This paper explains Egypt’s foreign policy stagnation, with a novel argument building on role and identity theories. Egypt’s foreign policy exhibits a case where its regional leadership role has changed (and declined), but its identity emphasising Egyptian leadership persists, thus leading to foreign policy that is widely seen as ineffective. This paper examines the theoretical link — and distinction — between national roles and identities. Drawing on previous role research, we argue that, compared to identities, roles are more behaviourally prescriptive, necessarily relational, and are dependent on others’ expectations and acceptance of them. We also discuss the distinct sources of role change and identity change, setting up the possibility that one may change while the other remains stable. We examine the implications of when roles and identities become out of sync with the case of Egypt’s role decay. While Egypt’s leadership role at the regional role has retreated, the leadership identity persists. For Egyptians, Egypt is a ‘natural’ leader of the Arab world and a pivotal state in regional affairs. Herein, we argue, lays the explanations for why Egypt’s foreign policy has suffered from contradictions and ineffectiveness. Empirically, this paper draws upon historical evidence, official statements, memoirs of Egyptian foreign policy makers, and observation of public debates in Egypt’s public sphere.