Follow us on social

google cta
19064739186_c2ae8ca00d_o-scaled

Congress bucks Biden, blocks $75 million in military aid to Egypt

A leading Democratic senator rejected the notion that Cairo has made efforts to improve its human rights record in the past year.

Middle East
google cta
google cta

Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) blocked $75 million of security funding for Egypt after determining that the country’s leaders have not rolled back their attack on political dissidents, failing to meet a condition that Congress put on aid to Cairo in a law passed last year, according to Reuters.

“We can't give short shrift to the law because of other policy considerations,” Leahy, who chairs the Senate Appropriations Committee, told Reuters in a statement. “We all have a responsibility to uphold the law and to defend the due process rights of the accused, whether here or in Egypt.”

The move highlights the extent to which Congress has soured on Egypt in recent years. Once considered a steadfast security partner, many on Capitol Hill now view Cairo as a serious liability for U.S. policy, especially under the authoritarian rule of President Abdel Fattah El-Sisi.

In total, last year’s law put conditions on $300 million worth of military aid to Egypt. The Biden administration recently pledged to block $130 million of that support, but the State Department said it would release $75 million following progress on Egypt’s treatment of political prisoners. Leahy rejected that finding, arguing that “the situation facing political prisoners in Egypt is deplorable.” The status of the remaining $95 million remains unclear.

Seth Binder, the director of advocacy at the Project on Middle East Democracy, applauded Leahy’s decision on Twitter.

“Ultimately, this sends a strong message to Sisi’s regime that it must address Congress’s concerns over human rights,” Binder wrote, adding that the administration’s determination that Sisi had made “clear and consistent progress” was “not credible.”

Notably, the move will only hold up a fraction of the $1.3 billion in security aid that Washington sends Cairo each year, opening up questions about how much of an impact it will really have on human rights in Egypt. 

Still, it does appear to be part of a broader increase in skepticism toward Middle East autocrats in Washington.

Just a couple of weeks ago, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates also stumbled into Congress’ crosshairs when the Saudi-dominated oil cartel OPEC+ voted to cut production despite concerns from the U.S. Following that decision, members of Congress called for a fundamental re-evaluation of Washington’s relationship with the Gulf countries, with some demanding a full-scale withdrawal of U.S. troops from their territory. Sen. Bob Menendez (D-N.J.), who chairs the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said he would hold up any arms sales to Saudi Arabia “beyond what is absolutely necessary to defend U.S. personnel and interests.”

And President Joe Biden himself has signaled that he is on-board with a shift in U.S. policy toward Riyadh and Abu Dhabi. As a White House spokesperson recently noted, Biden is “willing to work with Congress to think through what that relationship ought to look like going forward.”


Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.). (CSIS/ CC BY-NC-SA 2.0)
google cta
Middle East
Iran nuclear
Top image credit: An Iranian cleric and a young girl stand next to scale models of Iran-made ballistic missiles and centrifuges after participating in an anti-U.S. and anti-Israeli rally marking the anniversary of the U.S. embassy occupation in downtown Tehran, Iran, on November 4, 2025.(Photo by Morteza Nikoubazl/NurPhoto via REUTERS CONNECT)

Want Iran to get the bomb? Try regime change

Middle East

Washington is once again flirting with a familiar temptation: the belief that enough pressure, and if necessary, military force, can bend Iran to its will. The Trump administration appears ready to move beyond containment toward forcing collapse. Before treating Iran as the next candidate for forced transformation, policymakers should ask a question they have consistently failed to answer in the Middle East: “what follows regime change?”

The record is sobering. In the past two decades, regime change in the region has yielded state fragmentation, authoritarian restoration, or prolonged conflict. Iraq remains fractured despite two decades of U.S. investment. Egypt’s democratic opening collapsed within a year. Libya, Syria, and Yemen spiraled into civil wars whose spillover persists. In each case, removing a regime proved far easier than constructing a viable successor. Iran would not be the exception. It would be the rule — at a scale that dwarfs anything the region has experienced.

keep readingShow less
Much ado about a Chinese 'mega-embassy' in London
Top image credit: London, UK - 3rd May 2025: Protestors gather outside the Royal Mint to demonstrate against plans to relocate China's embassy to the site. (Monkey Butler Images/Shutterstock)

Much ado about a Chinese 'mega-embassy' in London

Europe

A group of Russian nuns were recently sighted selling holy trinkets in Swedish churches. Soon, Swedish newspapers were awash with headlines about pro-Putin spies engaged in “funding the Putin war machine.” Russian Orthodox priests had also allegedly infiltrated Swedish churches located suspiciously close to military bases and airports.

Michael Ojermo, the rector of Täby, a suburb of Stockholm, tried to quell the alarm. There is no evidence of ecclesiastical espionage, he said, and “a few trinkets cannot fund a war.”

keep readingShow less
world powers
Top photo credit: (Ben_Je/Shutterstock)

US-China symposium: Spheres of influence for me, not for thee?

Asia-Pacific

In the new National Security Strategy and National Defense Strategy, the Trump team charges that the Monroe Doctrine has been "ignored" by previous administrations and that the primary goal now is to reassert control over its economic and security interests in the Western Hemisphere.

"We will guarantee U.S. military and commercial access to key terrain, especially the Panama Canal, Gulf of America, and Greenland," states the NDS. The U.S. will work with neighbors to protect "our shared interests," but "where they do not, we will stand ready to take focused, decisive action that concretely advances U.S. interests."

keep readingShow less
google cta
Want more of our stories on Google?
Click here to make us a Preferred Source.

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.