Yediot Aharonot asserts that, "Even if the worst-case scenario occurs in Egypt – the Muslim Brotherhood takes power – it is clear that this regime will want to avoid a military confrontation with Israel for four reasons: One, the political reality in Egypt will require any regime to concentrate – first of all – on the internal situation. It is reasonable to assume that such a regime will make many anti-Israeli statements but it is unreasonable to assume that it will try to translate these statements into action. Second, the main challenge for an Egyptian regime will be economic… Third, Egypt is dependent – both economically and militarily – on American aid. Conflict with Israel would end this vital assistance. And fourth, given that Israel has withdrawn ‘from the last grain of sand’ on Egyptian soil, it has no real reason for conflict. There is a limit to what any future Egyptian regime will be willing to sacrifice in order to help the Palestinians or Hizbullah."
Haaretz writes: "The first round of elections to Egypt’s parliament, which begins today, is the first democratic outcome of the revolution. As such, it presents a historic challenge to the Egyptian people. Egypt’s citizens deserve congratulations for this success and all assistance as they pave their way to a democratic state to be molded according to their will. This great transformation is also a source of legitimate concerns, but it’s too early and unnecessary to break out the horror scenarios. In Israel and elsewhere, anxiety has developed over the Muslim Brotherhood, but we must remember that Egyptian secular leftist movements also see Israel as a menace, an occupier and a representative of colonialism. Israel must recognize that the region’s political and social reality is changing. It would do well to consider how to adjust its policy to the change instead of lamenting the change itself."
Ma’ariv notes that Israelis’ "immediate instinct is to prepare for the worst," but claims that "Egypt, even under the control of the Muslim Brotherhood, cannot strategically threaten Israel. It has the power to influence the flow of war materiel to Gaza and indirectly control the level of terrorism but no more. Egypt has neither the interest in, nor the ability to, enter a war with Israel. Whoever takes power in the wake of today’s elections knows very well that their country has no chance of winning such a conflict." The author, who was born in Alexandria and is a former diplomat, says that a radical Islamic regime would only further damage Egypt’s already reeling economy and ventures that in practice, the influence of a Muslim Brotherhood-dominated regime on Israel "would be marginal." The paper doubts whether today’s elections will resolve the questions over Egypt’s future course.
__________
Yisrael Hayom suggests that the latest Arab League sanctions on Syria are "a harsh blow, given that Syria has always presented itself a bastion of Arabism in the struggle against Israel and the West," and adds that Syrian President Hafez Al-Assad is now lumped together with the former leaders of Egypt, Tunisia and Libya. The author suggests that while states like Lebanon, Jordan and Iraq may find it difficult – or may even refuse – to honor the sanctions, the Arab League decision may yet pave the way for some sort of Western or Turkish intervention against the Assad regime. However, the paper cautions that "the foundations of the regime are still far from collapse," and contends that Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states are leading the effort against the Al-Assad regime as part of their campaign to curtail Iranian influence in the Arab world.
The Jerusalem Post comments that "more resources need to be invested in increasing the number of hospital beds" – this despite the data released last week by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. "Israelis – particularly Jewish Israelis – have one of the highest life expectancy rates in the world, a relatively low infant mortality, a low rate of death and a high rate of recovery from heart attacks, strokes and cancer; and better treatment of diabetes are all part of the reason for our higher life expectancies. In the mid-1990s, when the Knesset passed the National Health Insurance Law guaranteeing universal medical coverage regardless of political affiliation, almost 70% of national healthcare expenditures were paid by the state. In 2009, just 58% were, compared to an OECD average of 72%. As a result, poor families are finding it increasingly harder to pay for basic medical care. If this trend does not stop, we might soon reach the point where poorer families will be forced to forgo basic health services. The state’s share in healthcare must return to its previous level of 70% of the national expenditure on healthcare."