The Treaty with Egypt is indeed a very fragile one.
Reader comment on item: Assessing the Egypt-Israel Peace Treaty, Thirty Years Later

Submitted by Isaac Haskiya (Denmark), Mar 27, 2009 at 08:18

Singing hallelujah and all you need is love is not a way of putting a final full-stop to a series of armed conflicts. Either one side has accepted the bitter fact of not being able to win by the sword or both sides have seen the hopelesness of winning or losing, for the time-being. Peace would have better chances of being permanent in the first case.

In the second case a re-match might occur in the future. It is still a fact that the massive Arab majority has not been able to swallow the existence of a Jewish State. It is still a fact that Palestinian Arabs will continue calling for their brethren to get political and, eventually, military help. Egypt remaining loyal to the treaty would be considered as treason in case of the worst scenario. In principle all peace treaties Israel can sign with any Arab state are the sum of political variables and thus a variable in itself.

Israel must always be ready to react with its military possibilities and even, and unfortunately, show it from time to time in order to deter the enemy.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened for relevance, substance, and tone, and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome, but comments are rejected if scurrilous, off-topic, vulgar, ad hominem, or otherwise viewed as inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the Guidelines for Comments. For informational purposes, we identify countries from which comments are sent.