Hanin Ghaddar

Bashar al-Assad might be a dictator, but he backs the Resistance. That was the word on the street in South Lebanon during the first few months of the Syrian uprising. Today it is more like: Bashar al-Assad is a criminal, but he is much better than the Salafists that will come to power if he falls.

The fear of the Salafists, the Islamists and Muslim fundamentalists is becoming real as Islamic parties are winning elections in the countries that went through revolutions. Of course, these fears are valid, seeing that the rise of the Islamists crushed the dream of former Arab dictatorships turning into civil, democratic states. However, the situation is more complicated.

For the first time, both Assad supporters and some Israeli officials see eye-to-eye on the two countries’ relations. For example, Hezbollah and its Lebanese allies are playing the “Sunni fear” to scare their supporters of the “dark ages” that would follow if Assad were toppled. At the same time, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu criticized the uprisings in the Middle East last week, saying that the Arab countries are “moving not forward, but backward.” He also described the Arab Spring as an “Islamic, anti-Western, anti-liberal, anti-Israeli, undemocratic wave.”

Both are partially wrong. Although he is right that the Arab Spring is resulting in an Islamic wave, Netanyahu did not acknowledge the fact that the Islamic parties are winning through elections, the first democratic elections in their countries for decades.

As for Hezbollah and Assad supporters, who are worried about the Resistance and its future in a region without Assad, it is wrong to claim that a dictator overseeing the mass murder of his citizens is better than the Muslim Brotherhood.

Of course, setting up civil and modern states is the ideal outcome of these revolutions. However, one cannot change societies and their political realities in a few months. The Islamic parties were the most oppressed and persecuted by these regimes because they were the most organized, which in turn helped them because they were the most prepared to enter into elections when the regimes were toppled. In Egypt, the Muslim Brotherhood was the most influential party, despite its weakness at the level of state institutions.

And while the Egyptian Brotherhood is quite conservative, in Tunisia, the winning An-Nahda party’s leader, Rached al-Ghannouchi, stated last week that his party would not interfere in people’s daily lives and would focus on good governance. Morocco’s Islamic party’s head said something similar.

That’s good news for Tunisia and Morocco. But what about Libya and Syria, where Islamists might come to power too? There are two scenarios: either they govern rationally and follow the example of Turkey, where Islamist parties have to act within the democratic system, or they will apply Islamic rules as in Iran or Afghanistan, and try to create new dictatorships.

In the second scenario, they will fail because the people, energized by successful revolutions, will hold them accountable. The Islamic parties have criticized dictators and corrupt regimes for years, which is how they achieved credibility and popularity. Now if they install an Islamic state and forget about people’s real demands and necessities, they will also be toppled.

There is a huge difference between criticizing the authority and being one. This is exactly what happened to Hezbollah in Lebanon. When the party was the opposition, its popularity was much greater than it is now that it controls the government.

Moreover, the Islamists winning elections might be a good reality check for the secular groups that have been calling for a civil state but never got organized. Maybe now it is time for them to mobilize and gather the needed popular support.

Now all eyes are cast on Syria and the composition of its opposition. Although the Syrian National Council is a rather good representative of all opposition groups, many fear that elections could give more power to the Muslim Brothers, knowing that Turkey is backing them full-force. But we should keep in mind that the composition of Syrian society is more diverse than many Arab societies. With the Christians, the Alawites, the Druze and the Kurds, the Arab Sunnis make up just a tad more than the half. And not all of them are Muslim Brothers.

But again, even if they win the greatest share in elections, they will have to pass the same test.
No one can guarantee the future, but the risk is worth it. And if the Islamists fail the test, then others will have the chance to garner power. We have waited for change for decades; a few more years won’t hurt that bad.

Hanin Ghaddar is the managing editor of NOW Lebanon