The Islamist trend in Egypt has never been a homogenous movement. Its history is one of convergence and divergence. Following the 25 January Revolution the Muslim Brotherhood, various Salafist groups, Al-Gamaa Al-Islamiya and the jihadists made common cause but before the end of Muslim Brotherhood rule rifts had emerged. Following the 30 June Revolution the gulf widened. The Muslim Brotherhood allied itself with ultra-right Islamist groups — Al-Gamaa Al-Islamiya and Jihad — while a significant segment of the Salafis — Salafist Calling and its political wing the Nour Party — signed on to the roadmap and had representatives on the 50-member committee charged with amending the constitution. It became possible to identify distinct rival Islamist camps. The Nour Party, through its presence on the amendment committee, could present itself as the champion of Islamist gains in the 2012 constitution. It fought hard. Then, two days ago, the final vote was taken. The Nour Party representative withdrew during the first session when a vote was being taken on the article stating that the ruling system in Egypt is “civil”. Some observers interpreted this as affirmation of the party's objection to the article. Yet subsequently a Salafi leader announced that its representative had not withdrawn but had left the meeting hall to take a telephone call. Now that a final version of the constitution has been approved how will the various factions of the Islamist trend react? As Egypt gears up for the referendum on the constitution, will they boycott and urge others to do the same or campaign for a no vote? The reaction of the Muslim Brotherhood, its political wing the Freedom and Justice Party (FJP) and allies in the National Alliance in Support of Legitimacy was predictable. These forces reject the post-3 July roadmap which they claim is the product of a “military coup”. By extension they reject any arrangements or processes connected with the roadmap, starting with the constitutional amendment process and including parliamentary and presidential elections. “Anything built on what is invalid is invalid” goes their mantra. Yet are things really so clear cut? Speaking to Al-Ahram Weekly on condition of anonymity, a Muslim Brotherhood source said the alliance is still considering its response. There is a trend in favour of what he termed “proactive boycott, ie boycotting the referendum on the constitution and campaigning to persuade others not to go to the polls. Another source told the Weekly that some members of the alliance fear that the constitution will be approved and that rather than a boycott they are arguing for a no vote campaign. Al-Gamaa Al-Islamiya, allied with the Muslim Brotherhood since the build up to the 30 June Revolution, echoes the Muslim Brotherhood's rejectionist positions. Kamal Al-Helbawi, once a Muslim Brotherhood leader and a now a member of the Committee of Fifty, expects worse than no campaigns and demonstrations against the constitution. He warns that radical jihadists could stage a series of terrorist attacks during the run-up to the referendum in an attempt to sow panic and prevent people going to the polls. The Nour Party continues to stand apart from other Islamist factions. It maintains that it is in the national interest to move forward with the roadmap, the first major step of which is the ratification of the 2013 constitution. Yet the constitution prohibits the creation of political parties on a religious basis which could affect the Nour Party as much as the political wings of other Islamist organisations. In the absence of guarantees, which the Nour Party and other Islamists have asked for, will it actively campaign in favour of the constitution? Nour Party officials contacted by the Weekly all agreed that the national interest is of overriding importance. “We took part in the roadmap on the basis of this principle which takes into account both domestic and foreign issues,” said one. “We feel as though we are singing solo, away from the rest of the Islamist flock. We miss its warm embrace. However, we have opted for the larger home: Egypt.” “We paid a heavy price in the past because of our reformist Islamic calls and the Islamist trend to accuse us of pursuing our own interests and presenting ourselves as the alternative to the Muslim Brotherhood. This view could not be more mistaken. We have worked to safeguard the survival of the Islamist trend. We are not promoting a particular policy. Rather, we are feeling our way as we keep other Islamist experiences in mind, such as the bloody decade in Algeria. The fact is the Muslim Brotherhood failure was a failure for the Islamist project as a whole. We warned the Muslim Brothers on many occasions but our advice fell on deaf ears. The rational person is the one who chooses the lesser of two evils. If we had chosen the ‘warm embrace' of the Islamist trend, the Islamist trend would have been totally crushed.” Interestingly, the Nour Party official said that some Western circles had urged the party to side with the Muslim Brotherhood. “I think that what they were really interested in was the elimination of the Islamist trend as a whole, rather than the survival of the Nour Party or the Salafis. In siding with the roadmap we undermined a Western and US design to end the Islamist trend as a whole.” Another Salafi source told the Weekly that the Nour Party's position on the referendum on the constitution was contingent on a number of guarantees. One was full judicial supervision of the polls in order to prevent any tampering. There also had to be guarantees for the exercise of political freedoms. As for the prospect that the Nour Party would be affected by the constitutional article prohibiting religious political parties, the source saw no reasons for concern. The legal status of the Nour Party is safe, he said, because of the provisions of the constitutional declaration issued by the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces and approved by national referendum on 19 March 2011. “That declaration formed the framework for the subsequent creation of a number of Islamist-oriented political parties. Existing Islamist parties will not be affected when the constitution is ratified.” In its talks with the government on political freedoms, added the source, the Nour Party has been pressing for assurances that neither the Muslim Brotherhood's FJP or the Construction and Development Party, the political wing of Al-Gamaa Al-Islamiya, or other Islamist parties will be dissolved “as long as there are no criminal verdicts against them”. “The presence of the Muslim Brotherhood in the political arena is a necessity,” he argued. Salafi sources stress that their decision to participate in the referendum was contingent on the aforementioned guarantees. They were keen to help propel the nation towards stability via the roadmap but also want to ensure that Islamists “take part in shouldering national responsibilities”.
