Historical, symbolic, and poetic: The King's visit to Cairo

While "losing" Tiran and Sanafir islands to Saudi Arabia in no way compares to 1967, for the public it does similarly evoke a humiliating sense of deception by their leadership.

Even after the deal with Saudi was signed, Egyptians weren’t afforded an explanation or confirmation until two days after-the-fact, even though constitution prohibits any transfer of sovereign land without a clear mandate by the general public.

Instead, President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi outrageously claimed that the islands have been Saudis all along, and that Egyptians weren’t told the truth about the allegedly eight-month long negotiations because of what he described as the "harm" government transparency inflicts.

Like the guilty general in the movie, A Few Good Men, Sisi made it clear that Egyptians (especially the media) can’t handle the truth.

President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi outrageously claimed that the islands have been Saudis all along, and that Egyptians weren’t told the truth

Regardless of the legality of the island transfer, the manner in which it happened left a very bitter taste for many, even among some of his staunch supporters.

In an "historic" week when the nature of Egyptian-Saudi relations was to be decided, this island exchange provided a clear metaphor of what may be: the Egyptian government would offer Saudi Arabia utmost deference and preferential treatment, in exchange for Saudi gifts and presents.

The "people" in the eyes of the regime, signed off all of their affairs to Sisi in the elections, and he is free to do as he sees fit without their meddling.

This sense of deference to Saudi, if not reverence, is nothing new for this regime, and it began with Sisi’s initial ascension into politics. It figured heavily in his plans, before becoming President, as he described the late Saudi Monarch Abdullah as the "King of Arab Kings" during a pre-election campaign interview.

In their first meeting as heads of state in June 2014, Sisi boarded Abdullah’s plane in Cairo, kissed his head, and sat on a clearly lowered chair.

This was on Egyptian soil. The entire encounter was awash with symbolism and political posturing, and was all predicated on the notion that Egypt is waiting for a few large checks to come in from the Kingdom.

When Abdullah died and Salman became king, the Saudi position vis-à-vis Egypt was not as clear-cut due to reports of differing opinions on the matter among the ruling members of the monarchy.

However, that has all changed. The two have more than made up with the Saudi’s pledging $25 million to help and invest in Egypt last week.

This came after a few pledges of this sort during the March 2015 economic conference. The pro-Sisi public figures, all followed suit, until it felt obligatory that Saudi is only mentioned with utmost respect in the media.

The same cohort did not disappoint this time around, going above and beyond any show of deference or sycophantic hypocrisy towards Salman on his visit.

Besides nearly shutting down Cairo for him, Cairo University offered him an honorary PhD because of his "exceptional support of Arab and Islamic issues… and support of Egypt."

Similarly, Sisi offered Salman, The Order of the Nile, the state’s highest honour, for the same reasons.

There is no reason why Salman would not be worthy of all of this in theory. However, the reality is he has been in power for a mere 15 months, and didn’t have time to merit all of the country’s top honours so quickly.

There is no reason why Salman would not be worthy of all of this in theory, however, the reality is he has been in power for a mere 15 months, and didn’t have time to merit all of the country’s top honours so quickly

It is all so blatantly about the money, despite that fact that much of the financial reverberations from his visit will be in the form of investments that Saudi stands to benefit from financially as well.

Yet, the man was shuttled from one event to another, where he was bestowed one "award" after another and showered with different poetic proclamations of his beneficence.

Perhaps the second most shocking moment of the visit (the first being signing off the islands) and one of true shame for the Egyptian legislative establishment was when King Salman addressed Egypt’s Parliament.

He not only received a rapturous, stadium-like applause, but MPs actually stood up to read him poetry to praise him in every way possible.

It looked eerily similar to the Arabian Tradition of the poor approaching their tribal or sovereign leaders and making their financial requests only after performing a poem or song in praise of their sovereign, praying that God maintains their dominion over them.

Perhaps these MPs were not aware that their actions carried symbolic meanings that go well beyond their intentions.

King Salman not only received a rapturous, stadium-like applause, but Egyptian MPs actually stood up to read him poetry to praise him in every way possible

However, in a democracy, the onus is on the elected representative to understand politics and diplomacy. Ignorance could never be an excuse here. Certainly the Egyptian government has reached an unprecedented need for immediate capital injections. Saudi Arabia, which is historically cash-rich, is in the best position to do so.

However, in politics (especially in the Arab world) the messaging behind posturing and symbolic gestures is of paramount importance, and Egypt has seemed to relinquish much of its political leverage in the way it handled the Saudi visit.

I wonder whether the decision-makers for this period were aware that the Kingdom is looking to diversify its investments and is creating a massive fund to invest in its long term security.

Investing in the Arab World’s most populous market, dynamic market, and geopolitically relevant country, represents an opportunity for the Saudis as well.

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