Washington is currently engaged in a critical examination of U.S. military aid and its alignment with national interests. Figures like Senator Lindsey Graham and Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez have sparked the debate on U.S. assistance to Israel, prompting a broader reflection on military support provided to nations like Egypt. This raises important questions about the effectiveness and morality of U.S. foreign aid policies.
Scrutinizing U.S. Military Aid to Egypt
Over nearly four decades, Egypt has received $1.3 billion annually in U.S. military assistance, a practice that warrants intense scrutiny. Despite its history of human rights violations, including the imprisonment of American citizens and reported acts of bribery, U.S. financial support has continued unabated. Following the military coup of 2013 led by Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, military aid to Egypt has shown little return on investment and fails to advance U.S. interests or adhere to legal standards set out by U.S. laws.
Critics argue that the justification for this aid—predicated on maintaining peace with Israel and preventing Egyptian alignment with U.S. adversaries—does not necessitate military funding. Cairo maintains its peace with Jerusalem based on national self-interest rather than U.S. monetary incentives. Furthermore, countries like Russia and China are not vying to replace U.S. financial support for Egypt. In fact, U.S. vessels already pay transit fees for the Suez Canal, negating the need for military aid to ensure access.
Military Aid and Human Rights Violations
The efficacy of U.S. aid to Egypt comes into question against a backdrop of persistent human rights abuses committed by the Egyptian government. In light of systematic repression, arbitrary detentions, and a culture of impunity, the U.S. has a responsibility to reevaluate its financial relationship with Egypt. American citizens have suffered as a result of these policies, with U.S. nationals experiencing wrongful detentions and assaults.
Even in security-related assistance, such as border control or Sinai operations, the results have been far from satisfactory. Allegations of extrajudicial killings and human rights violations have surfaced, raising concerns about whether U.S. aid genuinely supports shared security goals. Moreover, U.S.-supplied military equipment has been implicated in tragic civilian tragedies, questioning the premise on which this aid is predicated.
Reassessing Military Assistance
Expending nearly $60 billion in military aid to Egypt has resulted in a military force capable of independent operations, yet it has not led to a stable and effective governance arrangement. The ongoing financial dependency fosters a cycle of unsustainable policies and exacerbates corruption within Egypt’s military-dominated economy. Ending military aid could prompt a critical reassessment of Egypt’s security priorities, encouraging reforms that align with both U.S. interests and international human rights standards.
A structured reduction of military aid over the next two years could realign U.S. policy with legal constraints while permitting targeted areas of cooperation. By maintaining engagement through strategic channels devoid of massive military transfers, the U.S. could better leverage its economic and diplomatic influence.
In this age of reevaluating long-standing foreign commitments, it is essential for U.S. policymakers to apply consistent scrutiny not only to aid directed to Israel but also to longstanding military assistance to Egypt. Ending this annual $1.3 billion in military aid represents not a radical break but a necessary adaptation in U.S. foreign policy—one that conforms to both national values and interests.