The recent toppling of the Mursi government in Egypt pushes one down the memory lane and many questions crop up as to why such events ever take place. The ouster of the Brotherhood-led government in Egypt reminds us of the events that saw Algeria’s Islamic Salvation Front being stripped of the huge mandate in the '90s and of what had happened after Hamas won big in the parliamentary elections in 2007.

Would it be correct to assume that the political environment of these countries is not conducive to a democratic disposition? Or is it that a democratic culture is antithetical to the social fabric of these countries? After taking good amount of time for reflection, one realizes that both the assumptions would be incorrect without deeply studying all the factors that triggered these ousters.

Continuation of democracy and transfer or rotation of power becomes an uphill task in countries where institutions struggle for supremacy over one another. In such a situation, a democratic set-up has to walk a tightrope so as to achieve its goals without disturbing the intricate network of loyalties. Consensus, in such a situation, is the key for survival. At least till the time democracy takes its roots in the society.

Monopolizing policymaking, at the initial stages, causes frictions and conflicts that at the end of the day wreak havoc on the country. We can see that happening in Egypt.

If a political party, soon after gaining power, embarks on a mission of imposing its values that are seen as challenging the existing social fabric then these moves will provide the traditional institutions like the military in Egypt and Algeria reasons to be apprehensive of the future of the state. It will also set alarm bells ringing for other sects and ethnicities especially amidst a poor law and order situation.

It is now a part of history that since 1952, Egypt has seen a great many ups and downs. Egypt remained a democracy wherein the real power rested with the army, which saw itself as the defender of the country.

During that period, the Egyptian society, by and large, enjoyed a degree of freedom. Hosni Mubarak had also allowed a controlled presence of the Brotherhood in the legislative council. Not to forget the fact that hard-liners remained incarcerated. Then as to why Mubarak’s grip on power loosened is a debate for other time and my focus is on the factors for Brotherhood’s failure.

The Muslim Brotherhood rode a wave of anti-Mubarak sentiment to win the elections in 2012.

It seems as if the ghosts of the past continued to haunt the Brotherhood and in a frenzy of imposing its ideology, it lost the trust of socio-political forces in general and the military in particular. It is, however, commendable that they dealt with the West and Israel pragmatically to the extent that Israel had to acknowledge that intelligence coordination under Mursi was better as compared to Mubarak’s regime.

The Brotherhood’s policies raised fears among the opposition groups and various moves suggested it wished to undermine the role of the Egyptian army in the country’s politics. Brotherhood’s policies not only became questionable on the domestic front, it had started emerging as a threat to the regional peace as well. Various reports suggested that the Mursi-led government had been involved in shady deals with various countries that could have proven detrimental to the peace and stability of the region.

Moreover, they had started meddling in the internal affairs of other states especially when they called on the Ikhwan (Brotherhood) in other countries – like Kuwait, Jordan, Gaza, United Arab Emirates and Yemen — to stir disorder. Stern actions were taken against such elements in many of these countries.

In addition to that, civil forces in Tunisia complained that Ennahda was stifling civil liberties especially after the assassination of leading opposition figures.

All this boils down to one thing that the Brotherhood was not yet ready to head a democratic disposition. So these internal and external factors left the Egyptian army with no choice but to intervene and topple a legitimate government as it had lost the trust of the masses.

They failed to make the state their top priority. Today’s highly polarized Egypt is the result of the Brotherhood’s ill-conceived policies.

Above all, they failed to provide solutions to the economic woes of the country that caused flight of billions of dollars from the country in search of a secure environment. Against this backdrop, the Egyptian army had no choice but to intervene.