The United States should base its military aid to Egypt on the Egyptian government’s performance on standard of living and good governance indicators. If Egypt under-performs, the U.S. should shift some of its military aid to promote economic growth.
Since 1979, the United States has given an average of $2 billion annually in assistance to Egypt. This is divided between military and economic aid, with the majority ($1.3 billion annually) of the aid given for military purposes – training, weapons, etc. Military aid has historically propped up a government whose forces used “unwarranted lethal force and tortured and abused prisoners and detainees,” according to the Department of State. Resentment against America grew when these same forces were used against protesters during the revolution. To counter charges of interference, the U.S. should adopt a results-driven system for aid allocation in order to keep Egypt as an ally while avoiding popular resentment, ensuring stronger governance and positive relations.
The key to achieving this objective lies in the relationship between the military and economic aid that the U.S. offers Egypt. The UN Human Development Index (HDI) and World Bank World Governance Indicators (WGI) are impartial measures of the standard of living and openness of government, respectively. The U.S. should tie Egyptian aid to these two standards. Specifically, the State Department should institute a sliding scale so that if Egypt’s performance falls, more funds will be shifted from military to economic aid.
Military aid ensures that the U.S. can continue to reap the strategic benefits of an alliance with Egypt – priority access to the Suez Canal and Egyptian airspace, and Egyptian-Israeli peace. Results-based aid would show that the U.S. will not support an authoritarian government, but is willing to stand with any government that legitimately works for the Egyptian people. Congress is currently expected to determine aid based on whether the newly elected government shares our ideals. Instead, we should emphasize results over ideology.
In the long term, a stable and prosperous Egypt would provide more security benefits to the U.S. than an ideologically friendly government. The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, fought almost entirely to deal with unstable political conditions after regimes were toppled, will cost the U.S. at least $4 trillion – we cannot afford many more interventions to stabilize countries.4 Additionally, trade ties will develop with an increasingly open and productive Egyptian economy. Most importantly, this policy poses no costs to U.S. tax-payers, as the total amount of aid would remain the same even if the allocation were to shift. These marginal benefits of a stable Egypt far outweigh the marginal cost – the possibility that Egypt may not espouse all American principles.
The primary beneficiaries of this aid will be the Egyptian people, 18.5 percent of whom live on less than $2 a day. Studies have shown that corruption and growth are inversely related. Thus, the government would have an incentive to reduce corruption and govern well. Continuing corruption among the military (which currently controls one third of the economy and much of the government) would trigger a shift in aid towards economic purposes, simultaneously benefiting the Egyptian people and weakening a repressive military. If we continue to apportion aid without objective measures, the U.S. runs the risk of strengthening a system that becomes corrupt and ineffective.
Any new economic aid should go directly through USAID, so that it would not only be coordinated with the Egyptian government, but also provide assurance that aid does not simply go towards strengthening the military. Congress should be eager to extract every bit of leverage it can from the current level of aid to Egypt without increasing expenditures. This policy will appeal to the Egyptian people and government. It ensures quantitative results for the standard of living, and should not threaten the government as long as we emphasize that military aid will only be cut if the government underperforms.
Egypt currently faces the prospect of a collapsing economy and further unrest. This proposal will pressure the military into relinquishing power, and thus must be implemented soon in order to prevent a further economic meltdown.
State Department Should Use Education Exchange Programs to Promote Peace
By Tahsin Chowdhury
Tahsin Chowdhury is a rising senior in the City College of New York studying International Studies Concentrating on International Relations. He has been a long affiliate of the Roosevel…
China Rising: How to Prevent a Naval War Between the U.S. and China
By Erich Helmreich
America Should Stop Giving $2 Billion of U.S. Aid to Egypt Unconditionally
By Graham Palmer
Chicago NATO Summit 2012: How NATO Can Become Relevant Again
By Daniel Pitcairn
I am a rising Senior at Yale University majoring in Global Affairs with a focus on international security and American foreign policy. I aspire to join the Foreign Service after gradua…
Female Military Veterans Suffering From PTSD, Sexual Assault
By Lily Roberts
Lily graduated in May from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, where she majored in Peace, War & Defense and English. At UNC, she led UNC’s Roosevelt Institute, an un…
Why the U.S. Must Ratify the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty
By Ariana Rowberry
I am a rising senior attending the University of North-Carolina at Chapel Hill. My majors are Peace, War, and Defense, and Political Science.…
Most Africans Still Live on Less Than $2 a Day, Here's What the U.S. Can Do
By Erika Solanki
Graduated UCLA summa cum laude in March 2012, with departmental honors and the college honors program with a BA in International Development (South Asian concentration) and minor in Pub…
How Rap and American Music Can Defeat Al Qaeda in the Middle East
By Kyle Villemain
How the U.S. Can Save Mothers in Poor Countries
By Corinne White
Junior public policy and history double major at UNC-Chapel Hill.…