American views on Egypt; promising or problematic?
By Cyril Widdershoven 

    In the wake of president Mubarak’s visit to the US, and his meetings with the political and business elite of the United States, international relations and economic factors will be on the top of the agenda. The role of Egypt in the Middle East, its growing role in the African constellation and economic/financial considerations for the growing interest of Western companies, investors and international lenders to be involved in its economic growth will be discussed in-depth between leading Egyptian businessmen, politicians and government officials and their American counterparts. Egypt’s growing international stance will have positive effects on the already steadfast and deep friendship between Cairo and Washington, as has been shown the last decades in the development of bilateral consultation-bodies, investment and business associations and the well known  Egyptian-American Presidency Council under the auspices of president Mubarak and the American Vice-President Al Gore. 

    However, international politics, media and international research do not always have the necessary impact on the views that are generated in the minds of the common people. The views of the people on the streets of Washington, New York, Houston or rural towns like Holland can be extremely different from the views of the American leadership. The impact of personal views or hidden factors in the perception of the local people will and can have negative repercussions for the development of new chances, foreign direct investment opportunities or bilateral export-import development, especially for Egypt. Research has proven in several Western countries that there is a huge discrepancy between official bilateral relations between states and governments and the views under the public, focusing on different aspects of certain countries, regions, religions or cultures. The position of Egypt in international politics is well known and most of the time regarded as very influential and pro-western. Its role in Arab politics, the mediator role in the Arab/Palestinian –Israeli conflict and the anti-terrorism stance of its government have brought Cairo to the forefront of international politics, with a pro-Egyptian view in most of the Western countries. Under the general public, Egypt is viewed in sometimes totally different ways. The European public, most of them interested in Egypt as a tourism target, is sometimes totally focused on the emergence of terrorism, fundamentalism, riots or a lack of organized and structured statism. All these factors have a very negative impact, under the general public in Europe of the Egyptian society, its attractiveness for SME investment or possible cooperation between small enterprises from Europe and their Egyptian counterparts. The lack of organized structures dealing with export/import issues, financial transactions or simply the overall perception that there is the threat of fundamentalism and terrorism, in reality of course not at all of relevance, has resulted in an increased weariness under the public to deal with Egypt.

    The overall question now is “Is this the same for the Americans? Do they have the same perceptions, and if so, how does Egypt, or the Middle East, need to deal with this problem? The reason for this is that otherwise potential investment flows or financial-economic cooperation will be subdued by factors that are not based on factual propositions. The visit of president Mubarak is one of the possibilities to deal with this underlying problem ,that until now not at all has been addressed by the Arab states, this in stark contrast to their Israeli partners who are well aware of these problems. Every high-ranking Israeli politician or government official who visits the US officially, will arrange a very intensive and extensive tour through various regions of the US to address ongoing issues with the public. The Israeli government and the so-called Jewish lobby in the US are major factors in the pro-Israeli mentality under the American public, largely due to the personal contacts with their Israeli counterparts.

    John Zogby, leading pollster in the USA, has done a very interesting poll-research, focusing on the American views, of the general public, on Egypt. Its results are amazing, sometimes shocking but of the utmost relevance to be considered by Egyptian planners to target the American public, business elite and politicians more effectively.  In a poll, by Zogby International  in October 1999 all-over the US, under 1003 US voters, very interesting and important results were found. US attitudes toward Egypt have almost a four to one favorable to unfavorable ratio 44.2% to 14.1 %. This places Egypt highest in the ranking among the Arab nations polled. Significantly, Israel’s 63% favorable rating far surpasses that of Egypt, but its 17.4 % unfavorable is slightly higher than Egypt’s 14.1%. A majority of voters (58.5 %) rate Egypt’s government as ‘very stable’ or ‘somewhat stable’, while only 11.6% sees it as unstable. Government stability provides a solid foundation for expanding trade and investment, prevention of terrorism, and promulgation of a general image-building campaign. Striking issues however came out of the question what is again at the top of your mind as the best thing about Egypt. The top responses were “ancient history, peace, stability, tourism/beauty, doing a good job, allies, friendly people and the weather”. The response to the ‘worst thing’ is however of more significance. Terms like “political unrest, ancient history/religion, treatment of women/foreigners, Muslim/Islam and oil” show that issues related to investment criteria or market research will have to cope with preconceptions that are in the Western mindset about the region.  John Zogby in his summary also addresses this issue. He states that “the bad news is that ancient history is still the predominant factor in defining Egypt’s positives. 

    To some extent, the press’ fixation on isolated terrorist events has caught hold – defining the first negative impression of the respondents.” He also stated “ the top facts that increase positive attitudes all relate to Egypt’s posture as “peace maker” and “strategic partner’. Egypt must emphasize its modern role and it will benefit most by doing so. At the same time, the political violence story line should be addressed by drowning it out with human-interest stories and by pressing reporters to keep the violence issue in perspective. However, this will be the hardest thing to achieve. The West, mostly liberal and social orientated forces in the domestic arena, will always be focused on human issues, including terrorism, fundamentalism and human rights. The latter factors are most of the times interconnected, without a change in attitude in human rights, position of women and children and religious strife the Western perception will stay focused on the negative aspects. Striking is the response that foreigners feel mistreated in Egypt. This perception, based on tourism and businessmen is of the utmost importance for the Egyptian economic development. As the big hard currency revenues of the state a new policy should be developed to make it more attractive for foreigners (business and tourism) to get the right treatment, to feel welcome without the hassle and obstructions of Egyptian life. Negative perceptions under tourists have negative repercussions for attracting FDI via leading business-elite in Europe and the US. Business men from the US and Europe are not having different views or first impressions than the tourists. First impressions or initial market research will always have more impact on investment and business decisions than long-term approaches. Egypt’s media, politicians and its liberal business-elite should re-evaluate parts of their marketing approach, with a full onslaught on Egypt’s perception in the western mind. Business decisions are made by large by people not knowledgeable of the region. Perceptions in the media, friends or social references will decide in earlier stages where new business opportunities are sought before a full constructive marketing research is initiated. There is where Egypt still lacks to gain the rewards of its potential. Israel, Turkey or Tunisia are playing this game better. Favorable feelings and good marketing campaigns are very effective in attracting investment and tourism. Israel’s sometimes-shaky government, the ongoing threat of extremism and regional conflicts have not resulted in the same disastrous effects on tourism than the one-off disaster of Luxor had for Egypt. Egypt, it is now time to act, being proactive and using new marketing tools will be more fruitful than only going down the line of business-delegations and international forums.

Reprinted with permission of the author. mideastinfo.com makes no claim to copyrights, reprinted as submitted.