Last summer, then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was received in Egypt with a barrage of rotten tomatoes. Protesters, mostly pro-democracy activists, shouted their rage for a very troubling reason: They believed, as many still do, that Washington wants the Muslim Brotherhood in power.
Many Egyptian liberals, the people whose worldview is most closely aligned with the West, think Washington stands against them. The notion is absurd, but democracy advocates are right to feel disappointed.
Washington wants to promote stability in the region, and its realpolitik views the Brotherhood as the most powerful force in Egypt. But that oversimplifies the case and is producing bad policy.
A most perverse turn of events came a few weeks ago when an Egyptian court convicted 43 representatives of foreign non-governmental organizations, including at least 16 Americans and two Germans, who had been working to develop civil society, conducting democracy seminars and trainings. The NGO workers were sentenced to up to five years in prison in a sham trial that found them guilty of operating without a license.
This comes as Egypt’s elected president, Mohammed Morsi, pushes legislation making it much more difficult for all NGOs to function. The country is becoming less democratic every day.
The NGO verdicts didn’t seem to trouble Washington all that much. The United Nations issued a statement accusing Egypt of assaulting fundamental human rights. And Germany answered with fury. Germany’s foreign minister described the decision as scandalous, and there are calls in parliament to end German aid to Egypt and sever diplomatic relations.
By contrast, the United States seems to be mostly taking the events in stride. The State Department issued a mildly worded statement on behalf of Secretary of State John Kerry urging Cairo to “respond to the Egyptian people’s aspirations for democracy.”
Days before the verdict was issued, with the case’s outcome in the balance, Kerry withdrew all American leverage without extracting anything in return. On May 10, Kerry waived the human-rights requirements on aid to Egypt, making it possible to deliver $1.3 billion in American military aid. It’s not the first time this has happened, but Kerry did it more quietly than in the past, without public pressure or admonishment.
The disappointment with the American government’s attitude towards the Islamic Brotherhood-dominated government is now extending to America’s European allies, who see Washington’s passivity as perplexing.
The United States wants stability. It values close ties with the Egyptian military, and it wants to help encourage continuing quiet between Israel and Egypt. But if Washington sees aid as a means to gain some influence, what is the point of providing the aid without pushing for even the most basic consideration for U.S. citizens, and for the fundamental requirements of democratic development?
Editorial, Pages 10 on 06/24/2013