Illustration: Liu Rui/GT

One man cannot serve two masters, as the saying goes, but that's the unenviable position of the Obama administration after shrinking Egypt's military aid.

Those cuts have failed to mollify the Muslim Brotherhood, while also angering Egypt's current rulers. While sanctions of some sort were seen as necessary, they have seriously complicated the US relationship with Egypt's rulers without any accompanying benefits.

These cuts are not critical. They include a halt in the delivery of tank parts, Apache attack helicopters and Harpoon antiship missiles. Although the suspension of some joint exercises may sting the Egyptian military, they will not degrade its military capabilities.

The aid Egypt is currently receiving from other supporters can easily replace that given by the US. Domestically, the Egyptian government's defiance seems to have benefited its leadership in Egypt's court of public opinion.

For these reasons, the practical effects of US sanctions are likely to be strictly limited. Ironically, should Egypt carry through on its threats to find other suppliers, the main victims of US President Barack Obama's actions will be the US defense industry.

The regional importance of Egypt, especially to the security of Israel and the free passage of commerce through the Suez Canal, is another barrier to an imposition of seriously damaging sanctions.

The Obama administration is unlikely to take any action that might seriously destabilize Egypt, and all involved know it.

However, these sanctions have enraged the Egyptian government, at least publicly. It has accused the US of turning on Egypt. Given that anger was directed at former president Hosni Mubarak for his close association with the US, it is entirely possible that the US actions have helped to enhance the domestic credibility of the Egyptian military.

For the Muslim Brotherhood, these sanctions are little more than symbolic, and fall far short of what the Brotherhood has demanded of the US.

The fact that the sanctions are unlikely to have any effect on the Egyptian military's capabilities proves to the Brotherhood that the US actually has little or no interest in protecting them from a coup.

This is likely to further inflame the Brotherhood's fury with the US' lack of action and enhance anti-US feelings across the region.

Unfortunately, the Obama administration has only itself to blame for this outcome.

The administration has consistently failed to develop or promote a proactive strategy regarding events in Egypt, leaving observers with the sense of a government that is fumbling its way from crisis to crisis.

The confusion that surrounded the administration's reaction to the initial coup against Mohamed Morsi is abundant proof of this, as is the current round of sanctions, which have done nothing more than anger both sides in Egypt.

The Obama administration should have determined what faction it intended to support and done so openly and without equivocation. Ironically, by doing so, the US would have been in a stronger position to influence events in Egypt.

A stance from the US might have both helped reduce violence and increased the chance of a political resolution to the current conflict.

If there is one thing that recent events in the region have proven, whether it is Egypt's tumultuous shift in government or the aftermath of the Libyan civil war, it is the need for a well-planned and forward-looking US policy.

By failing to have created such regarding the current Egyptian conflict, the US has not only alienated both factions, but squandered the political and material influence it could have used to promote a non-violent solution to Egypt's current crisis, drastically limiting future options in this troubled region.

The author is a freelance writer based in Corona, California. charlesgray109@gmail.com