Thread by @sarahleah1

My latest on #Egypt in ⁦@ForeignAffairs⁩ - America Must Stop Underwriting Sisi’s Brutal Reign foreignaffairs.com/articles/middl…

For decades, a steady flow of funds —more than $50 billion in military aid plus $30 billion in economic aid since 1978—has assured Egyptian leaders that they possess something world’s dictators value far more than even most advanced military hardware: political support from US

steady stream into their coffers sends important message to ordinary Egyptians, too. No matter what state-sponsored torture or terror they suffer, US has their govts back, &aside from the occasional stern statement of concern, US will do nothing to end support for their abusers.

For the United States, this is not just a moral problem but also a legal one: contributing to human rights abuses is a violation of international human rights law and of U.S. law itself.

Because efforts to “condition” aid to Egypt— triggered by Congress calling on @StateDept to “pressure” Egypt—are based on flawed assumption that US aid will & should continue, they have wound up justifying continued support for Egypt without achieving any meaningful reforms

A more honest reckoning would recognize that repression in Egypt is not accidental or a byproduct of particular excesses but a deliberate and essential strategy for its dictatorship’s survival.

This is why Sisi would never submit to demands for meaningful reforms. If forced to choose between losing U.S. military aid and loosening his grip, he would always give up the aid.

What is more, the notion that the United States will actually withdraw its aid to sanction Egypt’s abuses is simply not credible, and Sisi knows it. Only once in the past 40 years has the United States withheld military aid to Egypt and obtained a small concession.

advocacy that focuses on securing prisoner releases by urging conditions on aid contributes to moral&political hazards,diverts advocates who cycle back to mythical aid conditionality to achieve “reform” and distracts from larger harm of support for an unreformable dictatorship

decades-old shibboleths about U.S. security interests have produced a lazy, defeatist, unimaginative, &harmful approach. Successive U.S. administrations have failed to update relationship with Egypt in a way that reflects Washington’s present-day strategic and security interests.

For starters, Israel no longer needs the United States to bribe Egypt into maintaining the Israeli-Egyptian peace deal. The alliance between the two countries is at this point stronger and more mutually beneficial than Washington’s relationship with either of them.

sleight of hand in argument that only $1.3 billion in military aid can secure Suez & overflight privileges or that this is an appropriate price for these benefits. If this special access is valuable to U.S. military, then US can and should pay on a tailored pricing scheme

Defenders of status quo also warn that Egypt will seek to replace US patronage w support from China or Russia. This falsely assumes that US aid limits Egypt’s dealings w U.S. competitors & secures Cairo’s loyalty when it comes to arms purchases. But Egypt has already diversified.

Ending U.S. military and economic aid to Egypt would not mean ending the relationship altogether. There is no reason why the two countries could not continue to pursue mutually beneficial engagements, such as counterterrorism cooperation, or coordination on regional conflicts

The two biggest proponents of continued aid are, unsurprisingly, those who profit: the Egyptian government and American defense contractors, including Raytheon and Lockheed Martin, which manufacture the weapons systems that Cairo purchases with the money Washington sends its way.

There is growing bipartisan movement to replace US’ militarized approach to world w policy of restraint &humility. But debate has been narrow, w thoseencouraging or bemoaning a so-called withdrawal from MidEast focused on troop deployments & other forms of military engagement

Few have fully considered the role of U.S. weapons transfers in propping up abusive governments as a far more prevalent, persistent, and pernicious aspect of U.S. dominance, or examined whether such transfers achieve their stated goals. Egypt is great case in point.