Army cracks the Morsi code. What nextIJ
The ouster by the military of Mr Mohamed Morsi's Government in Egypt is news both good and bad. The development is bad for democracy because Mr Morsi's regime was a democratically elected one — a first for the country — and its removal (for whatever reasons) by forces other than the ballot box or an exit on its own volition, will encourage factions to continue deposing in an extra-constitutional manner Governments that are voted to power through free and fair polls. Obviously, such extreme actions will not allow democracy to strike roots in Egypt. On the other hand, Mr Morsi's removal is good because he had betrayed the mandate of the people by brazenly promoting an Islamist agenda and sidelining secular voices. Although he had come to power through a democratic process and on the promise of pursuing inclusive politics, he failed to appreciate the spirit of democracy and keep his promise. The massive street protests which broke out since past Sunday against Mr Morsi's regime indicated the extent of discontent that had seeped into society, and it had got so deep that only his removal could have addressed the issue. Realising that the people had decisively turned against Mr Morsi's Government and that any delay in taking hard decisions could escalate into large-scale violence on the streets, the Egyptian Army swiftly moved to remove it from power. It is ironical that the ‘military coup’, as the Muslim Brotherhood called it even as Army tanks had begun taking positions in the hours before Mr Morsi was shown the door, should have been led by an Army chief the former President had handpicked after sacking his predecessor's top military and defence officials.
But the Army's action is not entirely surprising, since it has always been careful to be on the right side of history. It stood by Mr Hosni Mubarak when the latter ruled Egypt with an iron fist from end-1981 to early-2011. When the Arab Spring caught up with the dictatorial ruler, the Army was quick to distance itself and allow Mr Mubarak to be displaced. It backed the formation of the democratically elected Government of Mr Morsi's Freedom and Justice Party — the political arm of the Muslim Brotherhood — although it had strong reservations. In the one year of the regime's existence, the Army kept a distance and did not at least overtly interfere in its functioning. Now it has struck once again, knowing well that it had the support of the people in its limited mandate of removing Mr Morsi. Still, the Army mustn't forget that the people, for all their gratitude towards it, do not want to be ruled by the men in uniform. If the Army does not quickly facilitate the process of free and fair elections and the installation of a democratic regime, it will be considered as wicked as the deposed rulers.
What does the Wednesday development mean for Mr MorsiIJ Although no longer President, the Brotherhood leader remains a powerful figure who will bide his time, presuming of course that the Army and the Government allow him the space which he deserves in a democratic system. He is backed by a well-established organisation and still commands considerable support among the people. Mr Morsi must reflect on the blunders he committed. The precious time he consumed in pandering to Islamist demands could have been better used in reviving his country's tottering economy and enhancing employment avenues. He has a choice: He can sagely revisit those mistakes and vow not to repeat them or he can in desperate rage turn into a full-blown fanatic.