Flaws in the concept of western democracy are exposed by the removal of democratically elected Egyptian government.

The concept of democracy within western society is very easy to comprehend. The party that wins majority of votes forms the government. What that counts as majority of votes depends on the law governing elections within the respective countries. In some countries, winning majority of votes involves getting just over 50 % of the total votes after elections. In others, it involves winning two thirds of the total votes in elections. If there is no party that wins the majority of votes following elections, two or more parties can team up to form a coalition government. This is the only form of democratic process being advocated for and practiced by the west. When it comes to non western countries, however, it seems that a different concept of democracy is being advocated for them by western and other world leaders.

A typical country to illustrate that a different concept of democracy is advocated for non western countries by their western counterparts is Egypt. Last week the president of Egypt, Morsi, whose Islamist party won 51% of the votes in the last general elections, was removed from office by the Egyptian military forces. Adly Mansour was installed by the military as the interim president of Egypt and mandated to conduct fresh presidential and parliamentary elections within one year.

The leaders of the world did not consider the removal of Morsi as a military coup and condemn it. Instead, they had indirectly supported the coup as demonstrated by their statements subsequent to the event. The president of United States, President Barack Obama, for example, stated that "The voices of all those who have protested peacefully must be heard - including those who welcomed today's developments and those who have supported President Morsi." The Secretary General of the United Nations, Ban Ki-Moon, argued that "An inclusive approach is essential to addressing the needs and concerns of all Egyptians.” The chief of European Union foreign policy, Catherine Ashton, said "I urge all sides to rapidly return to the democratic process, including the holding of free and fair presidential and parliamentary elections and the approval of a constitution, to be done in a fully inclusive manner, so as to permit the country to resume and complete its democratic transition,"

One notable thing in these statements is that all the leaders have called for inclusiveness in any new government to be formed in Egypt. By calling for this inclusive government, the western leaders appeared to have accepted the two arguments advanced by the Egyptian armed forces for ousting a democratically elected government. The first argument was that the government of Morsi was not representative of all Egyptians. What constitutes representative government in power?

Is it having members of opposition parties in cabinet that constitutes a representative government? I do not think that the answer to this question is yes. In every country, including United Kingdom and France, it is the government in power that decides who to include in the cabinet and who to exclude. The opposition parties can only cry foul but cannot do anything to stop such appointments except in countries such as United States where a candidate for position of Secretary can be blocked either by the House of Representatives or Senate. Arguing for otherwise is tantamount to asking the current Conservative government in United Kingdom to fill its cabinet positions with Labour Party candidates.

The second argument given by the Egyptian military forces for ousting President Morsi was that they were responding to calls of millions of Egyptians to save the country from chaos and anarchy. It is true that hundreds of thousands of Egyptians were protesting on daily basis against the government of Morsi prior to the military coup. Although such demonstrations can pose some security risks to a country, they cannot be used to justify the ousting of a democratically elected government from power. Arguing that it is justified to remove the democratically elected government of Morsi from power on the basis of street protests is equivalent to arguing that it is acceptable for the military in Greece or Spain to remove the democratically elected government in these countries because ordinary Greeks or Spaniards are protesting on the streets of Greece or Spain against their unpopular respective government.

In a nutshell, deposing a democratically elected government cannot be justified on any grounds. It can neither be justified on the basis of representative government nor on the basis of street protests. Accepting anything short of this will surely dilute the concept of western democracy and will make it difficult to sell to countries that are yet to purchase it.