As the war on Iran continues, amid escalating military confrontation and exchanges of strikes, Cairo—alongside other capitals—is pursuing a parallel track aimed at containing the fallout of the conflict and opening a window for a diplomatic solution.
A senior Egyptian government source told Alhurra that, from the very first day of the crisis, Cairo has sought to bridge the gap between Iran and the United States through intensive diplomatic efforts and high-level contacts, both at the presidential level and via the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The aim, the source said, is to reinforce a shared conviction among all parties that the military option will not deliver decisive results for any side but will instead lead to further escalation and instability.
The source, who requested anonymity because he is not authorized to speak publicly, added that these efforts come at a time of growing regional concern over the potential widening of the war—particularly with the United States and Israel directly engaged in military operations against Iran, alongside mounting threats to Gulf shipping lanes and global energy markets.
Two Tracks: Political Support and Mediation
The source explained that Egypt’s outreach to Gulf states is built around two main pillars. The first is political, and itself has two dimensions: reaffirming Egypt’s full support and solidarity with Gulf countries in the face of current threats, and—more importantly—exploring opportunities for Cairo to play an effective mediating role to halt the war.
He stressed that the proposed mediation has never been limited to easing tensions between Iran and Gulf states alone but has instead aimed at ending the war altogether and containing its regional repercussions.
Within this context, Egypt’s efforts also underscore Cairo’s regional role and political weight—particularly in a crisis that lies relatively outside its traditional sphere of influence compared to longstanding files such as the Palestinian issue. This reflects a broader ambition to expand Egypt’s diplomatic footprint in major regional crises.
Economic Pressures Drive Urgency
These diplomatic moves are also inseparable from pressing economic considerations. The source noted that the continuation of the war is placing significant strain on Egypt’s economy, which relies heavily on external sources of hard currency—including Suez Canal revenues, tourism, remittances from Egyptians abroad, natural gas exports, and short-term foreign investment inflows.
Despite these efforts, the Egyptian official acknowledged the difficulty of achieving a full ceasefire at this stage. He explained that the decision to end the conflict ultimately rests with three key non-Arab actors: the United States, Israel, and Iran.
Nevertheless, he emphasized that the mere continuation of contacts and the opening of channels for diplomacy and negotiation constitutes a positive development, while also signaling that a scenario of Iran’s total capitulation has been ruled out.
The source concluded by stressing the importance of restraint at this sensitive juncture, warning of the consequences of further escalation—particularly for maritime security. Any disruption, he cautioned, could have far-reaching regional and global economic repercussions, affecting international trade flows, supply chains, and triggering volatility in oil and food prices.
Gulf Retrenchment Opens Space for New Mediators
These efforts come at a particularly sensitive moment, following Iranian strikes targeting Gulf states and civilian and economic facilities—developments that have pushed Gulf countries to scale back their role in mediating an end to the war.
Qatar’s Foreign Ministry announced its withdrawal from indirect talks between the United States and Iran, citing a focus on safeguarding its internal security. The United Arab Emirates took escalatory steps by closing its embassy in Tehran, while Saudi Arabia declared the Iranian military attaché and his assistant, along with three others, persona non grata.
This shift in the Gulf position has opened the door for other regional powers to assume the mediation role. Egypt has emerged alongside Turkey and Pakistan—with participation from Oman—as key players attempting to reopen channels of communication between Tehran and Washington and to search for a diplomatic exit from the crisis.
Coordinated Mediation Efforts
In this context, Egyptian Foreign Minister Badr Abdelatty took part on Wednesday in a four-party meeting with his counterparts from Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Pakistan, on the sidelines of a consultative ministerial gathering in Riyadh. The meeting aimed to unify positions regarding the rapidly escalating military situation and to explore mechanisms for containing tensions—particularly in light of Iranian strikes on critical infrastructure in the Gulf.
According to Axios, citing a U.S. source, Egypt, Turkey, and Pakistan have recently played a role in conveying indirect messages between Iran and the United States. The source noted that the foreign ministers of these countries held separate contacts with U.S. envoy Steve Witkoff as well as with Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi.
The same source indicated that these mediation efforts are ongoing and have achieved relative progress, with discussions focused on ending the war and addressing outstanding issues, amid hopes of achieving a diplomatic breakthrough in the near future.
Signals of Diplomatic Momentum
These developments coincided with remarks by U.S. President Donald Trump, who said that “good and constructive talks” had taken place with Iran, announcing a five-day delay of any potential military strikes on Iran’s energy infrastructure.
Observers view Trump’s statements as an indication of the impact of diplomatic pressure exerted by mediating parties, aimed at creating a time window to give negotiations a chance.
Earlier, on March 13, Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi received a phone call from his Iranian counterpart, Masoud Pezeshkian, during which they discussed efforts to halt military operations and return to the negotiating table. Cairo reaffirmed its readiness to play a mediating role, while Egypt reinforced its diplomatic push through a presidential tour of several Gulf countries.
Egyptian Senator Effat El-Sadat, deputy head of the Senate’s Foreign Relations Committee, said these visits carried clear political messages and were aimed at building a unified Arab position, alongside diplomatic outreach to international powers.
Mediation Impact and Risks Ahead
Turkish political analyst Yusuf Katiboglu said that the joint efforts by Egypt, Turkey, and Pakistan have contributed significantly to reducing the level of regional escalation and played a role in encouraging President Trump to adopt a more conciliatory tone.
He added that mediation efforts remain ongoing, as these countries continue working to open dialogue channels among all relevant parties, despite the complexity of the situation and escalating tensions on the ground.
Katiboglu noted that the Riyadh meeting marked an important step in coordination efforts, but that developments on the ground—including Iranian strikes on Riyadh coinciding with these diplomatic moves—highlight the scale of the challenges facing any diplomatic track.
He warned that the continuation of the war could lead to a major global crisis, given its direct impact on energy markets, supply chains, and international trade. He also pointed to intensive diplomatic efforts aimed at preventing attacks on energy infrastructure, stressing that targeting such facilities could mark a dangerous turning point toward a broader regional conflict.
Egyptian and regional moves indicate a determined effort to keep diplomatic channels open alongside ongoing military escalation. However, their chances of success remain tied to the positions of the main parties involved in the conflict.
The article is a translation of the original Arabic.
