Re Egypt: Is it a coup, or isn’t it?
This would simply be a case of an unsolicited language police technicality, except for one thing: the news media and politicians won’t give it a rest.
Politically, it matters because an official finding that it’s a coup would trigger a cut-off of military aid to Egypt. To the rest of us, it matters because all the time wasted on the pointless distraction of bickering would be better spent on substantive issues.
A few of the real answers the American people need:
- What was Morsi doing that critics charge amounted to his own overthrow of democracy?
- How much does the Egyptian military actually do without the Pentagon’s knowledge and approval?
- What proportion of their top officer corps grew up attending US and British schools?
- What other Egyptian institutions, if any, are as westernized as the military?
So, was it, then, a coup?
Those who answer yes argue that since the military overthrew the elected government, that makes it a coup.
Those who answer no argue that, even though the military ousted the government, they then installed an interim civilian government rather than seizing power for themselves, therefore it’s not a coup.
It turns out, there’s a perfectly good label that applies to that sort of situation: putsch – a sudden and decisive change of government illegally or by force.
A coup may or may not be a putsch, and a putsch may or may not be a coup.
But as of today, with the military’s declaration of a de facto state of martial law, it’s a distinction without a difference.
Apparently, there really is a Bumphuc, Egypt.