The Obama administration’s efforts to promote democracy in Egypt are being complicated by what many Egyptians see as mixed messages coming from Washington, exacerbating already high anti-American sentiment and threatening broader U.S. goals in the region.
Any administration might find it difficult to safely navigate the intricacies of Egypt’s current political tumult, but some U.S. officials concede they have been unable to communicate a coherent policy. Officials also complain that their task has been made more challenging by the delicate line they must toe and by members of Congress who have inserted themselves into the high-wire diplomacy with one of America’s most important Arab allies.
Egypt has been a cornerstone of Mideast stability for decades, notably because of its peace deal with Israel and its protection of the vital Suez Canal. The administration has been eager to remain engaged and influential there, but it is straddling a fine line, trying to balance its support for representative government with U.S. national interests.
In Egypt’s crisis, the two do not meld well and staying involved has required what some see as a compromise in democratic principles.
Several officials speaking familiar with internal deliberations lamented that the White House’s nuanced policy is not easily explained to Egypt’s volatile public and wary leaders. Speaking anonymously, they also expressed frustration that the message has been muddled by the comments of lawmakers who have offered strident personal opinions on the situation that do not reflect the administration’s line.
To begin with, they said, President Barack Obama’s approach to Egypt since the July 3 toppling of the country’s first freely elected leader have appeared beset by uncertainty. For three weeks, administration lawyers and policymakers waffled on whether former President Mohammed Morsi’s ouster was a “coup,” a determination that under U.S. law would have forced $1.3 billion in annual military aid cut off, resulting in a loss of influence with the Egyptian armed forces at a crucial time.
In an unusual bit of legal gymnastics, Obama’s national security team simply didn’t determine the status either way. By declining to take a position, the administration infuriated Morsi’s Islamist supporters, who have refused to back down on demands that he be returned to power. At the same time, the administration drew the ire of the military and its supporters by continuing contacts with Morsi’s Muslim Brotherhood and sharply criticizing the tactics of security forces against protesters.
Secretary of State John Kerry inflamed the already bubbling mistrust by telling an interviewer last week in Pakistan that the Egyptian military had been “restoring democracy” by removing a democratically elected president. The remark drew a scathing response from the Brotherhood, and, a day later, Kerry tried to blunt the controversy by calling for all sides “to get back to a new normal.”
Then on a visit to Cairo, Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., called Morsi’s ouster a “coup.” Although McCain does not set administration policy, he does sit on the influential Senate Foreign Relations Committee, is a highly visible former Republican presidential candidate and is seen by many as an elder statesman with serious clout when it comes to providing aid.
McCain said on Thursday that the administration had wanted him and Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., to make the trip, but he also said they were speaking only for themselves.
“We never pretended to speak for the administration, but we do have constitutional responsibilities. One of those is obviously the power of the purse,” McCain said.
Nonetheless, the administration moved quickly to distance itself from McCain’s comments, which two officials privately described as a “disaster” for Washington’s attempts to clear up misunderstandings.
About the Author
