„The West“ and it´s arrogance in promoting and deriding elections elsewhere

„The West“, a phrase by which mainly The US and its western European NATO allies are meant considers itself and only itself entitled and qualified to determine who deserves to be voted, boycotted and overthrown in any country.

The rules of the game are quite easy:
If the ruler is pro-Russian or his country predominantly in the Russian geopolitical hemisphere he is almost by definition illegitimate. So, if any political, religious or ethnic group raises in opposition to such a country’s government, the oppositions autonomy and separatism oriented demands are legitimate. The ruler has to give in to the alleged will of „the people“ and relinquish power. If a part of such a pro-Russian state holds a referendum and demands autonomy, western politicians will be the first to support secessionist ideas and apply pressure to the central government.
Examples are ex-Yugoslavia and Syria.

If absolutely democratic elections are held and the outcome – thus the majority will of the people – does not please „the West“, the elected government will be shunned at best and isolated and sanctioned at worst. The voters will be punished for making the „wrong“ decision. So democracy and free elections do not protect anyone from the wrath of the West, and at the same time the West does not see any violation of its otherwise proudly propagated values such as freedom of choice.
Examples are the elections of Hamas in Palestine and Mohammad Morsi in Egypt.

If you are the man of the West or at least the enemy of the West´s enemy you can forcefully remove a democratically elected government, e.g. through a military coup, and win dubious elections, sometimes with 93% of the votes and afterwards be praised by the West as legitimate winner.
Examples are the Egyptian and Ukrainian elections

So, while Assads 88% are brushed off as „farce“ or „parody of the democracy“, Sisis 93% are supposed to be regarded as serious and respectable outcome.

Egypt: Islamists shoot down army helicopter with MANPAD

Islamic militants have shot down an Egyptian army helicopter with a heat seeking shoulder-fired missile:
The BBC article seems to express „grief“ about this. Probably because the Egyptian regime (and army) is considered pro-western.

Interestingly western press reports of the Syrian rebels´ successes in shooting down Syrian army Migs and helicopters and killing hundreds of personell have been accompanied enthusiasm and joy.
Note: If you are a radical sectarian Islamist fighting a pro-Iranian or pro-Russian state you are good, you are probably a „freedom fighter“ and the US congress will somehow find a way to declare you „moderate“.
If you are however fighting a pro-western state you are a terrorist and one has to be worried if you have acquired and applied deadly weapons.