CAIRO - For millions of Egyptians who took to the streets last week to demand Morsi's removal, it is no longer relevant that some Western commentators label the army's overthrow of the democratically elected president a coup d'etat. Apart from the Brotherhood followers and their Islamist allies, Egyptians firmly believed that keeping Morsi in office, with his autocratic and distruous way of governing, would totally ruin Egypt, the Arab world's most populous country. Hence, the large numbers of Egyptians who joined the protests called by the grassroots opposition Tamarod movement to push Morsi to resign. The standard definition of a coup is a sudden toppling of the government by a certain group or the army. The Egyptian case defies this definition. The Egyptian army has kept off politics since the military handed over power on June last year to the democratically elected president, who happened to be Morsi of the Muslim Brotherhood. Morsi squandered one opportunity after the other to end the political polarisation, which had gripped Egypt during the presidential run-off that pitted him against the Mubarak-era Prime Minister Ahmed Shafiq. Morsi projected an image of a despot when in November he issued a declaration that gave him sweeping new powers beyond judicial oversight. His year-long rule was also plagued by successive economic and social problems that affected the majority of Egyptians living on a limited income. Having pardoned hundreds of convicted terrorists, Morsi was widely blamed for turning Sinai into a safe haven for jihadists who targeted security and army personnel. Sectarian tensions, meanwhile, escalated, culminating in the lynching of four Shiites in an Egyptian village few weeks before his ouster. Morsi even failed to live up to expectations of Egyptians who voted for him, giving him a narrow margin win in last year's polls. He and his group laboured under the illusion that winning elections amounted to an unquestionable mandate to do whatever they wanted. It was a bad example of the ballot box-based democracy. The jubilation displayed by millions of Egyptians, upon learning that the army removed Morsi from power and kept him in custody, obviously proves that the classical definition of the coup does not apply to the Egyptian case. The army had repeatedly called for Morsi to "respond to the people's demands", warning that the national security was in jeopardy due to his prolonged dispute with the secular opposition. The army eventually took the side of most Egyptians and at the same time did not seize power. The military has no political role in Egypt's new transitional period. The process is to be run by civilians with the army to oversee the implementation of a relevant roadmap that includes amending a controversial constitution and holding early presidential election. Having deposed two presidents in nearly three years, Egyptians have time and again made history by staging a unique revolt, backed by the army. Confused observers can call it an Egyptian-style uprising.
