Hillary Clinton 'grants' National security waiver for US aid to Egypt.

Hillary Clinton 'grants' National security waiver for US aid to Egypt.(BM).By Adel el-Adawy.Senate Appropriations State and Foreign Ops Subcommittee Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-VT) was informed by the State Department of the national security waiver on US aid to Egypt. Many here in Washington have started to criticize this decision. Although, the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (SCAF) has badly managed the democratic transition, this piece argues, it is important to continue the aid to Egypt.
Of course, the transitional phase lead by SCAF has been disappointing to many observers, including myself. But, I have long argued that SCAF was never capable of leading Egypt towards a democracy. I never thought someone, who was the cornerstone of Mubarak’s authoritarian regime could lead Egypt’s democratic transition. Anyone who was convinced SCAF would, is distanced from the political realities in Egypt.
However, the prospects for democracy in Egypt today are much better than in 2011 under former President Mubarak. Egypt’s road to democracy will continue. Yes, the obstacles will be many, but the opportunities are enormous in Egypt. I am optimistic.
US aid to Egypt is not about support for democracy. US aid to Egypt is about a strategic partnership, connected with the Israeli-Egyptian peace treaty. The US military has a very deep-rooted and strong relationship with the Egyptian military that transcends the idea of democracy. The US military does get much in return for the relationship it has enjoyed for the past three decades with Egypt.
The debate about cutting aid to Egypt has shown that many people in Washington do not know where this aid goes and do not know what the US gets in return. Most of the tax-payer money goes to the purchase of American weaponry deals, which create many jobs in the United States. American consultants travel to Egypt, and members of the Egyptian military travel to the US on a regular basis. Of course, there are certain individuals within the Egyptian military establishment that may benefit financially from the aid, but most of the financial benefits go to the United States and not Egypt.
Furthermore, most of the military aid to Egypt goes into securing Sinai and the Israeli border. According, to the Egyptian-Israeli peace treaty, Egypt’s military is allowed only a limited amount of military presence in Sinai. The aid to Egypt’s military is to enhance Egyptian military capacity to secure Sinai and the Israeli border. Therefore, cutting the aid to Egypt would jeopardize the already deteriorating security of Sinai. This would be a blow to Israeli national security, a key US ally.
There are many organizations that I greatly respect here in Washington, who are calling for cutting the aid to Egypt. They are disappointed by Clinton’s national security waiver of US aid to Egypt. Their calls are legitimate from a theoretical standpoint. But, from a realistic standpoint, cutting aid would not bring Egypt closer to a democracy. The aid to Egypt has nothing to do with democracy in Egypt, the aid is more of a symbol of a very close strategic military partnership. The question I pose to people who are in favor of cutting aid is: What would cutting aid mean for Egypt? Will it help or hurt Egypt’s path towards democracy?
One thing is for sure. Cutting aid to Egypt would just sever US-Egyptian relations. If the US cut aid to Egypt today, the next Egyptian government in July would inherit a damaged US-Egyptian relationship. Why would you want to penalize the upcoming democratically elected Egyptian administration, by severing relations with the United States. I am a strong believer that strong US-Egyptian relations will help Egypt’s democratic prospects. And cutting aid will have long-term affects on US-Egyptian relations.Hmmmmm............“I will stand with the Muslims should the political winds shift in an ugly direction.”Read the full story here.