Is US Aid To Post-Election Egypt At Risk?

With the Muslim Brotherhood’s Freedom and Justice party likely to play an important role in the country’s next government, some observers are concerned the US Congress could cut funding to Egypt, one of America’s most important Arab partners and beneficiaries of foreign aid. 

US foreign assistance to Egypt is set to be over 1.65 Billion dollars in 2011, 1.3 billion of which is reserved for military aid. Other major areas of funding are economic development (246 million), Education (43 million) Democracy, Human Rights and Governance (30 million) Health (20 million) and Environment ( 10 million). 

Author and Council on Foreign Relations Middle Eastern Fellow Ed Husain says domestic political considerations and lack of knowledge about the Muslim Brotherhood could lead Congress to make a push for cuts, even if the preponderance of power will likely remain with the military after the election.

In June, House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Ileana Ros Lehtinen (R-FL) was quick to criticize Egypt’s military leaders for recognizing the Brotherhood’s Freedom and Justice Party and threatened action. 

“The Muslim Brotherhood is committed to violence and extremism. Neither freedom nor justice will be advanced by any political party established by the Muslim Brotherhood.” she said in a June 8 statement . “United States policy must reflect this reality, and the Administration must not engage the Muslim Brotherhood, or allow direct or indirect U.S. assistance to benefit that organization.”

“Sadly there is a mindset and advocacy around Congress that flies in the face of facts. So the Muslim Brotherhood is being portrayed as a monolithic movement, the diverse strands of thought within the Muslim Brotherhood are not understood by most people on the Hill.” Husain said in a CFR organized conference call from Cairo. 

He says he is concerned the group’s long and often controversial history will make it an obvious target.

“Its easy to build up an argument and say “The Brotherhood supported Hamas, the Brotherhood supported the Nazi’s, the Brotherhood was a terrorist organization through out the 1940’s, the Brotherhood is an anti - US organization. Why should US taxpayers fund the Muslim Brotherhood?” Those are the kinds of arguments that are going to be thrown into the public space in the US and my fear is that it is going to be difficult to add caveat, nuance and balanced thinking amidst that storm.” 

Husein says regions of Egypt that have so far voted have done so peacefully despite a scuffle in high profile area of Cairo between an Islamist and Liberal candidate and a shoot out in the city of Asyut. He says he has visited 20 or so polling station over the past two days and that while he remains critical of the Brotherhood, its members are by far the most active and well organized.

“They are the only force out there that a) have a manifesto, b) have some kind of vision as what they want to bring about and c) have the mechanisms to do so.” 

Husain says he has been in contact with members of the Muslim Brotherhood’s three main factions and that the driving force behind its focused campaign is the faction of deputy leader Khairat el Shater, an engineer and successful banker who was imprisoned for more than ten years under the Mubarak regime. 

“He understands liberal economics, he understands capitalism, he was educated in Britain, he is not a man who is cut off from the rest of the world like some of the older leaders of the past.” Husain said of el Shater.

Husain says the Brotherhood has been consulting with the Turkish and Qatari governments and had reportedly hired a “top five” Western accountancy firm to help it devise policy mechanisms. 

“The vast majority of their leadership is dominated by people from engineering, medical and other professional backgrounds so they are by nature almost technocrats who are have given to managing large institutions.”

Hussein says the Obama administration has adjusted its policy towards the Brotherhood, since Secretary of State Hilary Clinton refused to meet with members of the group six months ago. 

He says the US is now engaging with its leaders, but the administration’s future relationship with the group remains unclear.  Husein says he believes Freedom and Justice officials will be looking for constructive engagement with the US as well as a possible free trade agreement, but that Congress’s likely hostility to the group could be a significant obstacle.

Arab Spring Showed France Error of Its Ways

France’s minister of Foreign Affairs says his government’s past support for authoritarian regimes and dictatorships in the Middle East was misguided and short sighted, but is now determined to provide the region “a helping hand” to develop its democratic initiatives.

“The Arab Springs showed us that [the regional stability] was just an illusion” Foreign Affairs Minister Alain Juppe told a press conference at the Council on Foreign Relations this morning in New York. “The protests are a great chance to institute democracy and the rule of law as well as peace and stability”

Juppe said the international community has “a moral and political duty” to help Egypt, Tunisia and Libya in their transitions and argued only free elections could ensure national legitimacy and against the radicalization of political discourse.

The French Minster of Foreign Affairs also outlined the Deauville initiative, a G8 plan to support new democratic governments. He says the $38 billion initiative will help carry out transitions and reforms for the creation of new democratic entities in the Middle East.

“This is your revolution. We stand alongside you” Mr. Juppé said, repeating the message he delivered during a visit to Tunis last week. 

Kerry: Afghan Surge Won't Work Without New Strategy

Travis Martinez, University of New Mexico/Talk Radio News Service

Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) stated Monday that sending additional U.S. troops to Afghanistan will be fruitless without an updated strategy.

“The bottom line is that deploying additional troops won’t result in sustainable gains if the Afghan security, civilian and governance capacity isn’t there,” Kerry said during a speech to the Council on Foreign Relations.

Kerry, who chairs the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, suggested that both the Generals on the ground in Afghanistan and U.S. leaders develop a plan that establishes an attainable mission in the region.

“If we redefine our strategy and objectives to focus on what is achievable as well as critical, and empower the Afghans to take control of their own future, we will give us the best chance to succeed,” said Kerry.

The Massachusetts Democrat condemned General Stanley McChrystal's call for approximately 40,000 more troops, saying it goes too far and that a solely military approach will not fix the region.

Kerry also spoke on Pakistan's significance in the region, stating that there needs to be a supportive and open relationship between both the U.S. and Pakistani governments.

“Regardless of what happens in Afghanistan, and especially if we want to reduce the need for boots on the ground, it is vitally important that we intensify our support and improve our cooperation with Pakistan,” said Kerry.

Clinton Seeks To Boost U.S. Foreign Aid, Realign Global Governance

By Joseph Russell- Talk Radio News Service

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton addressed the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) on Wednesday to outline the Obama administration’s broad foreign policy objectives. Clinton highlighted the administration’s plan to use more tax dollars for foreign aid and realign global governance, and underscored its dedication to U.S. security.

“We advance our security, our prosperity, and our values, by improving the material conditions of people’s lives around the world,” Clinton said. “These efforts also lay the ground work for greater global cooperation by building the capacity of new partners and tackling shared problems from the ground up.”

U.S. foreign aid has not significantly improved global conditions according to Clinton. “We have devoted a smaller percentage of our government budget to development than almost any other advanced country,” despite giving more money than any other nation. “I want more of our tax dollars to be used effectively and deliver tangible results,” Clinton said.

Clinton asserted that the Obama administration will work to build a global consensus through partnerships, saying “we’ll work through existing institutions and reform them, but we’ll go further.”

Amidst a record deficit, pundits have criticized the Obama administration’s foreign policy objectives, calling the goal of providing more foreign aid unsustainable. Additionally, some have criticized the U.S.'s desire to realign global governance, arguing that it weakens U.S. power and leaves the country vulnerable to threats by North Korea and other unfriendly nations.

Clinton addressed these concerns by saying that if the U.S. uses its power to build relationships through common values, the world will be safer because countries will seek to find solutions to the world's problems.

Is the U.S. ready for the NATO summit?

The Council on Foreign Relations held a conference call for journalists on the outlook for the upcoming NATO summit in Bucharest. James Goldgeier Senior Fellow for Transatlantic Relations and Elizabeth Sherwood-Randall Senior Fellow for Alliance Relations both gave their input.

Elizabeth Sherwood-Randall spoke first and said that never before has NATO been doing so much or so little all at the same time. She explained this comment to mean that since NATO is involved in so many missions; Afghanistan, training missions in Iraq, exercises in supporting the African Union in Somalia and Sudan, and ongoing operations in the Balkans, that there has been too little focus on the strategic vision for NATO’s future. She said that the strategic problems that affect all NATO counties are not limited to Afghanistan or Kosovo but countering nuclear proliferation, managing Russia, containing China, dealing with climate change and dealing with Islamic extremism.

A major point that came up is the difficulty of NATO allies to help in Afghanistan when there is very little support domestically for the Allies to send more troops for combat. Germany in particular has been a point of contention as the German public support for participation in the war in Afghanistan is very low. The caveats attached to NATO and non-NATO allies in Afghanistan have been frustrating to the Pentagon as it limits the usefulness of NATO alliance participation and puts American combat troops at greater risk. Sherwood-Randall also emphasized the need for more non-military support in a statement of strategic vision. She said that while our troops are doing great work they need more non-military support, particularly in the Afghanistan mission.

Goldgeier focused more on the other large agenda item of the NATO summit, which is the consideration of NATO action plans for admitting Albania, Macedonia, Ukraine and Georgia into the NATO alliance. Russia has been outspoken in their opposition of Ukraine and Georgia’s membership and there has also been concern on the U.S. side whether or not these countries will act more as consumers of NATO security and less as contributors. Goldgeier said that United States is just not prepared for this summit and to talk about what is necessary for expansion of the alliance because the current summit will feature a lame duck administration and next year’s summit will feature a brand new administration which won’t have much time to prepare for the 60th anniversary summit.