Us Foreign Policy towards Egypt
Introduction
The United States of America and Egypt enjoy a good relationship politically, with no cases of tense situation existing between the two states. However, the political havoc hitting Egypt call for the United States to react. The foreign policy of the country may suggest that they use force and army reactions to the revolution. However, this might spoil the relationship between the two countries. Any move that will interfere with the relationship between the two countries should nit feature in the plans of the United States of America. The prosecution of people involved in the interference with the internal matters of Egypt proves that the United States stands the readiness to follow a more assertive approach to the relations. However, Egypt neighbours Israel, which bears strategic importance to the United States of America. More so, the Arab countries consider the Egyptian war as a strategic arm to them hence any American interference risks reaction from the Arab countries. This paper analyzes whether the United States of America should adopt a proactive or reactive approach to the Egyptian revolution.
The approach towards Egypt by US
The United States of America must take a stand that will not put the democracy and the bureaucracy of the country at stake. The opinion by the editors on the Bloomberg website (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-01-31/egypt-is-burning-and-u-s-should-do-little-very-quietly-view.html) stands out as the best policy for the United States of America. Firstly, the country must resist attempts by people to make its part in the revolution known to all. Making the political stand of the United States known is a risk, as it would attract some opposition from sections of people in Egypt due to their belief that the country leans on one side in the revolution. The main goal of the United States of America should reign in the stability if the country. An agreement requires that elections in the country come in the month of January. The United States must silently ensure stability to facilitate the occurrence f the elections in the country. Through electing their preferred leader, the Egyptian people will not blame the United States of America for the bloodshed in the country hence the relationship with the country will remain stronger.
Instead of declaring the position in the conflict, the United States of America should rather shape the minds of the people to the causes of the uprising in the country. The United States of America should not show involvement in the revolution but rather present the solution to future problems. By the people understanding what really ails the country, they will show readiness to rebuild the country, which is a step ahead for the United States of America. The uprising expressed the heartfelt anger of an Egyptian population, which grounded by authoritarian rule, corruption, and economic deprivation, without hope that the regime could reform itself (Ewan 46). The United States of America should make the people understand such facts as this would make them monitor the revolution easily to rebuild the country.
Instead of a proactive role in the revolution, the united states of America should help Egypt to move away from the military intrigues that the country experiences. Military rule may reign in the country for some time if the international community does not help settle the scores. None of the people in the country has the ability and willingness to take the leadership in the country but all the people defend the country with zeal as if they know that is all correct. When the country goes on a coup as if the case at now, the military threatens the whole population hence no person from the people takes the leadership apart from the military. The United States of America must take a lead role in sensitizing the people in Egypt to take the leadership and move the country forward instead of taking a backseat in the leadership. Avoiding the revolution front and training the people on leadership may prove to be the best policy for the United States of America.
The United States of America should stop the military reaction to the Egyptian revolution because it proves the unconventional structure of the United States military (Miller 3). The cries of the people call on the United States of America to come out and use the military prowess of the country in the Egyptian crisis. The United States of America has an army. An article on the heritage website, (http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2012/02/us-egypt-relations-ngo-standoff-and-foreign-aid), suggests that the United States of America should use force in the revolution. The application of military solutions to the uprisings in the Muslim countries proves to be faulty in most of the attempts. In the Iranian revolution, the use of the military by the American forces challenged the relations between the Asian countries and the United States of America (Glenn 7). Despite the fact that the calls for the US involvement in the revolution come from the people, the government must avoid any direct confrontation in the revolution, as it would tamper with the international relations of the US.
The United States of America must focus attention to the real nature of the revolution before advising on the course that the military take in the revolution. Most of the people will advice that the United States of America heeds the calls of the people to get tough with the people Helle (1) states that the actions of the transitional government are so outrageous that they have provoked a rare moment of bipartisan support in the Washington DC for a recalibration of U.S. policy regarding Egypt. This suggests that the American government should take to the revolution and fight the Egyptians as a way to end the revolution. The government should however underscore such calls from the people and take a backseat in the revolution.
Prosecution of any people who take place in the revolution should not guide the policies of the American country. The country needs to hold the relationship between the government and the African countries at the closest range possible. The United States of America should not take any sides in conditioning the state of political matters in the Egyptian country. Such advances by the United States of America will show a fake sight to the African that the American military revels in the instability in the continent. As far as many people call on the US government to pull the arms together and attack the country to free the population of thee revolution, the government should evaluate the economic importance of the African continent to US and take an old role.
Conclusion
Calls from different people require that the united states of America decide and announce the policy they will take in approaching the revolution and political rampage in Egypt. Egypt’s neighbourhood to Israel compels United States to intervene although the intervention must not spar reactions from the Arab countries. Most of the people call on the American government to tackle the problem through military force as the system has worked in other countries. However, the use of military force does not present the best solution. The United States must take a quiet role in the revolution rather than a vocal one. The best role is to help the country have a democratic election and sensitize the people to take leadership in the country. The United States should then foster the stability of the country, which will give a lasting solution to the problem as well as preserve America’s integrity.
Works cited
Ewan, Stein (2012) Revolution or Coup? Egypt's Fraught Transition, Survival: Global Politics and Strategy, 54:4, 45-66, DOI: 10.1080/00396338.2012.709388
Glenn, Greenwald (March 14, 2010). Salon Radio: Remi Brul In Transcript: The Most meaningless and manipulated political world. Pp. 1-9. Web. http://www.s al on.com/2010/03/14/brulin/
Helle, Dale (February 9, 2012). U.S. Urgently Needs to Reset Its Bilateral Relationship with Egypt. Web. http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2012/02/us-egypt-relations-ngo-standoff-and-foreign-aid
Miller, David (2013). The politically incorrect guide to US interests in the Middle East. pp. 1-23. Print
