The military coup d'etat that ousted Egyptian President Mohamed Morsy brought with it some diplomatic complications for other nations -- namely , that they want to avoid calling it a coup . A description of this week 's events -- the military placing the president under house arrest and naming a new leader of its choosing -- fit the definition of a coup . But labeling it as such could mean an end of U.S. military aid to Egypt , and subsequently a deterioration of relations with an important ally in the Middle East and North Africa . For now , Western nations have avoided using the word `` coup , '' preferring to watch developments unfold , and pointing to the fact that popular sentiment appears on the side of the military . Defining a `` coup d'etat '' The most accepted definition of a coup is a sudden overthrow of a government by a group of conspirators . The events in Egypt are troubling because Morsy 's government had been elected democratically . But an autocratic style had turned many of those who voted for him against his leadership and created deep divisions in Egypt . The massive protests that took place before the coup , and the celebrations afterward , lead some observers to define it as a revolution . But there are previous examples of situations where the public turned on a leader and were labeled a coup nonetheless . The environment that led to the ouster of former Honduran President Jose Manuel Zelaya in 2009 was similar to what was seen in Egypt . `` There was a significant amount of conflict within the country . There 's a degree -- a high degree -- of polarization . There was a worry about the -- some of the policies that the president undertook and so on , '' then Assistant Secretary of State Arturo Valenzuela said of Honduras . The State Department was slow to call it a coup , but eventually stated the action against Zelaya was unjustifiable . The United States temporarily stopped some aid programs to Honduras . Still , when it comes to conflicted countries , the United States has more interests tied to Egypt than Honduras , keeping the Obama administration from calling it what it is -- a coup . Repercussions of a coup . It matters what the government calls the Egyptian military 's seizure of power , because there is money at stake . Call it a coup and some of the $ 1.5 billion in annual aid that the United States gives Egypt is put in jeopardy . `` If this were to be seen as a coup , then it would limit our ability to have the kind of relationship we think we need with the Egyptian armed forces , '' Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Martin Dempsey told CNN . Egypt is a key player in U.S. foreign policy in the region , and anything to sour that relationship could have unintended consequences . So it was no coincidence that President Barack Obama 's statement on the coup did not actually use the word `` coup . '' He did n't call upon the military to restore power to `` the democratically elected civilian government , '' but rather to `` a democratically elected civilian government . '' In other words , it need not be deposed President Mohamed Morsy 's . The thinking of the president and administration officials , according to a knowledgeable source , is that while the administration is not explicitly supporting the removal of Morsy from power -- it expressly did not support the move -- it is seeking to push the Egyptian military in a direction . But U.S. Sen. John McCain , R-Arizona , called Friday for the suspension of U.S. aid to Egypt 's military . `` We can not repeat the same mistakes that we made at other times in our history by supporting the removal of freely elected governments , '' the ranking member of the Senate Committee on Armed Services told CNN affiliate KNXV . Once the military sets a timetable for elections and a new constitution , `` then we should evaluate whether to continue the aid , '' he said . A democratic coup ? The Egyptian coup presents a unique case in that there was a popular uprising that accompanied it . While military coups usually have the goal of concentrating power in the hands of the armed forces , in this case , the generals immediately named a civilian jurist as interim leader . It is a role reminiscent of the uprising that ousted former Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak in 2011 . In that instance , the military took over in the interim until democratic elections could be held . Once again , the military is stating that it does not want to impose a military dictatorship , but instead usher in another democratically elected government . Law professor Ozan O. Varol published a paper in the Harvard International Law Journal after Mubarak 's ouster , arguing that the events of 2011 broke the mold of traditional military coups . `` Although all coups have anti-democratic features insofar as they place the military in power by force or the threat of force , some military coups are distinctly more democracy-promoting than others , '' he wrote . `` In these coups , the military responds to popular opposition against an authoritarian or totalitarian regime , overthrows that regime , and facilitates fair and free elections within a short span of time . '' The current situation in Egypt is still playing out , but Varol 's research explains why many see this week 's coup as the expression of the popular will of the people .
The overthrow of Egypt 's Morsy fits most definitions of a coup . But the events in Egypt are not universally being called a coup . Calling it such would lead to a loss of aid to Egypt .