Islamist politics meet diversity

Nuance and context were the main themes in a discussion this week at the Carnegie Endowment of the role of Islamist parties in the ongoing political transitions in Tunisia, Libya and Egypt.

Jakob Wichmann of JMW Consulting presented a report prepared with Ellen Lust of Yale. They surveyed the role of religion in Tunisia and Egypt, focusing on the 2011 parliamentary elections. In Egypt, Islamists gained 75% whereas  in Tunisia they gained 45%.  Egyptians who voted for Islamist parties had a stronger sense of religious identity than Tunisians who voted for Islamists.  Tunisian Islamist voters however practiced a stricter religious routine and higher frequency of worship. Tunisia also has a higher percentage of voters who identify as secular, 45% to Egypt’s 20%. Voters seemed to be voting for Islamist parties for reasons other than religious values. One obvious, non-religious, reason for the success of Islamist parties is their ability to deliver services more effectively to the population. This was true in both Tunisia and Egypt.

Ellen Lust emphasized differences in how these transitional countries viewed the electoral stakes. Egyptians had an existential understanding of their political situation. The questions prominent in their political dialogue were, “what does it mean to be Egyptian?” and “what is our future?” When the population sets the stakes this high, the contest becomes hotter and efforts by various political groups to undermine each other more ferocious.  In contrast, Tunisian voters are less polarized and more centrist.  The elite worry about vision questions, but the population is focused on hard-core economic and social issues.

Carnegie Senior Associate Frederic Wehrey dealt with Libya.  Qaddafi’s reign was never open to civil society or political participation.  He purposefully divided the tribes of Libya against each other. These suppressed groups are now trying to reassert themselves. The overthrow of Qaddafi has left the country without  state institutions amidst a security crisis. The Islamist parties were suppressed for so long that they now feel blinded by the light and are struggling for dominance against each other.

One of the crucial divides within the Libyan political scene is the role of individuals in the revolution. Those who were at the center of the uprising  have become exclusionary toward those who participated less. As a result of widespread participation in the revolution, there is a strong sense of civic responsibility spreading throughout Libya. This is a testament to the truly bottom-to-top nature of the Libyan revolution.

Libya also benefits from a narrow ideological spectrum. Islamist parties differ little. Both secular and Islamist parties are striving for a more moderate image.

Marwan Muasher of the Carnegie Endowment ended by challenging these governments to accept a  fundamental aspect of democracy:  the right to be different. This has not yet taken hold in the Arab world.  Until the majority of citizens accept and encourage religious diversity, real democracy will never thrive.