Let’s cut the crap: There is no doubt whatsoever that the recent overthrow of Mohammed Morsi’s government by the Egyptian military was a coup. None. Zero. Zip. Zilch. Nada. Bupkes.
A coup is “a sudden and decisive change of government illegally or by force.” That’s exactly what happened in Egypt. While there’s certainly room for differences of opinion as to whether or not the coup was justified, it was by definition a coup.
So, why are US President Barack Obama and US House Speaker John Boehner refusing to use the word?
If Obama and Boehner admit that the coup is a coup, they have to stop sending money and toys (like the four F-16 jets due for delivery Real Soon Now) to the junta.
They’re refusing to call the coup a coup because it’s illegal to provide financial or military aid to a coup-installed junta, and Egypt receives $1.5 billion annually in US aid.
Instead of obeying the law or repealing the law, Obama and Boehner want to avoid the plain meaning of the word “coup” so that they can get away with breaking the law.
Of course, if the US minded its own business and kept out of other countries’ internal and international affairs in the first place, the fake “argument” over whether or not the Egyptian coup is a coup would be of less importance than, and less titillating than, the argument over whether or not what Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinski did with each other was “sex” and what the meaning of “is” was.
This is not the first, last or most damaging instance of foreign policy insanity damaging the rule of law at home (as the persecutions of Bradley Manning and Edward Snowden demonstrate). But it’s too blatant and unjustifiable not to at least take note of.