The Russian president’s recent visit to Egypt was greeted with much fanfare, writes Martin N. Katz, and it had a certain symbolic value. But the agreements signed by Putin and Egyptian president Abdel Fattah el-Sisi are unlikely to yield much in the way of practical results:

Given that so little of substance seems to have resulted from Putin’s visit to Cairo, and that both Putin and Sisi must have known that this would be the case beforehand, it seems the value of their meeting had more to do with how it would appear. Sisi may have hoped that meeting Putin in Cairo would show Western governments critical of his undemocratic rule that Sisi has other options. . . . Similarly, Putin may have hoped that, at a time when Russian relations with the West are deteriorating sharply over Ukraine, being received in such a friendly manner by the leader of the most populous nation in the Arab world will be viewed by non-Western governments (and even some Western ones) as a sign that Putin is a respected, legitimate leader whom they too can—and should—work with. . . .

[However,] improved ties to Egypt . . . will not help Putin reduce the rising costs of his Ukrainian venture or significantly mitigate the impact on Russia of sharply lower oil prices. Nor will improved ties to Russia result in Moscow expending significant resources on behalf of Sisi. And both Putin and Sisi are undoubtedly well aware of all this.

For some time, opponents of U.S support for Israel have been urging the White House to end the war in Gaza, or simply calling for a ceasefire. Douglas Feith and Lewis Libby consider what such a result would actually entail:

Ending the war immediately would allow Hamas to survive and retain military and governing power. Leaving it in the area containing the Sinai-Gaza smuggling routes would ensure that Hamas can rearm. This is why Hamas leaders now plead for a ceasefire. A ceasefire will provide some relief for Gazans today, but a prolonged ceasefire will preserve Hamas’s bloody oppression of Gaza and make future wars with Israel inevitable.

For most Gazans, even when there is no hot war, Hamas’s dictatorship is a nightmarish tyranny. Hamas rule features the torture and murder of regime opponents, official corruption, extremist indoctrination of children, and misery for the population in general. Hamas diverts foreign aid and other resources from proper uses; instead of improving life for the mass of the people, it uses the funds to fight against Palestinians and Israelis.

Moreover, a Hamas-affiliated website warned Gazans last month against cooperating with Israel in securing and delivering the truckloads of aid flowing into the Strip. It promised to deal with those who do with “an iron fist.” In other words, if Hamas remains in power, it will begin torturing, imprisoning, or murdering those it deems collaborators the moment the war ends. Thereafter, Hamas will begin planning its next attack on Israel:

Hamas’s goals are to overshadow the Palestinian Authority, win control of the West Bank, and establish Hamas leadership over the Palestinian revolution. Hamas’s ultimate aim is to spark a regional war to obliterate Israel and, as Hamas leaders steadfastly maintain, fulfill a Quranic vision of killing all Jews.

Hamas planned for corpses of Palestinian babies and mothers to serve as the mainspring of its October 7 war plan. Hamas calculated it could survive a war against a superior Israeli force and energize enemies of Israel around the world. The key to both aims was arranging for grievous Palestinian civilian losses. . . . That element of Hamas’s war plan is working impressively.