U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry at the U.S. Embassy in London, Friday, Aug. 2, 2013. (AP Photo/Jason Reed. Pool)
U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry tripped up Washington’s awkward Egyptian balancing act on Thursday after expressing support for last month’s military coup against Mohammed Morsi. Now Kerry is feebly backpedaling on his statement and further muddling the U.S.’s position on the issue.
The Secretary of State’s ill-advised remarks on Egypt came during a trip to Pakistan — where, it should be noted, he ran afoul of another major Obama administration policy - and essentially parroted the Egyptian military’s line on their overthrow of a democratically-elected leader: “In effect, they were restoring democracy. The military was asked to intervene by millions and millions of people, all of whom were afraid of a descent into chaos, into violence.”
Washington had been studiously avoiding publicly taking sides on the political crisis in Egypt following the coup. If Kerry’s remarks were not inconvenient enough for the administration, the outcry following his comments had to feel particularly uncomfortable. Brotherhood spokesman Gehad el-Haddad shot back, “Does Secretary Kerry accept Defense Secretary [Chuck] Hagel to step in and remove Obama if large protests take place in America?” The Brotherhood wasn’t alone in their criticisms: Deputy Turkish Prime Minister Bekir Bozdağ added, “Did the military restore democracy in the U.S. and the E.U. as well? Coups do not restore democracy; they only kill, destroy it. Just like the case in Egypt.” This lecture on democracy from the Muslim Brotherhood and Islamist governments adds insult to the injury of Kerry’s initial bungle.
Yet as bad as all of this looks, Kerry’s waffling does have one unintended benefit: the ambiguity around which party the U.S. is actually backing in Egypt will help to soften the backlash from within the country against their true ally (in case Kerry’s candor did not make it completely obvious, the $1-billion-plus in aid should confirm that it is indeed the Egyptian military). The toxicity of U.S. support within Egypt is hard to overstate. The Obama administration seems aware that they do themselves and their allies in the country a disservice by openly stating their support. Their gaffe-prone Secretary of State muddling the picture slightly could prove to be an unexpected boon. That, however, cannot be the underpinning of a strategy (it’s not even a tactic, really) — and the fact that some good may accrue from it shows just how at sea the White House is when it comes to Egypt policy, in both substance and articulation. How does the old saw go? Better to remain silent and be thought a fool . . .
