On Wednesday, the American government announced that it was canceling or delaying some $300 million in aid for Egypt. The decision stemmed from a combination of Congressional attempts to tie aid to Cairo to improvement in human rights, the Trump administration’s desire that Cairo direct more of the military aid it receives to counterterrorism operations, and U.S. frustration over Egyptian relations with North Korea. While acknowledging that Washington is correct to demand more in return for its aid, Eric Trager argues the decision was made so clumsily as to be self-defeating:
Washington’s concerns regarding Egypt’s dismal human-rights record, poor counterterrorism performance, and relationship with North Korea are valid. But the scattershot nature of these conditions [on aid], and the fact that bureaucratic and political considerations drove this decision rather than any overarching strategy for U.S.-Egypt relations or the broader region, reflects a policymaking process in disarray.
Whereas previous administrations’ decisions on changes to aid were announced after they were communicated to the highest levels of the Egyptian government, key Egyptian officials learned of [the recent] decision only after reading the initial Reuters report. The aid cut also comes only weeks before the United States and Cairo are scheduled to resume the biennial Bright Star joint exercises, which have been redesigned at Washington’s urging to focus on counterterrorism after a four-year hiatus.
The rollout was also poorly coordinated within the U.S. government. Indeed, the new aid policy leaked just hours before a high-level U.S. delegation—including Trump’s senior adviser Jared Kushner, Deputy National Security Advisor Dina Powell, and the Middle East peace envoy Jason Greenblatt—landed in Cairo for a meeting with President Sisi. . . .
To be sure, the ultimate impact of the aid decision is ambiguous, since most of the affected funds might ultimately be disbursed. And the administration can ease the sudden confusion in the bilateral relationship by setting clearer conditions for allowing Cairo to spend the $195 million in military aid now being delayed. Still, the way in which Washington made and announced its decision has significantly undermined the Trump administration’s credibility with Cairo, which now has reason to question whether the president’s vocal support for Sisi matters.
At the same time, the decision is a wake-up call for the Egyptian government, which can no longer afford to ignore longstanding and widely held concerns within the U.S. policy community regarding its internal and external behavior if it desires a durable and supportive relationship with Washington.
Read more on Washington Institute for Near East Policy: http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/view/washingtons-unfocused-decision-on-aid-to-egypt