Egypt's new govt will exercise self-restraint

The fact that the Muslim Brotherhood and other Islamist groups have taken 65 per cent of the vote in Egypt’s first free democratic election for decades should come as a surprise to no one. Their popularity stems from the fact that Islamist voices provided the language and context that opposed the then ruling regime of Hosni Mubarak that, like other Arab states, was authoritarian in nature.

Furthermore, in a country where unemployment and frustration run high, choosing one’s political affiliation on religious grounds gives the people a source of comfort amid great uncertainty.

The Brotherhood had been preparing for power from the minute the young and liberals took the streets to demand an end to the authoritarian rule of Mubarak. The Brotherhood has been by far the most prepared organisation, and therefore the recent victory at the poll is no surprise.

To ensure that they will not alienate the international community and the young people and liberals who stood up against Mubarak’s army, the Brotherhood immediately dismissed the idea of forming an alliance with another Islamist group, the Salafi Party, whose stance is considered too rigid and uncompromising for the secular and progressive thinking people in Egypt.

The Brotherhood understands well that a terser form of Islam will not help the situation at the moment, thus the decision to ditch the Salafis. Egypt is broke and the tourist dollars are not pouring in like they used to. Indeed, visitors are likely to stay away from Egypt if they feel that the civil liberties of the Egyptian people, and their own, are being torn down. Just as bad would the possibility that a stricter and narrower interpretation of Islam could alienate the Christian minority and women.

As Turkey has shown, a party elected largely on religious grounds does not have to make a sacrifice on civic priorities. In Tunisia, where the “Arab Spring” began, the Islamist party Ennahda won a plurality of the vote, and has formed a transitional government with liberal, secular parties.

As for international concern, even fear, about the Islamists, perhaps the best the world can do at this juncture is to continue to support the democratic movement while setting out long-term expectations.

The Brotherhood will soon learn that being in the opposition is easier than running a government. It’s always easier to say what one doesn’t like and what one wants; it’s another matter if one is put in the position of having to make decisions that affect a wide range of people. So the only way to retain their popularity, once in power, is to govern fairly but effectively. And in order to appeal to all groups in the country, the Brotherhood knows well that they have to moderate themselves.

If the recent history of political Islam in South and Southeast Asia is any indication, political parties embracing radical ideas lose their appeal quickly when the tables are turned. But it probably won’t mean a return to authoritarianism in Egypt’s case.

The sorting out of the differences between the conservative and liberal visions of political Islam will be a new process in this phase of the Arab Spring. It will no doubt be a period of uncertainty. But the Brotherhood’s brand of Islamism is not that of the Taleban or al-Qaeda. And as secular Turkey has shown since 2002, an Islamist government is not an end to democracy. Like Turkey, Egypt’s Islamists won the largest portion of the vote. They are part of a parliament that represents a wide range of views among the people. In a real sense, democracy has just begun.

Egypt will eventually regain its position as the leader of the Arab states, once everything falls back into the realm of normalcy. It is therefore likely that whatever form of governance Egypt now adopts will be duplicated elsewhere. In other words, what happens in Egypt will affect the entire region and possibly the wider Islamic community for that matter.