Foreign Aid*: Will that asterisk be utilized in Egypt?

Foreign aid can manifest itself in various ways from food, to money, to money with an asterisk regarding how it should be used. In the recent example of Egypt, CBS is reporting just how likely the US may withdraw aid if the military aggressively commits violent acts. With that said, a lot of positives can be attributed to US foreign aid in Egypt as the U.S. Department of State has chronicled how “U.S. military cooperation has helped Egypt modernize its armed forces and strengthen regional security and stability”. Should stability ultimately fail, then military cooperation becomes questionable in a period of domestic issues in the United States taking a precedent over U.S. foreign affairs as highlighted in President Obama’s State of the Union address where he outlined his vision to strengthen the United States. Ultimately, foreign aid may start from good intentions, but should commitments have an asterisk? The issue becomes increasingly complex if aid is being developed to a country experiencing internal strife as questions of ‘whose side are you on?’ emerge from such decisions. Regardless, lending a helping hand, whether you are an ordinary citizen or leader of a country, should never be discouraged. Intentions are hard to judge in the present and after-the-event analysis often arrive too late yet, as in the example of Egypt, civil unrest takes the stage in a country receiving aid suggesting that patience may just be the most rewarding option. Just fourteen minutes ago according to the Google news timer, the Wall Street Journal published an article entitled “U.S. Threatens to Cut Off Aid to Egypt” featuring one quote which exemplifies the U.S. mindset at the time. In a press conference when White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs was “asked if President Barack Obama stood by the 81-year-old Egyptian strongman, Mr. Gibbs said: "This is not about picking a person, or the people of a country”. This statement reveals the fact that it is still too soon to foresee an outcome for Egypt and that until such fog clears, further action/involvement from the U.S. will likely be delayed if not cautiously deployed. Yet, as President Mubarak promises to name a new government by tomorrow questions remain as to whether he should be the one to do so or whether ‘free’ elections are the only thirst-quencher for change.