The Islamists are not in an enviable position, writes Amani Maged After the comfort of the embrace of the Democratic Alliance for Egypt, the largest electoral coalition so far, their spirit concord has begun to unravel. Whereas until just a week ago, the Muslim Brotherhood's Freedom and Justice Party had succeeded to contain or, at least, postpone the historic animosity between it and the Salafis and had struck common cause with Al-Gamaa Al-Islamiya, the Islamists have begun to fall out, shattering their electoral understanding. It all seemed to happen from one day to the next. When the Salafist Nour (Light) Party saw that it would come out of the party without prizes, which is to say that its candidates would not top the lists, it broke away from the coalition and formed a list of its own. As a result, the largest and most popular Salafist party now plans to contend 70 per cent of the seats that will be elected by proportional lists and, following talks with other parties, it will soon reveal the number of single-ticket seats it will contend. In spite of the tender age of the Nour Party, which only emerged after the revolution from an ideological trend that shunned political involvement and largely regarded the electoral process as a heresy, its leader, Emad Abdel-Ghafour maintains that it is better prepared for the elections than most other parties. The party, he said, could rival parties that have existed for more 30 years. Moreover, in the space of a few days, it succeeded in luring two other Salafist parties, the Asala (Authenticity) and Fadila (Virtue) parties, away from the Democratic Coalition. These were soon followed by Al-Gamaa Al-Islamiya's Construction and Development Party, which also broke away from the coalition due to disputes over ranking in the lists, as well as the Islamic Action and Arab Unity Party. In the Islamist spectrum of the electoral map, therefore, the Muslim Brothers are on one side and all the other Islamists are on another. As one contemplates this Muslim Brotherhood- Salafist divide, one can still hear the echoes of Islamist declarations of solidarity. It was not that long ago that the prominent Salafi leader Yasser Burhami said that Salafis should support Muslim Brotherhood candidates in the parliamentary elections. His opinion was quickly seconded by another major Salafi leader, Sheikh Mohamed Hassan, who announced on a satellite television programme that the Salafis would stand behind the Muslim Brotherhood in the forthcoming phase. The Muslim Brotherhood was the political force that was "the best equipped to participate in political life because of its lengthy experience in this field and, because of its background and its Islamic outlook, it is the closest to the ideas, views and principles of the Salafist movement which also seeks to serve Islam and the Muslim people," he said. Such statements were a marked departure from the historic antagonism that had prevailed between the Salafis and the Muslim Brotherhood since this organisation was founded by Hassan Al-Banna. It is the Muslim Brotherhood's belief that that change can only be accomplished by participating in all activities of society, including politics and the electoral process. This is why Muslim Brotherhood candidates have always run in elections from the local to the national level, whether for municipal councils, educational boards, syndicate boards and student federations or for the People's Assembly and Shura Council. The Salafist movement, on the other hand, believes that there is only one way to reform society. This is to proselytise and enjoin people to pray, give alms, perform the pilgrimage, fast and conform with the other Islamic duties and precepts. One could say that to them, urging men to grow their beards and women to wear the veil comes first and political involvement of any form comes a distant second. Salafi leaders have been known to lash out at Muslim Brotherhood figures and individuals sympathetic with their ideas, such as Amr Khaled and Youssef El-Qaradawi. But nor have Salafis the wrath of Muslim Brotherhood leaders who have charged that Salafist forums and media outlets show little interest in or respect for the opinions of others. In view of this historic animosity, it is perhaps not so surprising that, as the expert in Islamist movements Mohamed Zahran observed, when it resurfaced after a brief lull, tensions would erupt and the Islamists would rapidly re-coalesce into new alignments, not against liberals, leftists and other traditional adversaries of the Islamist movement, but against the Freedom and Justice Party, the political wing of the Muslim Brotherhood. As Zahran sees it, the Democratic Coalition began to unravel the moment that the Nour Party, which had politically matured somewhat, felt that it no longer needed the Muslim Brotherhood or its Freedom and Justice Party. So, when it met its latest disappointment in the context of the coalition, it reassessed its calculations, reordered its priorities and decided to wash its hands of the Muslim Brotherhood, which Salafi leaders for several months had praised as a source of inspiration worthy of emulation as the Salafis learned politics and which they had pledged to support to ensure that the Islamist cause prevailed over the secularists. Zahran further believes that the real reason why the Nour Party fled the coalition and why other Salafist parties followed suit was to found in the statement by Muslim Brotherhood Supreme Guide Mohamed Badie to the effect that the Freedom and Justice Party intended to field Coptic candidates in the forthcoming elections. As though this were not a sufficient departure from the Islamist frame of reference, from the Salafist perspective, there were also speculations that the Coptic thinker Rafiq Habib, vice-president of the Freedom and Justice Party, would enter the elections under the party banner. According to Zahran, this is when the Salafist parties, spearheaded by the Nour Party, began to consider creating a Salafist Islamist front opposed to the Democratic Coalition and to the Muslim Brotherhood, in particular. The natural consequence of this development will be to divide the Islamist vote. Nor will the Freedom and Justice Party be the only party adversely affected. As Zahran put it, the rifts that have been fracturing the Islamist camp will be detrimental to all factions, from the Muslim Brothers through the Salafis and Al-Gamaa Al-Islamiya to the Wasat (Centre) Party and the Islamist Action and Arab Unity Party. In order to avert this prospect, he adds, these parties urgently need to summon the resolve to set aside factional differences in the interest of promoting their collective Islamist project and, more practically, to develop modern organisational and coordinating mechanisms commensurate with the demands of the new experience they are engaged in. Looking a little further ahead, the electoral rivalry between the Salafis and the Muslim Brotherhood, if it continues, would certainly affect the shape of the forthcoming parliament. Will it wear the Brotherhood mantel or the Salafi turban? Or will the elections bring other surprises?
