The American reaction to the Egyptian coup (yes, it was a coup, no matter how popular) is schizophrenic.

The Obama administration, with significant support in Congress, accepts the new situation and is trying to make the best of it, pushing behind the scenes for the Egyptian army to re-establish civilian authority and move quickly to revise the Constitution and hold new elections, which have been promised within six months.

Democracy advocates want an immediate suspension of all aid, claiming it is subject to the legal requirement to cut off assistance in the event of a coup. That is not entirely correct: The economic portion, by far the smaller slice at $250 million, is not limited in the same way as the military portion. Most of the military portion for this fiscal year has already been transferred. There is therefore no urgent need to make a decision one way or the other on US assistance, which is tiny compared to what Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Kuwait are anteing up ($12 billion).

Cutting off US assistance would reduce US influence relative to those with such deep pockets. It would inaccurately give the impression that the US wants Mohammed Morsi returned to power. It would puzzle and offend the Egyptian military, which is in charge, as well as the Egyptians who took to the street in unprecedented numbers to demand Morsi leave. The New York Times claims,  "Delivering an order of American-made F-16 jets to Egypt anytime soon would be provocative." Not delivering products already paid for would not be provocative?