Both The Washington Post and The New York Times have printed scathing editorials that demand the U.S. suspend $US1.3 billion in aid to Egypt after a military crackdown led to the deaths of
more than550 people, including
two foreign journalists, on Wednesday.
- “[T]he Obama administration is complicit in the new and horrifyingly bloody crackdown launched Wednesday by the de facto regime against tens of thousands of protesters who had camped out in two Cairo squares.”
- “This refusal to take a firm stand against massive violations of human rights is as self-defeating for the United States as it is unconscionable.”
- “President Obama must make clear his unequivocal opposition to the Egyptian military’s conduct. He can do so by immediately suspending military aid and cancelling joint military exercises scheduled for September.”
- “And if suspending a $US1.3 billion subsidy does not do the trick, it will at least tell rank-and-file Egyptians that the United States is no longer underwriting repression.”
And as Marc Lynch of Foreign Policy notes, creating distance from Egypt’s military regime “won’t matter very much in the short term” but still matters immensely.
“Taking a (much belated) stand is the only way for the United States to regain any credibility — with Cairo, with the region, and with its own tattered democratic rhetoric,” Lynch writes.
This tweet from Politico deputy editor Blake Hounshell pretty much sums it up:
Nobel Prize-Winning President Stands By Aid to Military Regime As It Slaughters Political Opponents
— Blake Hounshell (@blakehounshell) August 15, 2013
The post-coup massacre became too much for at least one Egyptian working for the military-led government:
The question now becomes when enough is enough for President Obama.
NOW WATCH: Briefing videos
Business Insider Emails & Alerts
Site highlights each day to your inbox.