

The current U.S. administration's policies have exacerbated unrest in the Middle East, an Egyptian expert has said.

CAIRO, May 5 (Xinhua) -- The current U.S. administration's policies have exacerbated unrest in the Middle East, an Egyptian expert has said.

"As an observer of U.S. policy in the region, I have two observations," Ezzat Saad, director of the Egyptian Council for Foreign Affairs, told Xinhua in a recent interview.

First, he noted, the political rhetoric of the U.S. administration is characterized by a great deal of arrogance, conceit and haughtiness, and it constantly threatens to use force.

Second, the U.S. administration in general does not have a clear strategy regarding the Middle East or other issues, he affirmed.

Saad pointed out that the Palestinian issue -- a long-standing source of regional tension -- has been particularly mishandled.

He noted that U.S. President Donald Trump had said that Gaza could be turned into the Riviera of the Middle East and explicitly declared that the United States intends to seize Gaza. "Naturally, the Arab world and the international community reacted strongly and rejected this approach," Saad said.

Saad added that the reality on the ground contradicts such pronouncements, adding that "no neutral observer can claim there has been any progress on any front" during the first 100 days of the current U.S. administration.

On the Palestinian issue, Saad said that Israel continues its daily military aggression, while the United States remains determined to sideline multilateral frameworks and strip key United Nations bodies -- such as the UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East, the UN Human Rights Council and the International Court of Justice -- of their roles.

"Trump's irresponsible statements regarding the Gaza file have led to a significant deterioration in this regard and a clear state of instability at the regional level. The United States has become part of the problem, not part of the solution," Saad said.

"When examining Israel's position on the ceasefire issue, we find Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu saying that he wants to implement Trump's plan, which proposed displacing the population of Gaza," he stated.

He added that the perception of U.S. neutrality, vital for any effective mediation, has been irrevocably undermined. Netanyahu, he noted, declared that the establishment of a Palestinian state is entirely off the table, and, unfortunately, Trump handed him a lifeline by introducing the idea of displacing Palestinians.

"The United States has lost all credibility as a party historically viewed as neutral and capable of acting as an honest peace broker," he said.

Beyond the Palestinian conflict, Saad also criticized the U.S. administration's handling of the Iranian nuclear issue.

He noted that during Trump's first term, the United States withdrew from the 2015 Iran nuclear agreement and adopted a policy of maximum pressure, which "ultimately led to further sanctions on Iran without any justification whatsoever."

Saad emphasized a recurring lack of strategic coherence within the U.S. administration, citing internal divisions and an absence of a clear approach to dealing with Iran.

He also voiced concern over Washington's reliance on sanctions and threats, asserting that the repeated imposition of sanctions has become a ridiculous policy that has failed to compel Iran to act by U.S. expectations.

The consequences of this approach are evident in the region's escalating tensions, Saad said, adding that U.S. policy has worsened the situation in the Middle East due to the administration's failure to pursue de-escalation efforts.

Saad also criticized Washington's broader foreign policy stance, noting that the current administration has avoided diplomatic solutions, targeting not only adversaries but also allies with unorthodox positions.

He cited Trump's claims about seizing Greenland, the Panama Canal and Canada, emphasizing that such rhetoric reflects a troubling return to colonial-era thinking.  ■