It's simplistic to think that democracy can take hold in countries that have just freed themselves from dictators. We should know that a democracy cannot grow in a country if certain conditions are not being met.
One of these conditions is that the country's citizens have a sense of security. They have to believe that, no matter what, order will prevail if they are to work at shoring up such elements of a democracy as free and open expression, license to criticize its leaders, and the primacy of law. It is understandable that Egypt's Army would take over amidst this country's turmoil and try to achieve this stability through authoritarian rule.
Another condition is a willingness among the country's different factions to dialogue with each other and achieve reasonable accommodations. How can Iraq ever grow a democracy as long as its century-long hatred between Sunnis and Shiites remains unabated? How can Afghanistan ever pull its warring tribes into a nation as long as each tribe is only after its self-interest? How can Egypt submit to governance by law as long as the Muslim Brotherhood and other sects simply want power?
America was lucky. It had just defeated the British and had, for the time being at least, a general sense of security. And it had strong leaders that kept it from fragmenting into the factions that could develop.
Will any such leaders emerge amidst the struggles of these newly freed countries?
Anton G. Hardy
East Greenbush