NewsBreakingOnline

Islamist movement has evolved and expresses readiness to work within a democratic framework Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood, which held landmark talks today with vice-president Omar Suleiman, is used to controversy over its ideology and tactics but has never before received such intense scrutiny at home and abroad. The veteran Islamist movement was slow to respond when the unrest began, although it has made clear that whatever happens next, it will be involved. It is hard to imagine a successful democratic transition without it. Egypt’s best-organised opposition group, which has an estimated 600,000 members, is formally banned but has been a significant force since it was founded in 1928. Its reputation and role have changed markedly in recent years – though it still arouses suspicions and has many enemies. Hosni Mubarak’s regime often seemed obsessed by it. Without vote-rigging the Brotherhood would have won far more than the 88 seats (20% of the total) it took in the 2005 elections – its candidates ran as independents to evade the ban on religion-based parties. The Brotherhood – or Ikhwan as it is known in Arabic – boycotted last year’s rigged elections. Since then it has again seen its offices closed down and leaders harassed, arrested and released in a cat-and-mouse game with the authorities. In 2010, 6,000 activists were detained. Like other Islamist movements, its popularity is based on a reputation for not being corrupt and charity work in clinics, nurseries and after-school tutoring. Volunteers fill gaps left by a state that has seen illiteracy rise and services fail as liberal economic reforms enriched businesses close to the regime. It is known for its ability to mobilise supporters. In 2006 Suleiman, then Mubarak’s intelligence chief, described the Brotherhood as “neither a religious organisation, nor a social organisation, nor a political party, but a combination of all three” – though the regime exaggerated its importance to present itself as a bulwark against extremism. It used terrorist methods before and after the 1952 revolution and its underground wing was kept under surveillance by state security, which tortured thousands of its members. But it was also exploited by presidents Nasser and Sadat as a counterweight to the left. It used anti-western, anti-Zionist, and anti-Semitic language. Nowadays it eschews violence and is attacked by al-Qaida for urging young Muslims to vote in elections instead of taking up jihad. Its hostility to Israel and Zionism remain unchanged. It has evolved in other important ways, expressing a readiness to work within a democratic framework that uses sharia law “as a reference” – an ambiguous formula that worries secularists and the large Christian Coptic minority. “Islam is the solution,” remains the Brotherhood’s signature slogan. “Although the Brotherhood entered the political system in order to change it, it ended up being changed by the system,” commented the American scholar Carrie Rosefsky Wickham on the website Foreign Affairs . “The Brotherhood is too savvy, too pragmatic and too cautious to squander its hard-earned reputation among Egyptians as a responsible political actor or invite the risk of a military coup by attempting to seize power on its own.” Most experts predict that if free elections were held in Egypt, the Ikhwan might win 25-40% of the vote, though that would depend on the ability of smaller rival democratic and secular parties to carve out the space deliberately denied them by the Mubarak regime. In a multiparty system the Brotherhood would certainly voice its hostility to the peace treaty with Israel. But it is hard to imagine that any party exercising responsible power in a democratic, post-Mubarak Egypt would seek to return to the bad old days of a permanent war with the country’s unassailably powerful neighbour. Egypt Middle East Protest Ian Black guardian.co.uk