Egypt's Sisi Promises Investment to Avoid Another Suez Closure

Ships have been stuck in a maritime traffic jam either side of the Ever Given. (AFP)
Ships have been stuck in a maritime traffic jam either side of the Ever Given. (AFP)
TT

Egypt's Sisi Promises Investment to Avoid Another Suez Closure

Ships have been stuck in a maritime traffic jam either side of the Ever Given. (AFP)
Ships have been stuck in a maritime traffic jam either side of the Ever Given. (AFP)

Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi pledged Tuesday investment to avoid any repetition of the past week's closure of the Suez Canal as he paid a celebratory visit to the reopened trade artery.

The promise came a day after the refloating of the giant container vessel MV Ever Given, which hit the eastern bank of the narrow shipping lane last Tuesday and became wedged diagonally across its span for nearly a week.

"We will acquire all the necessary equipment for the canal" to avoid similar incidents, Sisi said during a visit to Ismailia, home to the Suez Canal Authority.

He did not specify what hardware would be bought, but SCA chief Osama Rabie has cited the need for both dredgers and new tugboats in comments to media.

Egyptian authorities have presented the freeing of the megaship as a vindication of the country's engineering and salvage capabilities.

Traffic on the canal, a conduit for over 10 percent of world trade, began moving again on Monday evening, after tailbacks totaling 425 ships built up to the north and south.

On Tuesday morning, maritime tracking sites showed ships with capacity of up to 200,000 tons -- a similar size to the Ever Given -- navigating the narrow waterway.

Widening ruled out
But many more cargo ships were seen waiting at its two entrances, in the Mediterranean and the Red Sea. The SCA says it will take over three days for the tailbacks to clear.

Maritime data company Lloyd's List said the blockage had held up an estimated $9.6 billion worth of cargo each day between Asia and Europe.

The near week-long blockage has left Egypt facing scrutiny over how to avoid another similar crisis.

But both Sisi and the SCA have been quick to rule out a widening of the southern section of the canal, where the blockage occurred.

"Economically, it would not be useful," he said.

Egypt spent more than $8 billion on widening a segment and creating a second lane on a northerly stretch in 2014-15.

Professor Jean-Marie Miossec, a maritime transport expert at France's Paul-Valery University in Montpellier, said it would "be prudent... to only authorize (passage) by small and medium sized ships at nightime," restricting oil tankers and other very large ships to daylight hours.

The giant Panamanian-flagged vessel operated by Taiwanese Evergreen Marine Corporation was stranded after running aground on the east bank of the waterway in a sandstorm.

Helped by tugboats, it has been shifted out of the path of other ships, and was anchored late Monday ahead of an investigation.

"The owners and operators of the... ship and other interlocutors will be involved" in the probe, Angus Blair of the American University in Cairo, told AFP.

The clearance operation required over 10 tugs, as well as dredgers.

"Between 180 and 200 people worked tirelessly 24 hours a day" on site, a canal official told AFP on condition of anonymity.

Picking up the tab
Ahmed Abbas, a Suez Canal employee, shared live footage from the scene on his Facebook account as the ship was refloated, exclaiming: "Praise be to God, the vessel is finally out! Well done to the SCA boys!"

Up to "2,000 workers" provided "outside services", the employee added.

"The determining factor is that we dug deeper under the bow of the ship and widened to form a pool of water below" at a depth of about 12 meters (yards), he revealed.

Elsewhere, salvage teams dug up to 18 meters.

Egypt lost between $12 and $15 million in revenues for each day the waterway was closed, according to slightly revised SCA figures.

It is seeking to recover some of its losses, stretching also to damage to the canal generated by the intensive rescue efforts.

"Litigation is likely to ensue to determine legal responsibility for the Ever Given blocking the canal," said Marcos Alvarez of credit ratings agency DBS Morning Star.

"Indications are that the responsible partners would include the owner of the ship, its operator, and the Suez Canal Authority, which requires local pilots to guide ships through the canal."

The crisis forced shipping firms to choose between waiting or rerouting vessels around the southern tip of Africa, which adds 9,000 kilometers (5,500 miles) and more than a week of travel to the trip between Asia and Europe.



Lebanese Ex-FM Mitri to Asharq Al-Awsat: No Alternative to Resolution 1701, Even if It Needs Rewording

Lebanese Former Foreign Minister Tarek Mitri.
Lebanese Former Foreign Minister Tarek Mitri.
TT

Lebanese Ex-FM Mitri to Asharq Al-Awsat: No Alternative to Resolution 1701, Even if It Needs Rewording

Lebanese Former Foreign Minister Tarek Mitri.
Lebanese Former Foreign Minister Tarek Mitri.

United Nations Security Council Resolution 1701 forms the cornerstone for any diplomatic solution to the Israeli war on Lebanon, despite the loopholes caused by repeated violations since its adoption in August 2006.

Although rapid developments and Israel’s policy of destruction across Lebanese territories have made it difficult to be “built upon”, Lebanese former Foreign Minister Tarek Mitri stated that it is impossible to agree on an alternative resolution due to the sharp divisions within the Security Council and the veto power wielded by the United States and Russia.

In an interview with Asharq Al-Awsat, Mitri emphasized that there is “no alternative to this resolution, although it requires a new preamble and rewording.”

Ambiguous clauses in the resolution have led to its repeated violations by both Israel and Hezbollah, as each interprets the provisions according to its own interests.

Mitri, who was one of the architects of the resolution when he served as acting foreign minister in former Prime Minister Fuad Siniora’s government, pointed out that all Security Council resolutions contain some ambiguities, and a careful reading of 1701 shows that while its tone is strong, its wording leaves room for interpretation.

“The main problem with resolution 1701, which led to its varied interpretations, is that it calls for a cessation of hostilities rather than a ceasefire. There was also ambiguity, especially in paragraph (8), which discusses security arrangements in the area between the Litani River and the Blue Line, making it free of armed personnel,” he said.

He also noted that the resolution was issued under Chapter VI, but the greatest confusion arose when it came to the role of the UN Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) peacekeepers, as they were given the authority to take all necessary measures to prevent any military presence or unauthorized armed activities, as if it were issued under the UN’s Chapter VII article.

“Unfortunately, these forces did not fulfill their role, and instead of being a monitoring and intervention force, they themselves have become monitored,” he continued referring to their being tracked and confronted by Hezbollah supporters.

The developments of the July 2006 war led to the adoption of this resolution under fire and the massacres committed by Israel. Mitri did not hide the fact that resolution 1701 was not thoroughly studied, and all parties were primarily focused on agreeing to halt hostilities.

He noted that the resolution “would not have been issued if the Lebanese government, under the leadership of Fuad Siniora, had not decided to send 15,000 soldiers to the South. However, for various reasons, Lebanon was unable to fulfill this promise, first due to a lack of resources and the army being preoccupied with numerous tasks, including maintaining internal security.”

Although the resolution has been subject to continuous violations, which the Security Council has frequently evaluated and warned against, it has remained a framework that regulates the security situation along the Blue Line, which separates Lebanon and the occupied Palestinian territories.

The former minister pointed out that between the adoption of the resolution and the cessation of hostilities in 2006, and Oct. 7, 2023, “Hezbollah did not initiate any conflicts, its weapons were not visible, and its military activities were absent. Hezbollah considered itself compliant with resolution 1701 as required, while Israel violated Lebanese airspace thousands of times, even refusing to provide Lebanon with landmine maps, which led to the deaths of dozens of Lebanese civilians.”

On whether this resolution is still viable, Mitri noted that the true intentions of Benjamin Netanyahu’s government are unclear.

“The Americans are warning Netanyahu against a ground invasion, but he claims he only wants limited operations to target Hezbollah, which is uncertain,” he remarked.

He also highlighted contradictory signals, such as when the Americans and French presented their proposal for a ceasefire, Israel resorted to a rapid escalation in Lebanon.

Mitri expressed concerns based on previous Israeli experiences, saying: “In 2006, Israel claimed its operations in Lebanon aimed to strike Hezbollah, but they destroyed Lebanon, and today they are applying the same scenario, even though they have avoided targeting Beirut’s international airport and refrained from destroying bridges.”

He emphasized Lebanon’s role in opening a diplomatic window, stating that the country has no choice but to implement resolution 1701 and be prepared to send the army to the South.

“Israel knows the Lebanese government is weak, and if it obtains a commitment from Lebanon to implement the resolution, it will demand even more,” he stated.

Although many believe that resolution 1701 is no longer the valid international course to end the current war in Lebanon, Mitri ruled out the possibility of the Security Council issuing an alternative resolution.

He argued that the Security Council may renew the call for its implementation with some rewording and a new preamble.

He also explained that the international institution is paralyzed, with the US and Russian vetoes preventing any alternative decision.

“If Israel makes military advances, it will close the door to a diplomatic solution. However, if Hezbollah manages to withstand Israeli intervention, it could open the door for political solutions,” the former minister concluded.