When the historic peace deals among Israel, Bahrain, and the United Arab Emirates were concluded in 2020, it was hoped that—unlike the earlier treaties between Jerusalem and both Jordan and Egypt—they would foster not only diplomatic relations and military cooperation, but “people-to-people” contacts as well. In this vein, the first-ever Abraham Accords Global Leadership Summit, intended to be an annual event, recently took place in Rome, bringing together diplomats, clergy, and others from 40 countries. Rabbi Elie Abadie of the UAE, Imam Mohammad Tawhidi, and Pastor Carlos Luna Lam of Guatemala—all of whom attended the summit—write:

Significantly, the central focus of the summit was not only to celebrate the successes the historic Accords have brought to the region in just two years but, most importantly, the promise to bring people together to explore innovative ways to promote the values of the Accords—tolerance, religion, traditional family, economic peace and prosperity—in as yet unfathomed ways. The goal was to find ways to widen this new regional paradigm and explore novel approaches to replicate the peace and coexistence attained in the Middle East in other parts of the world, including in Europe, the Americas, and beyond.

It was truly meaningful for us, as representatives of the Abrahamic religions, to unite on stage in a conversation about our future. All three of us recognize the shared past that unites us and acknowledge that we must strive to build a common vision for our future.

Critical to this collective future is our celebration of the traditional family unit and its core role in preserving the identity and culture of society. We all agreed during the conversation that our traditional family values are at the forefront of our Abrahamic heritage, and form the cornerstone of our societies, connecting us and preserving our identity and unique cultures. It is these traditional values that have sustained and allowed religions and cultures to impact the world constructively, resulting in society’s commitment to a strong sense of humanity.

Before exploding electronics in Lebanon seized the attention of the Israeli public, debate there had focused on the Philadelphi Corridor—the strip of land between Gaza and Egypt—and whether the IDF can afford to withdraw from it. Egypt has opposed Israeli control of the corridor, which is crucial to Hamas’s supply lines, and Egyptian objections likely prevented Israel from seizing it earlier in the war. Yet, argues Mariam Wahba, Egypt in the long run only stands to lose by letting Hamas use the corridor, and has proved incapable of effectively sealing it off:

Ultimately, this moment presents an opportunity for the United States to hold Egypt’s feet to the fire.

To press Cairo, the United States should consider conditioning future aid on Cairo’s willingness to cooperate. This should include a demand for greater transparency and independent oversight to verify Egyptian claims about the tunnels. Congress ought to hold hearings to understand better Egypt’s role and its compliance as a U.S. ally. Despite Secretary of State Antony Blinken’s nine trips to the Middle East since the start of the war, there has been little clarity on how Egypt intends to fulfill its role as a mediator.

By refusing to acknowledge Israel’s legitimate security concerns, Egypt is undermining its own interests, prolonging the war in Gaza, and further destabilizing its relationship with Jerusalem. It is time for Egyptian leaders either to admit their inability to secure the border and seek help from Israel and America, or to risk being perceived as enablers of Hamas and its terrorist campaign.