As the war for Libya's future is underal Facebookers and Islamic Holy Bookers - and the latter seem to be winning. The results of last weekend's referendum point to a simple truth: the internet was fine as a tool for gathering a few hundred thousand youths in Tahrir Square and dazzling the western media. But it is largely useless as a means of winning elections across large swathes of Egypt, where three quarters of the population have no internet connection at all.
The conditions have proved perfect for the Muslim Brotherhood. The Brotherhood ran an aggressive and disciplined campaign, declaring it a religious duty for all Muslims to vote 'yes' to a quick and dirty patch-up of the constitution - paving the way for parliamentary and presidential elections in the next few months. The referendum turnout was a dismal 40 per cent. For all their online presence, the Egyptian twitterati have yet to organise themselves into coherent political entitles. The liberal parties now taking shape are chronically fragmented, badly organised, overwhelmingly urban and lacking in leadership.
Egypt now seems set to fall to a party whose slogan is 'Islam is the solution' and whose blueprint for government is terrifyingly similar to Iran's. Those who cheered the Egyptian revolution did so in the naive hope that the end of history is still nigh - that western-style democracy is on the brink of an irrevocable triumph. But liberal democracy will not replace despotism as readily as many politicians in Washington and London might hope. Power, once devolved, is often seized by the best-organised groups, not necessarily the most popular - we have seen this from St Petersburg to Basra. David Cameron is right to have forestalled Gaddafi's planned massacre of the Libyan rebels. But as he knows, it would be foolish to make any wider claims about bringing liberty to the region.
No comments:
Post a Comment