Commentary
The bills differ in minor but meaningful ways, but their overwhelming convergence is key.
Alasdair Phillips-Robins, Scott Singer
{
"authors": [
"Michele Dunne"
],
"type": "legacyinthemedia",
"centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace"
],
"collections": [],
"englishNewsletterAll": "menaTransitions",
"nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
"primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"programAffiliation": "MEP",
"programs": [
"Middle East"
],
"projects": [],
"regions": [
"North America",
"United States",
"North Africa",
"Egypt"
],
"topics": [
"Political Reform",
"Democracy",
"Foreign Policy"
]
}
Source: Getty
In The Media
A Thaw in U.S.-Egypt Relations
The United States must balance its advocacy for human rights and democracy promotion in Egypt and the broader Arab world with other strategic interests; it would be wrongheaded to completely cut off ties with authoritarian regimes.
Published on Aug 18, 2009
Source: Al Jazeera's Riz Khan
Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak’s visit to Washington suggests a renewed cooperation between the two allies after years of strained relations during the Bush administration. This has stoked fear among human rights activists that the Obama administration will turn a blind eye to Egypt’s repressive domestic political situation. Michele Dunne argues, “The U.S. needs to take a stand in favor of democracy and human rights in Egypt. If the U.S. fails to do so it will hurt its own image and present itself as acting in an unprincipled and self-interested way.” Nonetheless, Dunne continues, “the U.S. is a superpower with a multiplicity of interests. The danger is not that human rights and democratization will overtake the agenda, but that they will fall off it.”
Ultimately, the U.S. must balance its advocacy for human rights and democracy promotion with other strategic interests; it would be wrongheaded to completely cut off ties with authoritarian regimes.
While the Arab-Israeli peace process was on the agenda for President Obama and Mubarak, “Mubarak didn’t offer anything new that other Arab leaders had not already said.” In this regard, noted Dunne, “the Obama administration was probably disappointed with the visit.”
Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.
More Work from Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
- With the RAISE Act, New York Aligns With California on Frontier AI Laws
- Europolis, Where Europe EndsCommentary
A prophetic Romanian novel about a town at the mouth of the Danube carries a warning: Europe decays when it stops looking outwards. In a world of increasing insularity, the EU should heed its warning.
Thomas de Waal
- Japan’s “Militarist Turn” and What It Means for RussiaCommentary
For a real example of political forces engaged in the militarization of society, the Russian leadership might consider looking closer to home.
James D.J. Brown
- The Trump-Modi Trade Deal Won’t Magically Restore U.S.-India TrustCommentary
Washington and New Delhi should be proud of their putative deal. But international politics isn’t the domain of unicorns and leprechauns, and collateral damage can’t simply be wished away.
Evan A. Feigenbaum
- From Loss and Damage to Climate Mobility ActionCommentary
Senior climate, finance, and mobility experts discuss how the Fund for Responding to Loss and Damage could unlock financing for climate mobility.
Alejandro Martin Rodriguez
