Follow us on social

google cta
Rafael Groosi , Abbas Araghchi , badr Abdelatty

Are Iran and Egypt relations on the cusp of a 'seismic shift'?

The two Middle East powers, in the throes of crises, are pulling together — which won't make certain governments too happy

Analysis | Middle East
google cta
google cta

In the heart of old Cairo last month, one of the Middle East’s longest-running rifts was being publicly laid to rest.

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi, flanked by Egyptian officials, walked through Cairo’s historic Khan el-Khalili bazaar, prayed at the Al-Hussein Mosque, and dined with former Egyptian foreign ministers at the storied Naguib Mahfouz restaurant. Araghchi was unequivocal when he posted during his trip that Egyptian-Iranian relations had “entered a new phase.”

This visit was more than routine diplomacy, but a signal of a potentially seismic shift between two Middle Eastern powers, drawn together by the pull of shared crises.

The rupture began in 1979, when Iran’s revolutionary leaders severed diplomatic relations after Egyptian President Anwar Sadat signed the Camp David Accords with Israel — a betrayal in Tehran’s eyes. The schism deepened when Cairo granted asylum to the deposed Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, who was just overthrown by a popular revolution which birthed a new Islamic Republic under the leadership of Ayatollah Khomeini. He died and was buried in Egypt in 1980.

During the Iran-Iraq War (1980–1988), Egypt’s material support for Saddam Hussein’s regime cemented Tehran’s view of Cairo as an antagonist. For decades thereafter, diplomatic relations remained frozen, with only intermittent and largely fruitless attempts at dialogue.

Against this backdrop of accumulated grievances, Tehran’s recent renaming of "Khalid al-Islambouli Street," is a particularly significant gesture. The street had honored the chief suspect in Sadat’s 1981 assassination, whom Iran hailed as a "martyr" after his court-mandated execution by firing squad. The new name, “Hassan Nasrallah Street” instead pays tribute to Hezbollah’s slain leader, killed by Israeli airstrikes in 2024, rectifying a decades-old insult to Egypt.

This renaming represents a strategic concession, resolving what Araghchi called the “final hurdle” to normalization weeks earlier. Cairo’s swift public embrace of the move, with Foreign Ministry spokesperson Ambassador Tamim Khallaf calling it a "positive step" that "helps put matters back on the right track," demonstrated Egypt’s willingness to turn the page.

During marathon meetings with President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi and Foreign Minister Badr Abdelatty in June, Araghchi asserted that "trust between Cairo and Tehran has never been this high." The tangible outcome of the meetings was an agreement to establish regular political consultations at the sub-ministerial level — a structured channel absent since 1979.

Crucially, Abdelatty carefully framed the visit as a pragmatic necessity, not as unconditional alignment. "There is a mutual desire to develop our relations, taking into account the concerns and perspectives of each side," Egypt’s chief diplomat said.

This nascent détente is less about newfound affection than cold-eyed calculation amid emerging and converging crises. First, Houthi attacks on Red Sea shipping, launched in solidarity with Palestinians in Gaza but enabled by Iranian arms and training, struck Egypt’s economic jugular. Billions of dollars in Suez Canal revenues evaporated as shipping rerouted around Africa.

While Araghchi publicly downplayed direct control over the Houthis, insisting that Yemen "makes its own decisions," Cairo desperately needs Tehran’s leverage to restore maritime security. Abdelatty’s blunt emphasis on "protecting freedom of navigation in the Red Sea" during a March phone call with Araghchi underscores this vital priority.

While Yemen’s Houthis maintain operational independence from Tehran, Iranian support for the group is well-documented, and statements from Egyptian leadership calculate that Iran could exert significant influence on the Houthis.

For Iran, reeling from last month’s Israeli and U.S. strikes on its nuclear and military infrastructure, normalization with Egypt — the Arab world’s cultural heart and an important U.S. ally — helps establish its regional legitimacy and expands its diplomatic options. This outreach is all the more urgent now that its traditional "Axis of Resistance" is faltering, with Hezbollah battered in Lebanon, Hamas under siege in Gaza, and Bashar Al-Assad ousted in Syria.

Larger regional dynamics are increasingly conducive to Iranian-Egyptian normalization. China’s 2023 brokering of Saudi-Iranian rapprochement removed a critical veto. With Riyadh restoring ties with Tehran, Cairo gained freedom to engage Iran without fear of alienating its vital Gulf financiers.

This new diplomatic freedom is being accelerated by the brutal reality of Sudan’s civil war. The conflict has pushed the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) to revive a dormant alliance with Iran in a desperate search for military support. Since Egypt is also a key backer of the SAF, Cairo and Tehran now share a mutual ally in a war raging on Egypt's southern doorstep, creating an unexpected arena of common interest.

These regional realignments, coupled with shared economic pain — Egypt’s debt crisis and Iran’s crippling sanctions — make tangible cooperation on trade, and religious tourism (primarily for Iranians to visit Shiite sites in Egypt) suddenly viable.

Additionally, Israel's 12-day assault on Iran further intensified cooperation between Cairo and Tehran.

The offensive created parallel crises for both: for Iran, Israeli strikes — conducted with U.S. assistance — against its defense and nuclear infrastructure deepened its isolation, violated its territory, and derailed nuclear diplomacy. Concurrently, Egypt suffered collateral damage to its energy security when Israeli-operated gas fields, supplying 15-20% of its needs, were shuttered. This forced emergency measures and sparked blackout fears, revealing a shared vulnerability exploited by the conflict.

The attacks also amplified Egypt’s mediating role while drawing Iran and Egypt closer. Sisi’s late-night call with Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian, just hours before U.S. strikes on Iranian nuclear sites — in which Sisi condemned Israeli "escalation" — highlighted Cairo’s unique positioning. Egypt’s foreign minister has since embarked on a diplomatic blitz, coordinating with Oman, which has mediated U.S.-Iran talks, U.S. Special Envoy for Middle East Affairs Steve Witkoff, and Rafael Grossi, Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), in hopes of reviving nuclear negotiations.

Despite the momentum, full diplomatic trust remains constrained by structural divides. Egypt's pro-Western orientation — anchored in U.S. military aid and its 46-year-old treaty with Israel — clashes with Tehran’s revolutionary ethos. Hostility toward the U.S. (“the Great Satan” as the Islamic’s Republic’s founders called it) has remained a core, albeit flexible pillar of Iranian foreign policy.

For Cairo, its relationship with Israel is non-negotiable, for reasons both strategic and existential. Israel is not only a critical energy supplier, but also an indispensable counterpart in Gaza ceasefire talks aimed at ending the brutal war raging on Egypt’s Sinai border. Iran's anti-Western posture, meanwhile, has been hardened by a series of Israeli escalations: direct strikes killing senior military and scientific figures, and explicit threats to assassinate Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

Significantly, Iran's support for Hamas — the militant group Israel has been fighting in Gaza for nearly two years — isn't merely a complication; it's a structural barrier.

Egypt, in addition to being a key mediator in the Gaza conflict, is also a significant stakeholder with sensitive national security interests on the line. Its primary objectives are to secure a ceasefire, establish a governing authority in a post-war Gaza, and, crucially, prevent a mass influx of Palestinian refugees into the Sinai Peninsula.

However, Cairo’s goals clash head-on with Iran's public declarations in support of the militant group.For Egypt, Hamas is not a partner but a dangerous security threat. Cairo views the group as a hostile offshoot of its primary domestic arch-nemesis, the Muslim Brotherhood, and has long accused it of fueling the brutal Islamist insurgency in the Sinai Peninsula. This deep-seated animosity is irreconcilable with Tehran's position.

After Hamas’s October 7 attacks on Israel, Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi hailed the attacks as a "victorious operation" that "made the Islamic Ummah happy." In a recent interview with Fox News, Iran’s Foreign Minister called Hamas “freedom fighters...fighting for a just cause.”

This praise is not just political, it was backed by operational links managed by figures like the recently assassinated Revolutionary Guard commander Saeed Izadi, who reportedly oversaw military coordination with Hamas. While reports indicate Iran did not participate in the October 7th attack, its praise for Hamas is backed by decades of material support that built the group's military strength.

Iran’s support for Hamas, and its fundamental hostility towards Israel, which itself is a necessary albeit frustrating partner for Egypt, will continue to complicate the burgeoning relationship.

The Cairo-Tehran rapprochement therefore is not a grand strategic embrace but rather a marriage of convenience. Its trajectory leans toward deeper engagement because mutual necessity — securing waterways, averting an all-out regional war, surviving economically — now outweighs the costs of avoidance.

It looks probable that the two nations will soon upgrade their current low-level missions to full embassies, that economic ties will continue to grow, and that diplomatic channels will remain active on flashpoints like the Red Sea crisis and U.S.-Iran nuclear talks. However this relationship will remain inherently transactional, constrained by their competing national interests.



Top photo credit: Egyptian Foreign Minister Badr Abdelatty meets with Iran's Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi and Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Rafael Grossi in Cairo, Egypt, June 2, 2025. REUTERS/Mohamed Abd El Ghany
google cta
Analysis | Middle East
South Africa: Between Iran and a hard place (Donald Trump)
Top photo credit: President Cyril Ramaphosa (Photo: GCIS/Flickr) and Donald Trump (Gage Skidmore/Flickr)

South Africa: Between Iran and a hard place (Donald Trump)

Africa

South Africa is struggling to unfurl its wings as a leading middle power and advance its relations with its fellow BRICS members while keeping out of the cross hairs of the U.S. president. This has been particularly hard considering that one member of the Global South grouping — Iran — is on Donald Trump’s current list of potential military targets.

South Africa joined BRICS in 2006. The organization is supposed to serve as an intergovernmental forum for member countries to connect on issues related to diplomacy, security, and economics. But the bloc has angered President Trump, who sees it as a threat to American leadership, particularly given China’s membership in the group.

keep readingShow less
Trump Khamanei
Top image credit: Bella1105/shutterstock.com

Could Trump bomb Iran before settling on a rationale?

Middle East

Shifting justifications for a war are never a good sign, and they strongly suggest that the war in question was not warranted.

In the Vietnam War, the principal public rationale of saving South Vietnam from communism got replaced in the minds of the warmakers — especially after losing hope of winning the contest in Vietnam — by the belief that the United States had to keep fighting to preserve its credibility. In the Iraq War, when President George W. Bush’s prewar argument about weapons of mass destruction fell apart, he shifted to a rationale centered on bringing freedom and democracy to Iraq.

keep readingShow less
James Holtsnider
Top image credit: James Holtsnider, U.S. President Donald Trump's nominee to be ambassador to Jordan, testifies before a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing on nominations on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C., U.S., September 11, 2025. REUTERS/Jonathan Ernst

New US ambassador's charm offensive is backfiring in Jordan

Middle East

Since arriving in Amman around three months ago to serve as the U.S. Ambassador to Jordan, James Holtsnider quickly became one of the highest-profile envoys in the Hashemite Kingdom. In addition to presenting his credentials to King Abdullah II, Holtsnider has met with Jordanian soccer players, attended weddings, and joined tribal gatherings.

However, a January 14 request by a U.S. Embassy delegation for the ambassador to offer condolences at the family home of former Karak mayor Abdullah Al-Dmour showed that many Jordanians have little interest in participating in Holtsnider’s public relations initiative. Dmour’s relatives rejected the U.S. ambassador’s wish to visit. Dmour’s tribe issued a statement noting Holtsnider’s request “violates Jordanian tribal customs, which separates the sanctity of mourning from any political presence with public implications.”

keep readingShow less
google cta
Want more of our stories on Google?
Click here to make us a Preferred Source.

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.