The debate continues in Egypt regarding proposals to use the Suez Canal to pay off Egyptian debts.
Top trending topics
It was not only the proposal by businessman Hassan Heikal, son of the late writer Mohamed Hassanein Heikal, to conduct what is called the great debt swap in exchange for land and assets in companies up to the Suez Canal, but it extended to the proposal of one of the deputies to collect part of the transit fees for several years in advance.
MP Ahmed Helmy, a member of the Parliamentary Proposals and Complaints Committee, proposed a set of ideas aimed at maximizing the state’s dollar resources and supporting the economy’s ability to cope with debt burdens, stressing that managing existing assets and resources more efficiently could be an important alternative to constantly resorting to borrowing or selling state assets.
MP Ahmed Helmy, a member of the Parliamentary Proposals and Complaints Committee, proposed a set of ideas aimed at maximizing the state's dollar resources and supporting the economy's ability to cope with debt burdens.
He suggested studying the possibility of collecting part of the expected ship transit fees through the Suez Canal for several years in advance, through concluding optional programs with major international shipping companies and lines, in exchange for granting them appropriate discounts and incentives on transit fees during a specific period of time, in a way that achieves a common interest for both parties and ensures an advance dollar flow to the state.
He explained that the Suez Canal generated about $10.25 billion during 2023, and if this figure is used as an accounting indicator, then ten years' revenues would amount to about $102.5 billion. Assuming a 25% discount, the theoretical value of the advance collection could reach about $77 billion. He stressed that this figure is not a guaranteed target, but rather an accounting model that requires careful study in accordance with global trade trends and canal revenue projections.
He pointed out that even if the proposal is applied to companies that represent only about 50% of the targeted revenues, it could theoretically provide upfront dollar liquidity approaching $38 billion, calling for an examination of directing the proceeds of any such program directly to paying off part of the external debt, especially the most costly obligations in terms of interest and financial burdens.
The MP stressed that the proposal does not involve selling, mortgaging, or relinquishing the management or sovereignty of the Suez Canal, but rather is based on collecting a fee for a future transit service in advance, with the possibility of linking the benefit of discounts to the companies’ commitment to a certain volume of trips or transit operations during a specific period of time.
He stressed that the idea deserves to be studied by the government, the Ministry of Finance, the Central Bank and the Suez Canal Authority, by assessing its financial, legal and economic effects, determining the appropriate discount rate, mechanisms to protect the state’s rights and ensure that it does not affect the canal’s future revenues.
He pointed out that dealing with the burdens of debt should not be limited to borrowing or selling assets, but rather innovative solutions can be sought that are based on maximizing the benefit from the state’s current resources.
The Dignity Party expressed its deep concern about the proposals and ideas circulating regarding "exchanging state assets," primarily the Suez Canal and some Egyptian lands, in exchange for writing off part of the external debt or for obtaining financing facilities.
In addition, the “Dignity” party expressed its deep concern about the proposals and ideas being circulated regarding “exchanging state assets,” primarily the Suez Canal and some Egyptian lands, in exchange for dropping part of the external debt or for obtaining financing facilities.
He affirmed in a statement his absolute and final rejection of this proposal in its entirety, explaining that the Suez Canal is the artery of global trade, the lifeline of Egypt, and its sovereign revenues are estimated at billions of dollars annually, and it is a guarantee for future generations.
He considered that “giving up its management or benefiting from it is a direct infringement on national sovereignty,” noting that “Egyptian land is not a commodity. Sinai, the desert hinterland and the Delta lands are a trust in our hands.”
He stressed that “giving up an inch of it under the pressure of debt opens the door to endless ambitions.”
He added “The experiences of recent and distant history have proven that selling strategic assets to pay off debts has not solved any country’s crisis, but rather increased its poverty and dependency. Debts are paid off through work and production, not by selling off assets.”
The party stressed that the real solutions lie in rationalizing government spending, rearranging budget priorities, supporting national industry and agriculture, increasing exports to provide hard currency, fighting corruption and recovering looted funds, and attracting genuine investment based on partnership and not on selling.
The House of Representatives demanded that the matter be discussed in a public session and that any agreements or memoranda of understanding be made public.
He urged the relevant state institutions to be fully transparent regarding the debt file and the management of sovereign assets.
The party emphasized that the Egyptian people have made great sacrifices to preserve the Suez Canal and their land. They will not accept having their dignity sold in the debt market.
MP Mohamed Abdel-Aleem Daoud, head of the parliamentary body of the Wafd Party, also announced his complete and categorical rejection of any proposal based on including Egyptian state assets in a swap or settlement of debt, stressing that the assets and resources of the Egyptian people should not be turned into a means to pay the price of economic and financial policies that have not achieved their goals.
Daoud said in a statement that the Suez Canal is not just a state asset that can be dealt with in terms of numbers, debts and barter, explaining that it is a major artery for the Egyptian economy and an essential part of the nation’s resources.
He added “What is related to the Suez Canal should not be presented in terms of barter, mortgage, or transfer of ownership, under any name.”
The MP called on the Egyptian government to have a clear, final and decisive position, not only regarding the Suez Canal, but also regarding the principle of including any of the state’s strategic assets in debt swaps or settlements.
Daoud stressed the need for the Cabinet to officially confirm the state’s position on this matter, saying: “No barter, no mortgage, and no transfer of ownership of any of Egypt’s strategic assets in exchange for debts.”
He stressed that the state’s assets belong to the Egyptian people and are not a bargaining chip for debt repayment, warning that addressing the debt crisis cannot be limited to transferring ownership of an asset from one government entity to another, and then considering the problem to be over.
He pointed out that if the government has announced its rejection of swapping the Suez Canal for debt, then this rejection must become a firm and final principle in managing the assets of the Egyptian state, and not just a response to a passing media debate or controversy.
The head of the parliamentary body of the Wafd Party asked “Why have debts accumulated? How do we reduce the cost of servicing them? How do we increase production, exports and real investment? How do we stop wasting the state’s resources? How do we ensure that Egypt’s assets achieve a real and sustainable return for the people?”
He stressed that “debt must be addressed through work, production, reform and accountability, not by transferring ownership of assets between state institutions,” saying: “Debt is dealt with through work, production, reform and accountability, not by zeroing out a number in a ledger, and transferring ownership of an asset from the ledgers of one institution to the ledgers of another institution.” Daoud warned that “approaching state assets becomes the easiest solution to confront financial crises, while the more difficult solutions are postponed, foremost among them reforming economic policies, improving management, increasing production, maximizing state resources, and holding those responsible for the dysfunction accountable.”
He said “The easiest solution cannot be to approach the state’s assets, while the more difficult solution, which is to reform policies, improve management, increase production, maximize state resources, and hold those responsible for the dysfunction accountable, is postponed.”
Daoud stressed that “his position is not limited to rejecting the exchange of the Suez Canal for debts, but extends to rejecting the transformation of Egypt’s strategic assets into a tool for addressing policy shortcomings.”
He said “We do not just reject the idea of swapping the Suez Canal for debt; we fundamentally reject turning Egypt’s strategic assets into a tool for addressing policy shortcomings.”
He stressed that “these assets were not built in one day, nor were they inherited by one generation, and therefore no single generation has the right to treat them as a bargaining chip in settling financial accounts.”
He concluded “Egypt’s assets are not for sale, not for mortgaging, and not for bartering,” stressing that preserving the nation’s resources is not a partisan stance or political posturing, but rather a duty towards the Egyptian people and future generations.
Egypt’s external debt amounts to approximately $164.8 billion by the end of the first quarter of 2026, while the total estimated domestic public debt in the budget amounts to approximately 18.37 trillion Egyptian pounds.
Tags:
asiawest
