The activists who kick-started the revolution are being forced to develop strategies against the Islamisation of Egypt, reports Dina Ezzat "We did not spend three weeks in Tahrir Square to bring about an Islamic state. We went there to bring democracy, not to replace Mubarak with Badei," says Islam, one of the young men who took part in the 25 January Revolution. Speaking to Al-Ahram Weekly in Tahrir Square, Islam offered an argument that has become increasingly familiar: toppled president Hosni Mubarak was ruling as a civil dictator whereas an Islamist ruler, be it the current Supreme Guide of the Muslim Brotherhood Mohamed Badei or, worse, a more radical Islamist figure like Aboud El-Zomor, would be ruling in the name of God. "When we opposed Mubarak we were considered a political minority but if you oppose someone who rules in the name of God you become an infidel," says Islam. "No, no, no; we cannot let it happen." Islam was on his way to a meeting of activists to decide the next move in their long march towards freedom and democracy. "We are examining what happened on the day of the referendum, trying to understand the mechanism that the Muslim Brotherhood used, along with other Islamists, to gear support for their position," he explains. The Muslim Brotherhood, along with other Islamist groups, including the Salafists, called for a yes vote during last week's referendum on limited constitutional amendments. The call for a no vote was championed by more secular quarters and, ultimately, by the Coptic Church. Sources within the Coptic hierarchy say that despite no clear instructions on the matter from Pope Shenouda, the decision for a no vote was prompted by an acute fear of the possible consequences of the Islamist bloc winning. While the sweeping 77.2 per cent vote in favour of the amendments was not strictly Islamist-orchestrated, it is nonetheless being seen as an indicator of Islamist influence. For Islam and his co-activists the objective is to make sure that the "political scene is not hijacked -- or let me say controlled -- only by Islamists". Like other activists who spoke to Al-Ahram Weekly Islam states in no uncertain terms the "undeniable fact that it was the young men of the Muslim Brotherhood who took the lead in defending the [demonstrators in Tahrir] Square against the attacks of the state". He promptly adds that this does not give the Muslim Brotherhood the right to lead the way. "Ours was not an Islamist revolution and you cannot build an Islamic state out of this revolution," he insists. Mohamed is one of younger members of the Muslim Brotherhood who stood his ground in Tahrir Square during the harshest days of the revolution. He is offended, he says, by suggestions that the Muslim Brotherhood's call for a yes vote in the referendum is an attempt to hijack the revolution. "We are not doing anything of the sort. We are just exercising our political rights, expressing our views and lobbying for support for those views. Isn't that what democracy is supposed to be about?" Mohamed argues that the Muslim Brotherhood's opting for a yes vote was simply in line with what "many people were thinking". "It is true that we distributed brochures and pamphlets calling on people to vote yes and it is also true that we worked with other Islamist forces through mosques and charities to support this call. But this does not mean that we hijacked the revolution. it means we are resorting to democracy". Other young men from the Muslim Brotherhood claim the call attributed to the Coptic Church for a no vote provoked many to vote yes. "It is true that we made our position heard first but we acted as a political and not a religious group. The church's call was religious. It was clearly sectarian and provoked many people to vote yes in response to what they saw as an attempt by the church to impose its views," says Nasser, a Muslim Brotherhood member from Alexandria. Other members of the Muslim Brotherhood who spoke on background said they used their mobile phones to photograph "busloads coming out of the churches towards the ballot station" and then circulated the photos to "alert the Muslim population to a Coptic no vote bloc". Coptic Church sources admit that there is "growing concern within the Coptic community" over what they qualify as "the rise of the fundamentalist trend in Egypt" in the post Mubarak regime. Some Copts who spoke to the Weekly said they had never encountered any problem with Muslim co-workers or neighbours but remained concerned about the possibility of an Islamic state being established in Egypt. "I would love to live in Egypt and I never ever had a problem, not in school, not at work. I have great Muslim friends and I don't encounter signs of discrimination," said Madeline, a 45-year-old Heliopolis resident. Speaking to the Weekly in one of the main Heliopolis supermarkets, Madeline insisted that the day Egypt becomes an Islamic state she "would pack and leave". "I already have an Australian citizenship and I can go." Leading figures from the Muslim Brotherhood, including its supreme guide and spokesmen, argue that they are not pursuing any dramatic changes in society, and certainly not changes that might be perceived as anti-Copt. This week the supreme guide of the Muslim Brotherhood made an exceptional visit to the Coptic Patriarch and called for Muslim-Coptic dialogue among young people on both sides. The offer was welcomed by the Coptic Church. The state is also trying to reassure the Coptic Church. This week, Prime Minister Essam Sharaf made an unprecedented visit to express his respect and convey assurances to the Coptic Patriarch. The visit came at the tail of a call made by Field Marshal Hussein Tantawi to Pope Shenouda in which he also offered assurances. Sources close to the Coptic Patriarch say that Pope Shenouda does not expect any anti- Coptic actions in the short or medium term. But they point out too that Shenouda is an ailing 86-year-old man with few years left. "The trouble is that any call for an Islamic state will immediately press all the phobia buttons of the Coptic minority as well as within the church. This ultimately means that Pope Shenouda's successor will be a real hardliner. This is the easiest route towards a state of confrontation that could undermine the basic interests of the entire nation," says an informed church source who asked for his name to be withheld. Hamdi Hassan, a Muslim Brotherhood member who won a parliamentary seat in the 2005 elections and then lost it because of blatant rigging in 2010, says he is planning to contest his seat again. While the Brotherhood has announced it will seek to secure only a third of the People's Assembly seats, Hassan told the Weekly that once in parliament Brotherhood MPs would coordinate with all other shades of Islamic opinion, from Salafists to independents who were once members of the ruling National Democratic Party. The pursuit of justice, says Hassan, will be the top priority for Muslim Brotherhood representatives in the next parliament, and it will be pursued with a definite "Islamic style". Islamic Sharia, as understood by the Muslim Brotherhood, will decide their position on all future legislation, including the writing of a new constitution. Hassan does not seem to be particularly alarmed by the concern expressed by secular Muslims and Copts over the possible political dominance of Islamists in the near future. "Should this be the wish of the majority, the minority should abide by the wish of the majority," he says. Nor does he understand the fear of the possible establishment of an Islamic state. According to Hassan "the Islamic state by definition is a civil state that applies Sharia, it is not a theological state". Hassan insists that any phobia is unjustified and even undemocratic. The Muslim Brotherhood's interpretation of Islamic Sharia is certainly milder than that of some other Islamic groups. Yet many Muslims feel that the manifesto announced by the group in 2007, which among other discriminatory positions excluded Copts and women as a matter of principle from the top executive job, is unacceptable. The current constitution does not deny Copts or women the right to nominate themselves for the presidency. And the Muslim Brotherhood are not saying that they would seek to change this, or not yet. Hassan says that the Muslim Brotherhood insists on a "constitution that most people will be comfortable with". But, he says, "if 80 per cent of Egyptians go for the full application of Sharia then this is what must happen". For political scientist Amr El-Shobaki concern over the possible Islamisation of the state is valid. El-Shobaki, who has spent many years researching political Islamist movements, believes the Muslim Brotherhood's call for a yes vote in the referendum reflected its accurate reading of the mood of a public seeking stability rather than being a fundamental choice of the group. Civil and liberal forces, El-Shobaki argues, failed on two counts. First they failed to read the mood of the street and as a consequence were unable to effectively lobby the public. His greatest concern, however, is focussed on how the Muslim Brotherhood and other Islamist groups managed to turn the referendum into a religious issue. "I was very disturbed to see the pamphlets distributed by Islamist groups suggesting that it was an Islamic duty to vote yes," he says, arguing that such an Islamisation of the political process could not have happened had "strict civil rules of political engagement" been observed. The nature of the civil state, he says, was compromised under the rule of Mubarak who allowed a mushrooming of Islamic socio- economic activity "provided it steered clear of politics". The army's choice of a Muslim Brotherhood figure to join the committee in charge of drafting the constitutional amendments passed on Saturday is simply another symptom of the lengthy undermining of the civil state. The combination of a weakened state apparatus with diluted civil processes is what El-Shobaki finds most disturbing. "It is this combination that could ultimately allow for the Islamisation" of society and then of the state. "Liberal forces must learn from their mistakes" rather than get worked up into a state of Islamist-phobia, he says. "This does not mean that liberal forces should go round opposing the Muslim Brotherhood just for the sake of opposing the Muslim Brotherhood but rather that they work on a real grassroots engagement, and above all on formulating a clear and comprehensive political agenda that appeals to the majority of Egyptians". "If you have a constitution that observes civil rules of political engagement and a civil president -- and so far the indicators are that the next president will be non-Islamist -- then we have a chance to avoid an Islamic state. If not then an Islamist state is a serious possibility," he says.
