ABSTRACT
This chapter compares the aid relationships of Egypt and Fiji. Egypt represents a primary recipient with leverage against donors. Fiji represents a secondary recipient with less leverage against donors. The chapter explains the context-specific salience both recipients provide to the respective donors. The US pressured Egypt to hold multiparty elections in the 1990s. It backed down when faced with the prospect of the Muslim Brotherhood, that is hostile to US, coming to power. By contrast, the US successfully pressured Egypt to curb arms smuggling on the Gaza-Egypt border when Israel’s security was at stake. US donor pressure was successful only when its crucial interests, not democracy promotion, were at stake. Fiji’s military regime under Bainimarama came under pressure from mainly Australia and New Zealand. Fiji resorted to a “Look North” to attract Chinese aid and created its own regional organization, the Pacific Islands Development Forum. China valued good relations with Australia and New Zealand, over ties with Fiji. Under pressure, the Bainimarama regime held elections in 2014. The same donor pressure using democracy aid that fails when applied to primary recipients might work on secondary recipients.
