The victory of the Muslim Brotherhood's Mohamed Morsi in Egypt's presidential elections, and the strong showing of fundamentalist Salafis in legislative elections, completes a wave of Islamist electoral success that began in Tunisia and has swept the Arab world. One day soon, Islamist regimes may hold sway in an unbroken arc from Morocco to Turkey.
During the Arab Spring, the spotlight was dominated by secular urban activists. Religious conservatives lent quiet support, if at all. But those who make revolutions rarely benefit from them. The Arab Spring is a triumph of democracy, a shift from minority to majority rule. Less noticed is that it represents a victory for demography: the ascent of people power over military hardware. This point is tragically driven home by exceptions like Syria, where weapons continue to defy numbers. Yet raw populations are not always progressive forces: they may spawn nationalist and religious populisms which infringe on civil liberties.
The success of the Arab Spring in bringing democracy to the Arab world has rightly been celebrated. However observers need to realise that democracy and liberalism are only loosely related. The first refers to majority rule, the second to protecting the rights of individuals and minorities. James Madison and Alexander Hamilton warned in the Federalist Papers that there is always a potential for democracy to produce a tyranny of the majority.
The Arab Spring has created a situation in which mass sentiment counts as never before. Public opinion in many Arab states combines illiberal social attitudes with a democratic political stance. In Egypt, the UN's 2009 Arab Human Development report revealed that 96% of Egyptian women aged 15 to 49 had undergone genital mutilation. In a 2005 ARDA youth survey, 94% of young Saudis favoured a system of government where 'religious authorities have absolute power.'
Roughly 90% of Muslim respondents who support shari'a as the exclusive law of the land in the 2000 World Values Survey also preferred democracy over other systems of government. In effect, a mood of illiberal democracy prevails in much of the Arab Middle East.
Many in Arab countries emerging from dictatorship believe that secularists and minorities were protected by strongmen and their western allies. As politicians compete to embody the popular will, they may advance religious platforms that reduce safeguards for the marginal voices in society. The judiciaries whose task it is to uphold individual rights are weak and associated with a westernised elite. In Egypt, as in non-Arab Muslim states like Pakistan, liberal judges are being challenged by a new generation of upwardly mobile Islamists and may be unable to hold the line much longer.
Demography is key to this equation. Algiers, Casablanca, Tehran, Baghdad, Istanbul and Cairo, among others, long housed a politically-active secular middle class. This is the group that spearheaded most of the region's revolutions, including the Arab Spring. Even the Iranian Revolution and abortive Algerian revolt benefited from secular liberal and leftist organising.
Yet these groups were defeated at the ballot box. A popular western perception is that Egypt's secular parties lost because they are disorganized novices. This is only part of the story. Since the late twentieth century, population explosion in the pious countryside has flooded Muslim cities with migrants sympathetic to Islamism. The first phase of Islamic revival saw the Muslim Brotherhood thrive in the fertile soil of the Middle East's expanding slums. Though they made dictators like Mubarak take notice, their influence in authoritarian contexts could only be partial. Democratisation, by contrast, translates the demographic heft of mass piety directly into political power.
This path is a familiar one. In the twentieth century United States, evangelicals increased from barely one-third of young white Protestants to nearly two-thirds. As Andrew Greeley, Mike Hout and Melissa Wilde demonstrate, high evangelical birthrates - mainly in rural southern heartlands - accounted for three-quarters of this growth. In the late 1970s, the Republican Party woke up to the potential of this large constituency. Today, no Republican candidate can afford to alienate evangelical voters. The same development, on a larger scale, is underway in Israel. The ultra-Orthodox have three to four times the birth rate of other Jews. They now form a third of Jewish first graders while religious zionists make up a growing share of the Israeli Defence Force's officer corps. Ultra-Orthodox activists rip away faces of women on Jerusalem's billboards and are challenging the legitimacy of the Israeli Supreme Court. Secular judiciaries such as Egypt's are succumbing to Islamism as a new generation takes the reigns.
How will the combination of demography and democracy play out? The most likely development is the emergence of a region-wide, Saudi-style religious right. This conservative force may steer society away from freedom of expression and minority rights. There may also be foreign policy consequences. In countries like Egypt where authoritarian rulers enjoyed cordial relations with the United States or Israel, we may see a nationalist U-turn. A scenario in which Israel and its neighbors pursue cultural puritanism while behaving pragmatically is possible. Yet policymakers must also recognize that rival conceptions of sacred nationalism, buoyed by religious population growth, may be on a collision course. This makes it urgent to secure a Middle East peace deal while there is still time.
Follow Eric Kaufmann on Twitter: www.twitter.com/epkaufm
Stephen Starr: Syria's Minorities Are Afraid - After Assad, They Shouldn't Be
James Zogby: Egypt's Elections: Lessons and the Way Forward
Shadi Rahimi: Egypt Is Not Iran
Adil E. Shamoo: Time to Turn the Page on Egypt
Then isn’t the solution in the math? If the holder of a belief can demonstrate that survival is independent of supplies, go to it. But if they disappear and take their philosophy with them, so be it.
"The Arab Spring is a triumph of democracy"
Look up the definition of democracy, and say that.
"populations are not always progressive forces:"
Especially with leaders regressive in regard to testing truth. Is it the fear of forfeiting authority, if answers are found wanting?
"tyranny of the majority."
Is surely tyranny.
"expanding slums."
Major product: ignorance Chief tenet: Thou shalt not question Recommended remedy: Enlightenment.
"The same development, on a larger scale, is underway in Israel."
If fearful of a population that thinks for itself. The alternative may be a population primed to swallow whatever it is served.
"How will the combination of demography and democracy play out?"
It’s a losing hand, unless philosophy is dealt. The card that trumps all “truths”. For if valid such versions should be verifiable. A disinclination to put them to what shouldn’t be an insurmountable test, equates to folding.
"there is still time."
To realise that opening an egg at a specified end, is in reality an irrelevant human aberration.
As far as Israeli paranoia is concerned, it is a shame that they feel the need to continue with their policy of assassinating scholars and scientists who just happen to be Muslims. Can't help relations.
A typical example being Osama Bin Laden. a guy who I met during one of my Saudi contracts, before he took himself off to another place, A very bright and intelligent man indeed.
In fact I would say, the fact so many of these folk are intelligent, even if misguided by allowing their religious indoctrination to outwit their intelligence, has led to the upsurge in the so called Arab Spring.
Basic peasantry do not have access to the means to create such movements, they are usually far too involved keeping themselves and family alive in the face of overwhelming natural odds on top of the pressures of living under dictatorial regimes.
It is the more educated amongst them that stir the pot, and create fervent rebelliousness. The unfortunate thing being, they are locked into the belief in a fictitious entity, and are so deeply trained to follow every utterance of their religious leaders they have no room, or will, to challenge what they have been force fed from birth.
We should have put up a geo-stationary satellite over this region 30 years ago and had it broadcasting a swathe of informative and entertaining secular radio programming 24 hours a day. Then given away millions of free radios.
It would have been way more cost effective than the horrific wars that are coming.
I don't want to appear paranoid, but I am also concerned about this kind of Islamic culture establishing a significant foothold in Britain because as the article states such populations tend to reproduce rapidly. In my opinion it might be quite a prudent move to abolish all faith schools in the UK. As you say, a vote is useless without an education, and an education is not what you get from a religious school.
"This makes it urgent to secure a Middle East peace deal while there is still time."
- Unfortunately, it is now too late. Making peace with Israel amounts to a violation of certain religious duties of the head of any Islamic
Not sure what urgency you see for Israel. The Ayatollah of Iran issued a fatwah against the use of nuclear weapons. This fact seems to have been ignored by a paranoid Israel which prefers to quote the mad Amnidinnerjacket's threats, bearing in mind he is of little importance in the order of power in Iran.
I see population explosion as the most pressing problem. The belief by Muslims that they must produce many sons will see us all lose our much prized personal space. This is the dialogue we should be having, not Israel's imagined demise.
Demographic studies put the present birth rate in Britain to tip over the political balance by about mid century.
Unless controls are put in place not to just restrict Islamic immigration, but also limits of family size, then my successors will be very likely living under Sharia law.
"In his first public speech, addressing tens of thousands of people in Tahrir Square, Morsi promised to work to free Omar Abdel-Rahman, the spiritual leader of men convicted in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing."
Omar Abdel-Rahman is the very same sheikh who issued the fatwa granting a certain Lieutenant Khalid Islambouli, a member of the Egyptian Islamic Jihad, approval for the assassination of Anwar El Sadat.
- Unfortunately, it is now too late. Making peace with Israel amounts to a violation of certain religious duties of the head of any Islamic state, according to Sharia. And Sharia grants the people of any Islamic state the right to depose any head of state who fails in his duties according to Sharia. (Remember Sadat?) Making peace with Israel is not an option for Islamists. But of course, deception is a perfectly fine option according to Sharia - and that is just what we will see.