°®Âþµº

The UK has always had a peculiar relationship with domestic Egyptian politics.

Since the two countries never signed an extradition treaty, the British government has ended up housing dozens of people wanted by Egyptian authorities. Many are from the now-outlawed Muslim Brotherhood.

Similarly, since the 25 January Revolution, many individuals tied to the Mubarak regime have sought refuge in the UK while they were on trial in Egypt for charges mostly relating to corruption.

While activists have called on David Cameron to take Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi to task on human rights abuses, it did not seem that this was an agenda priority for this week's London visit.

On the contrary, the British government may have reason to appear more sympathetic to some apparent transgressions, or at least, not treat them as important. After lavishing support on the Muslim Brotherhood and President Mohamed Morsi before he was ousted, the UK may now have found its winning horse in Egypt - and seems keen to solidify a relationship.

The British government has decided to wholeheartedly embrace the Sisi regime, and sees strategic and economic reasons to do so.

To be sure, expecting David Cameron to hold the Egyptian president accountable is in itself dubious, because it places him in a questionable position of moral authority with regards to human rights.

He has been at the forefront of the Conservative Party's plan to scrap the , which (along with many other rights) saves many from being deported from the UK to perilous fates elsewhere.

More recently, the British prime minister had been criticised for his treatment of refugees and his refusal to make broader commitments to alleviate the ongoing tragic situation of refugees escaping massacres in Syria and elsewhere.

There are other, more compelling reasons, why this visit and the current relationship between the regimes did not yield much acrimony or reprehension.

Evidence strongly suggests that the definition of 'terrorist' is beginning to be confined to 'fundamentalist Islamic terrorists'

British domestic politics has of late been pre-occupied with terrorism. Evidence strongly suggests that the definition of "terrorist" is beginning to be confined to "fundamentalist Islamic terrorists".

Individuals of different backgrounds who plan equally heinous acts are deemed . It just so happens that a cornerstone of Sisi's international diplomacy charm offensive is to play up his role in the vanguard of fighting Islamist terror groups.

Like Cameron, Sisi believes that the root cause of all terrorism is purely the . They both arguably believe that the socio-political status quo do not play any role in allowing the proliferation of extremist ideology.

It is no wonder that, despite having operated in the UK for decades, Britain is again set to investigate claims that the Muslim Brotherhood is engaged in "terrorist activities", and so would be apprehended or deported.

In the north London suburbs of Cricklewood, Muslim Brotherhood organisers produce literature and arrange meetings - both of which are considered "terrorist activities" in Egypt.

The group is considered by the Egyptian government to be the fountainhead of terrorist ideology in the region.

The suggestion that the UK would soon ban Muslim Brotherhood operations seems far-fetched, as it would simply be too politically and logistically complicated.

Furthermore, the group's activities have surely already been monitored by MI5 - and if they were to suddenly discover that the exiles had been engaged in extremist activities right under their noses, the British intelligence services would not come off well.

But as a show of good faith between the two power centres, the British government, for the second time, has decided to address the Egyptian government's concerns - and has promised to produce a report based on its findings.

Aside from "anti-terrorist" solidarity, the UK seems to be keen on getting a foothold in Egypt both economically and politically. This is not a new tactic by Whitehall, as it also attempted to court the Muslim Brotherhood immediately after Mohamed Morsi was elected as president.

Sisi made it clear that Cairo's previously subservience to US and Saudi Arabian foreign policy directives may have loosened. As he made overtures to Putin and decided to tacitly back Bashar al-Assad in Syria, evidence abounds that world powers should now make their move if they'd like to increase their influence in Egypt.

Jan Casson, Britain's ambassador to Cairo, said that his government aimed to be Egypt's top trading partner

Besides inviting Sisi to London, the UK has played a part in the pageants of political and economic power plays by the Egyptian government. Foreign Secretary Phillip Hammond attending the March Economic Conference, while Defence Secretary Michael Fallon attended the Suez Canal opening.

Jan Casson, Britain's ambassador to Cairo, said that his government aimed to be Egypt's top trading partner. BP's already massive investments in Egypt were topped off by a massive $12 billion investment in the West Nile Delta Project, a massive offshore gas exploration project.

BP already produces 15 percent of Egypt's oil, and is set to produce, along with its partners, as much as 30 percent of its gas. Trade agreements between the UK and Egypt are thought to have reached $30 billion this year.

While foreign investments could be procured and relations restored without rolling out the red carpet for Sisi, it is clear that the British government is interested in more than merely scavenging for opportunities and allies.

It is looking to move to the next level of commitment, one that transcends human rights.

Muslim Brotherhood members will likely stay, but perhaps feel less welcome. The British government may tacitly decry or express concern for egregious human rights abuses, but will probably in the future express more of an understanding as to why they may occur.

In other words, at least under Cameron, the British relationship with Egypt may be described as more of the same, but different.


Mohamed ElMeshad is a journalist and a PhD candidate at SOAS, focusing on the political economy of the media. He extensively worked in Egypt, Bahrain, West Africa, the UK and US. Recently, he contributed to the Committee to Protect Journalists’ book, Attacks on the Press (2015).

Opinions expressed in this article remain those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of al-Araby al-Jadeed, its editorial board or staff.