The US should suspend foreign aid to Egypt.

re: FOREIGN AID TO EGYPTAs Pro notes, US aid to Egypt began in 1979 as part of the agreement reached by the Camp David Peace Accords.Pro should note that the Six-Day War was in 1967, followed by the Yom Kippur War in 1973. The Yom Kippur War was the fourth Arab-Israeli war since 1948. Since Camp David was the continuation of disengagement talks initiated by Kissinger in 1973, it would be more correct to say that peace followed the Yom Kippur War.[1] U.S. aid was correctly seen then, and continues to be seen now, as a bribe to Egypt for maintaining peace with Israel. This payment is worthwhile to the United States for the following reasons:1) Egypt is the most populous muslim state in the Middle-East and often the most influential. While Egypt has remained at peace with Israel over the past 35 years, the large Arab League Invasions that marked the first 30 years of Israel's history have been effectively prevented. [2]2) The provision and monitoring of U.S. aid has provided the U.S. with relationships with Egyptian officials. Essentially, under the umbrella of aid discussion, the U.S. Government has reason to sit down frequently with Egyptian officials and discuss many other aspects of the U.S.-Egyptian relationship.3) Initially, U.S. aid was provided as a substitute for U.S.S.R aid. During the first 30 years of the Cold War, Egypt was a Russian ally, receiving large amounts of military support which Egypt then employed against Israel. Starting in 1979, U.S. aid to Egypt served as a token of Egypt's transfer of allegiance to the U.S.. 4)Aid to Egypt now serves essentially as our only vote in Egyptian politics: the threat to withdraw serves as a kind of veto against Egyptian initiatives that the U.S. would like to prevent. Unfortunately, aid serves as a one-shot veto. Once aid is withdrawn, Egypt is diplomatically isolated and will likely seek new patronage from Saudi Arabia or China, further disengaging Egypt from U.S. interests. Russia is already back in talks with Egypt while the U.S. wavers. [3]5)Although the U.S. is unpopular in Egypt, all indications are that withdrawing aid would reduce the U.S. favorability in that country even further.re:CIVIL UNREST IN EGYPTThat's a pretty short-sighted view of the conflict. The ouster of Morsi is more correctly seen as a continuation of the popular uprising known as the Arab Spring. Yes, Morsi was fairly elected by the most democratic vote in Egypt's history. However, we can not fail to note that Morsi overthrew the democratic process on November 22 of last year. Morsi issued a proclamation immunizing his decrees from any political process or democratic challenge. As Mohamed El Baradei stated, Morsi had " usurped all state powers and appointed himself Egypt's new pharaoh." [4]In effect, Morsi staged a coup against the Egyptian democracy before a constitution had even been agreed..The American Declaration of Independence asserts: "...When a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security." [4]By the founding fathers' estimation, the Egyptian people had a duty to overthrow their new tyrant and establish a new framework towards democracy. Punishing Egypt for its dogged pursuit of a more representative government would the less democratic option.Pro and Con can agree that the military crackdown on the Muslim Brotherhood represents the brutal oppression of a large minority in Egypt. The mass murder of unarmed protesters must always be condemned. However, Pro's suggestion that the military is acting in opposition to the popular movement for democratic reform. This is not true. The Egyptian military consistently denies any interest in long-term governance and is in fact the strongest faction supporting populist, inclusive reform.Pro should also note that time was running out on a peaceful compromise. Morsi had advocated for intervention in Syria on the side of insurgents. This was a fairly unpopular stand in Egypt (Syria and Egypt were briefly one country 55 years ago) and any war against Syria would have certainly been more divisive for Egypt than the current unrest. The military removed Morsi from power to prevent the Syrian Crisis from escalating into a much larger conflict.re:STANDING FOR PRINCIPLEWhich American principle is it then, for which we are so well considered? I can't think of any principle for which it might be fairly said the U.S. has consistently advocated in the Arab world. Freedom? The U.S. has made a strong alliance with brutal authoritarian states like Saudi Arabia. Democracy? Americans may have forgotten that the CIA and UK intelligence overthrew the popular and democratically elected President of Iran in 1953 and installed the autocratic Shah as a puppet for oil companies, but the Middle-East has not forgotten. As Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas said, "When Mossadegh and Persia started basic reforms, we became alarmed. We united with the British to destroy him; we succeeded; and ever since, our name has not been an honored one in the Middle East."Americans may have forgotten that the U.S. secretly sold weapons to Iran while allied with Iraq in the Iran-Iraq war, but the Middle-East has not forgotten. If Pro believes that an American principle should be to disengage with any nation guilty of killing innocent people, than America would be friendless indeed. Nor, by that lofty principle, would the U.S. qualify for her own aid programs. As Groucho Marx once said, " Those are my principles and if you don't like them....well, I have others."re:SPHERE OF INFLUENCEIf we cut off aid tomorrow, the U.S. would drop in the polls some more. In the United States, congressional popularity is far worse than American popularity in Egypt, only 10% approve of Congress. Nevertheless, the great majority of senators and representatives are re-elected. When polling data conflicts with an electorate's self-interest, bet on self-interest. The Egyptian Street is simply incapable of rational thought about the United States and for good reasons. Nevertheless, the Egyptian majority is clearly most interested in a democratic state and the Egyptian military is clearly the only faction in Egypt with the means and the interest to implement democracy. So long as U.S. aid remains popular with the military, and so long as the military continues to represent the interests of the majority of Egyptians, U.S. support still favors Egypt's primary interest. If we only gave aid to countries that loved us, what would be the purpose?re:THE FOREIGN ASSISTANCE ACTIn fact, the same act states that no assistance will be provided to a government which "engages in a consistent pattern of gross violations of internationally recognized human rights, including torture or cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment, prolonged detention without charges, causing the disappearance of persons by the abduction and clandestine detention of those persons, or other flagrant denial of the right to life, liberty, and the security of person".[5]In context, we see that legal idealism has no place in foreign aid: of the 24 countries that receive US foreign aid, how many actual uphold this standard? Con would argue 2 barely qualify: South Africa and Mexico. The other 91% of foreign aid recipients fail to qualify. In fact, Con would argue that since the War on Terror, the United States would not qualify as a recipient of their own foreign aid according to the standards put forward by this act.[1]http://en.wikipedia.org...[2]https://www.cia.gov...[3]http://allafrica.com...[4]https://twitter.com...[4]http://www.archives.gov...