Between shifting security realities in Egypt and Washington’s expectations

Egypt is navigating a moment of simultaneous regional security realignment and shifting influence in Washington, as long-standing assumptions about US assurances are tested and regional actors reassess their positions. This was one of the main takeaways from our conversations with think tanks in Washington, DC, during the AmCham Doorknock Mission last week.

Why this matters: These are two parallel conversations in the wake of the US-Iran war — one focused on regional security dynamics, the other on influence in Washington — but they intersect at a critical point: Egypt’s ability to navigate both will shape its role in a changing regional order.

A security architecture under pressure

From a regional perspective, the core question is whether the US-led security umbrella is still fit for purpose, according to Mirette Mabrouk, senior fellow at the Middle East Institute. “Recent escalations involving Iran did not create new dynamics so much as expose existing ones,” she says, noting that Gulf states have been forced to confront the limits of a model built on external protection. Gulf exposure to attacks has challenged its long-standing positioning as a stable hub, reinforcing a growing perception that Washington — and, in some cases, Israel — may tolerate a degree of regional instability if it aligns with broader strategic objectives.

Realignments are emerging but not yet settled: Within this assessment, Mabrouk points to early signs of shifts in alignment patterns that could see the formation of multiple alliances, each including some Gulf states. That said, “no actor can replace the United States as the primary security guarantor in the region,” she stresses, while noting that the current regional security architecture is increasingly seen as insufficient on its own.

A different challenge for Egypt in Washington — relevance and visibility

Separately, discussions at the Atlantic Council point to a decline in Egypt’s visibility within US policymaking circles, despite its size and long-standing partnership with Washington. The issue, according to the discussion, is not a complete absence of engagement but the lack of a sustained, integrated strategy to influence decision-making. Egypt’s efforts are seen as fragmented compared with those of other countries that have built comprehensive lobbying ecosystems spanning think tanks, media, and diaspora networks.

Another point frequently raised in Washington is the Trump administration’s scaling back of the role of many institutions, which makes it more difficult for Egypt — or any country — to engage in constructive and impactful strategic dialogue with the administration. It should also be taken into account that the US administration currently has a long list of priorities and crises it is managing.

“Engagement with the United States needs to change because the way the US operates has changed,” researchers at the Atlantic Council say, noting that the role of traditional institutions has declined, creating more space for direct engagement. One example is that Maisoon Kafafy, senior advisor for Middle East programs at the Atlantic Council, recently published an open conversation with Foreign Minister Badr Abdelatty on the security of maritime corridors in the Red Sea. “This is the first time we’ve seen an Egyptian foreign minister engage in a somewhat sharp, open dialogue with a think tank focused on the country,” one expert at the council comments. This development reflects a positive shift, but it needs continuity and expansion.

The limits of a security-first relationship: “The Egypt-US relations remain heavily focused on defense and security, with relatively limited engagement in other sectors,” the Atlantic Council researchers highlighted, pointing to missed windows in areas such as energy, education, scientific research, and technology that could broaden the partnership and strengthen Egypt’s position in Washington. Experts also note a messaging gap, in which Egypt is often framed primarily as an aid recipient rather than a strategic economic partner.

Domestic pressures are shaping Egypt’s external role: Egypt’s external positioning is closely tied to domestic economic realities, with pressures on key revenue streams — including losses at the Suez Canal due to regional disruptions — alongside broader fiscal constraints limiting policy flexibility, the Atlantic Council researchers argue. Policymakers are balancing the need for economic reform with maintaining social stability, which in turn affects Egypt’s ability to expand its regional role.

“The key to building an enhanced US-Egyptian strategic relationship lies in defining a common project,” Robert Satloff, executive director of The Washington Institute for Near East Policy, notes. “At one point, that common project was peace, but Egypt does not appear interested in developing this further,” says the institute’s director, who is close to pro-Israel policy circles in the United States. “Egypt seems satisfied with the absence of war, which is no small thing, but Egypt seems satisfied with that,” he argues. It is not easy to identify a major unifying project that could form the foundation of the kind of enhanced strategic partnership, as “we don’t always see eye to eye on everything in the region — whether on Libya, Sudan, or elsewhere — and we have our disagreements, which need to be respected,” he adds.

Where the two conversations meet

Taken together, Mabrouk’s analysis and the Atlantic Council discussion point to a convergence of pressures, with Mabrouk describing a region where security assumptions are being reassessed and new alignments are beginning to form, while the Atlantic Council underscores expectations in Washington for Egypt to play a more visible and proactive role. Egypt’s relative stability — in contrast to ongoing conflicts in Sudan, Syria, and Lebanon — is widely recognized, but translating that into influence requires a clearer strategy and more effective engagement.