The battle of the Egyptian constitution ended up in a majority of voters, nearly two-thirds, voting yes for the constitution in a referendum in which the turnout was less than 40 per cent. The battle left the nation with a gaping wound in its political life, one that isn't likely to heal soon. What went unnoticed, amid the loud self-congratulation and the even louder mutual accusations that followed the referendum, was that the real loser in the battle of the constitution was the Egyptian revolution. A country that once had a modicum of consensus is now torn apart by rivalries and hounded by impending violence. The Islamists were thrilled with their perceived triumph, many of them having treated the constitution as a decisive battle, a matter of life and death. But in ways that they don't yet realise, they have lost big. Throughout the battle for the constitution, the Islamists committed the same type of misconduct that they had for years denounced. What the Islamists consider to be a resounding political victory was deep down a moral and ethical defeat. Some of their ulema (preachers) engaged in acts that can only be described as unethical in their zeal to have the constitution pass. They treated things that are mundane as if they were divine, called their opponents atheists, and condoned lying and misinformation. As the battle for the constitution went on, the venomous rhetoric turned to physical violence, leading to bloody attacks on political opponents at Al-Ittihadiya presidential palace. The biggest loser in this battle, although it doesn't seem to know that, is the Muslim Brotherhood. The Muslim Brotherhood has lost much of their reputation at home and abroad while trying desperately to get the constitution through the public vote. The Al-Ittihadiya attacks were not the Muslim Brotherhood's only error. The group, which sided completely with the Salafis during the vote, sacrificed the moderate veneer that it had boasted for two decades or so. Its political preferences are now known to all. No more pretence of sympathy with the liberals. No more tolerance for the seculars. No more cultivation of centrist politics. The Muslim Brotherhood has tossed aside any remaining bonds with non-Islamist groups. In one statement after another, Brotherhood leaders denounced their political opponents with the same vehemence once reserved for fulul (remnants of the former regime). Now everyone who opposes the Brotherhood is either acting in cahoots with the fulul or promotes a foreign “conspiracy”. The Muslim Brotherhood has gone back on its former promise to give the nation a consensual constitution. Having tasted power, the Brotherhood sees no reason to maintain workable relations with the liberals and seculars. Such conduct hasn't only undermined the Muslim Brotherhood at home, but gave it bad publicity abroad. In the international media, the Muslim Brotherhood is no longer depicted as a peaceful group of moderate Islamist tendencies that seeks to promote democracy and work with good faith with its opponents. More likely, it is portrayed as an autocratic group that is not above resorting to Nazi or fascist tactics, a group that uses democracy to promote its hidden agenda. The Muslim Brotherhood's leaders don't seem to fully process the shift in domestic or international perception. Whenever criticised, they dismiss their critics as part of a global “conspiracy” against everything Islamist. The Muslim Brotherhood has undermined its moral standing not only in the eyes of its opponents, but among some of its sympathisers too. And yet, it doesn't seem to realise the extent of damage its policies have caused. Muslim Brotherhood leaders would have us think that the vote on the constitution was a vote of confidence for them. If so, then the writing is on the wall indeed. In Cairo and Gharbiya, the majority of voters said “no”. And in places such as Daqahliya and Menoufiya the margin for “yes” was negligible. Is this the vote of confidence the Muslim Brotherhood boasts about? The Muslim Brotherhood may have distanced itself from the liberals and the secularists to gain the votes of the Salafis, a risky tactic as it turned out. As Muslim Brotherhood popularity ebbed, that of the Salafis rose, leading to persistent tensions in the Islamist current. The Salafis, who have stood loyally by the Muslim Brotherhood in previous elections, are asking for their share of the pie, not only in parliament but also in the government and local councils. The Salafis are also pressuring the Muslim Brotherhood for more concessions — a more vehement commitment to Sharia law, or tougher policies towards the West. How much in concessions the Muslim Brotherhood will be able to give before it loses its own base of supporters is a matter of conjecture. The far-right strand of the Salafist movement is another thorn in the Muslim Brotherhood's side. This strand, which has been threatening state institutions over the past few weeks, is not the kind of ally a party in power can keep for long. Indeed, if the Muslim Brotherhood continues to tolerate the far-right Salafis it will be jeopardising its own political future. As for President Mohamed Morsi, his credibility as a president for all Egyptians is gone forever. Isolated and indecisive, mistrusted by opponents and former allies, he has shown no skills of negotiation in dealing with his adversaries, or a desire to control his supporters when they misbehaved. Having failed to achieve the minimum of national reconciliation, Morsi has put the country into its worst ever political crisis in 50 years. The Islamists are too dazzled by their ballot box successes to see the failures of their policies or the immorality of their ways. The mistrust with which they are viewed today may take decades to reverse. The writer is a researcher at School of Government and International Affairs, Durham University.
