Amira Howeidy on Hosni Mubarak's Posturing

The Fourth Geneva Convention is constantly being waved before Egyptian officials. As a signatory, Egypt is obliged to protect civilians during times of war and foreign occupation. Since the convention considers "collective punishment" -- which clearly applies to Israel's brutal 18-month- old siege and the humanitarian crisis it has provoked -- a war crime, Egypt is doubly obliged, under the convention, to keep the border with Gaza open to provide protection for its civilians. By keeping the Rafah border crossing closed as the war ensues Egypt is "contributing to a war crime", says Ahmed Mekki, deputy chief of the Court of Cassation.

"By insisting to coordinate border movements and traffic with the occupier, which is Israel," argues Mekki, "[Egypt] is effectively recognising an occupation that is, by default, illegal and illegitimate." From a strictly legal viewpoint he says that "the Egyptian side of the Rafah border is under Egypt's full sovereignty" and "anyone who disputes that is undermining Egypt's sovereignty over its borders".

Israel's onslaught against Gaza has placed the Rafah border, and by default Egypt, at the centre of the conflict. For one thing, if Egypt opens the crossing while Hamas controls Gaza, it automatically translates into a new political reality, a de facto recognition of Hamas's legitimacy. If Egypt opens the crossing while Israel continues its siege of Gaza Cairo will be practically rendering the siege futile. In other words, the political decision to open or close the Rafah border crossing will to some extent determine the balance between Israel's project of occupation and Hamas's resistance to that occupation.