Also from Reuters: “Complete Egypt’s Revolution” by David Rohde.
From what little I remember of what little political theory I actually learned in school, one of the main issues with a regime change (literally referring to a change of the entire political system) is that, while the inclusion of the military creates a naturally structured group at the head of the system post-overthrow, the military leadership generally lacks motivation to cede power. Without a clear civilian leadership that can effectively rally the entire population, the military is unlikely to give up their increased influence.
Interestingly, Egypt would actually be expected to be an easier case for this transition. Looking to examples such as South Korea, the country faces some amount of perceived external threat (Israel), which should allow the military to maintain prominence and importance without needing to hold the reins of civilian politics. But … well, that’s not happening. And I’m not sure I’d want to espouse the benefits of Egypt and Israel being at odds on a military buildup.
(Poorly articulated memories of things I barely studied.)