Fact Check: "Muhammed Morsi shouldn't have been overthrown and if the people didn't like him they could've just voted him out in the next election"
What We Know
Muhammed Morsi was Egypt's first democratically elected president, taking office in June 2012 following the 2011 revolution that ousted long-time leader Hosni Mubarak. His presidency was marked by significant political turmoil and widespread protests against his administration, culminating in a military coup on July 3, 2013, led by General Abdel Fattah el-Sisi. The military justified this coup by citing Morsi's failure to address the country's economic issues and political divisions, stating that he had not fulfilled the hopes of the Egyptian people (BBC, New York Times).
Critics of Morsi argue that his government exhibited authoritarian tendencies, particularly after a controversial constitutional declaration in November 2012 that granted him sweeping powers and was met with significant backlash (Brookings, Al Jazeera). Despite this, some analyses suggest that Morsi's rule was not entirely autocratic; rather, it was characterized as a transitional phase between democracy and autocracy, with a Polity IV score indicating a mixed governance style (Brookings).
Analysis
The claim that Morsi should not have been overthrown and that he could have been voted out in the next election is nuanced. On one hand, Morsi was indeed democratically elected, and his removal by the military interrupted a democratic transition. Many argue that the military coup undermined the democratic process and set a precedent for military intervention in politics (Wikipedia, The Guardian).
However, the context of Morsi's presidency is critical. His administration faced significant challenges, including economic instability and political polarization, which led to mass protests. The military's intervention was framed as a response to the public's discontent, suggesting that many Egyptians felt they had no viable option but to support the coup (New York Times, BBC). While some analysts argue that Morsi's governance was flawed and failed to build a broad coalition, others contend that he was not given a fair chance to implement his policies and that the coup was a reaction to the immediate pressures of governance rather than a legitimate democratic process (Brookings, Washington Institute).
The argument that Morsi could have been voted out in the next election overlooks the fact that the political environment was highly volatile, and the military's actions effectively eliminated the possibility of a democratic resolution to the crisis (Wikipedia, Al Jazeera).
Conclusion
The verdict on the claim that "Muhammed Morsi shouldn't have been overthrown and if the people didn't like him they could've just voted him out in the next election" is Partially True. While Morsi was indeed a democratically elected leader and his removal by the military disrupted the democratic process, the context of his presidency—marked by significant public dissatisfaction and political turmoil—complicates the assertion. The military coup was framed as a necessary intervention by many Egyptians, reflecting a complex interplay between democratic ideals and the realities of governance in a transitional society.
Sources
- Was Mohammed Morsi Really an Autocrat?
- 2013 Egyptian coup d'état
- Egypt's Mohammed Morsi: A turbulent presidency cut short
- June 2013 Egyptian protests
- Army Ousts Egypt's President; Morsi Is Taken Into Military Custody
- Revisiting Egypt's 2013 military takeover
- Mohamed Morsi ousted in Egypt's second revolution in two years
- Egypt Two Years After Morsi
