Amr Abdel-Atti* assesses the most likely fallout from the ongoing case against US-based NGOs After the 25 January Revolution succeeded in overthrowing the Mubarak regime, on 11 February 2011, there were signs of tension in US-Egyptian relations due to possible changes in Egyptian foreign policy at the regional and international level that could affect US interests in the region. These tensions burst to the surface when Egyptian security agencies raided a number of NGOs and criminal charges were brought against 43 staff members of these organisations, among which 19 are Americans. Washington has attempted to use various means to pressure the interim government into dropping the case against the Americans who are accused, alongside Egyptian NGO employees and several of other nationalities, of operating without a licence and accepting foreign funding. Cairo has refused to yield and the trail of the NGO members started on 26 February. This begs the question as to how Washington will handle the crisis over foreign funding of NGOs operating in Egypt. Among the NGOs whose employees are facing prosecution is the International Republican Institute, headed by Arizona senator and former presidential candidate John McCain, and the National Democratic Institute, founded by former secretary of state Madeleine Albright. By virtue of their connections with the Republican and Democratic parties, both are close to US decision-making centres, one reason why the case is certain to have a powerful impact on the shape of US-Egyptian relations in the near future. Of course, much will depend on how Washington handles the question of future aid to Egypt, with regard to which there are at least three possible scenarios. - Washington suspends military aid: Congress has made the renewal of $1.3 billion in military aid to Egypt for 2012 conditional. The ruling Supreme Council of the Armed Forces must continue to abide by the peace treaty with Israel, must hand over power to a civil authority and safeguard fundamental rights and freedoms, though the congressional bill on aid to Egypt includes a provision that these conditions can be overlooked for security reasons. If Egypt is to continue to receive this aid, under normal circumstances, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton must present Congress with evidence that SCAF is meeting the above-mentioned conditions, which would be difficult for her or any other US official to do. An alternative would be for the conditions to be set aside for security reasons. This may be difficult given that the Egyptian regime has lost supporters in Congress, and not just as a result of recent events. Public relations firms engaged by Egypt to improve its image in Congress have come under criticism, not least from Congress members John McCain and Joseph Lieberman. The Egyptian regime has also lost one of its most important assets in Washington, the good will of AIPAC, the powerful American-Jewish lobby that once defended Cairo in Congress because of its pro-US and pro-Israeli policies but which following the storming of the Israeli embassy in Cairo, Cairo's rapprochement with Hamas, its support for the Palestinian bid for UN membership, the reopening of the Rafah border with Gaza and repeated attacks on the gas pipeline to Israel, has turned a cold shoulder. - Washington abolishes US military aid to Egypt: Those who want an end to US military and economic aid to Egypt argue that the economic crisis that hit the US in the wake of the global financial crisis compels the US to cut back on spending. Halting aid will also spare the government from criticism on the part of taxpayers who complain of the huge sums of aid given to countries that adopt anti- American postures. According to a recent Gallop poll, 71 per cent of Egyptians oppose US economic aid to Egypt and 74 per cent oppose direct US funding of NGOs in Egypt. They also argue the current Egyptian regime does not share the US democratic values and respect for freedom and human rights. Cancelling aid is posited as an opportunity for a much needed change in the nature of US-Egyptian military relations. The US, they say, should pay only for services rendered, such as permission to pass through the Suez Canal. Finally, they argue that cancelling aid to Egypt will free resources for other countries, including Tunisia and Morocco, that need US and which, unlike Egypt, will be grateful for it. - Focus on democratic transformation: Some American analysts and commentators hold that the type of change the US would like to see in Egypt will not be achieved by furnishing military aid but by Egyptians agreeing on the steps to take in the next phase of democratic transformation. The solution, they say, is to pressure the Egyptian regime to accept NGOs but to encourage all the parties involved to adopt realistic steps to pave the way for a civil state. They caution that should the Egyptian regime pursue a non- democratic path it will lead to far graver consequences and require a much more serious response than the trial of NGO staff members, however significant this issue may now seem to US-Egyptian relations. In the event that US-Egyptian relations worsen the first scenario -- a temporary suspension of US aid to Cairo -- is the most likely. The freeze would probably not last long since both Washington and Cairo know how important US military aid to Egypt is, especially to security and US interests in the Middle East. It is little wonder, therefore, that former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Mike Mullen cautioned Congress against reducing military aid to Egypt. Egypt, he said, is of value to the US because no other country is capable of performing the services for US interests in the Middle East that Egypt does. The present Chief of Staff Martin Dempsey also ruled out the idea of cutting aid to Egypt after his visiting Cairo earlier this month and meeting with members of the ruling military council. In April 2006 the Government Accountability Office (GAO) submitted a report to Congress detailing the benefits the US receives from military aid to Egypt, foremost among which is permission for US military aircraft to use Egyptian airspace. According to the report, from 2001 to 2005, a period which saw US wars in Afghanistan (2001) and Iraq (2003), the Egyptian government allowed 36,553 US military plans to pass through Egyptian airspace. During the same period the Egyptian authorities expedited passage through the Suez Canal, and furnished security for 861 warships. Nor were US vessels carrying nuclear weapons, whether ships or submarines, obliged to notify the Egyptian authorities 30 days before their intended passage. The Egyptian army has also hosted thousands of US soldiers during the Bright Star military manoeuvres. Whatever sentence the court issues in the case of the NGO employees will have a great impact on Egyptian-US relations. If the judgement is against the NGOs as independent institutions operating in Egypt the crisis could be settled by legalising the status of these institutions and ensuring they operate in accordance with Egyptian regulations. If the court finds against the heads of the American NGOs, the US reaction will be strong. It will not, however, be allowed to completely derail relations. Both states need each other too much for that as they face a host of regional and international challenges. * The writer is a researcher at Al-Ahram Centre for Political and Strategic Studies.
