the islamist-secular divide - transitional governance project

Islamism, Secularism and

Democracy after the Arab Spring

2

The Islamist-Secularist Divide…

3

And What It Means for Transitions in the Arab World

4

Overview of the Data

Unique, Time-Series Survey Data in Egypt:

7 surveys, 13,200 respondents, social and political questions

Survey Data in Tunisia: post-election survey (in-progress)

Interviews with Egyptians and Tunisians:

Voters, party elites, scholars, journalists

Observation:

Elections and other events

Secondary sources

5

Key Questions

To what extent does the Secularist-Islamist Divide drive elections?

Voters differentiate parties and candidates primarily on a secular – religious scale

Discourse mainly – and increasingly – focused on religion during campaigns

Do deep-seated beliefs explain the polarization over religiosity and the

strong showing of Islamists?

Strong results for the Islamist parties do not represent deep religious values

Rather, strong showing represents primarily organizational capacity of Islamists

What are the implications for democracy-promoters?

Need to resist temptation to limit liberal freedoms, discourse

International organizations need to avoid shoring up secularists vs. Islamists

Need to emphasize iterative processes and seek ways to avoid entrenchment of early

winners (ex. Need for local level elections)

Voters don’t distinguish

Candidates’ Positions on Economy

Tarek Masoud, Ellen Lust, Jakob Wichmann, Gamal Soltan, “The

Presidential Election in Egypt – Who voted for whom, and why?”

but they do on Religion

Tarek Masoud, Ellen Lust, Jakob Wichmann, Gamal Soltan, “The

Presidential Election in Egypt – Who voted for whom, and why?”

8

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Egyptian Bloc

Continuing Revolution Alliance

Wafd Party

Free Egyptians Party

Nour Party

Wasat Party

Freedom and Justice party

Egypt National Party

Generally, Voters Differentiated by Religion

-0,8

-0,7

-0,6

-0,5

-0,4

-0,3

-0,2

-0,1

0,0

0,1

0,2

0,3

0,4

0,5

0,6

0,7

0,8

-0,8 -0,6 -0,4 -0,2 0,0 0,2 0,4 0,6 0,8

The Continuing Revolution Coalition

Egyptian Bloc

Al wafd party The free Egyptians party

Al Nour Party

Al Wasat party

The Freedom and Justice party

NDP offshots

Socialist & religious

Liberalist & secular Socialist & secular

Liberalist & religious Socialist & religious

Liberalist & secular Socialist & secular

Liberalist & religious

Voters’ values of the parties differentiate on religious

-secular scale and not the economic scale

1 Voters differentiale placement of parties on the

religious – secular scale and not on the liberal-

socialist scale

2

Political parties voters’ values Placement of political parties

Source: Religious axis: (1)Religious leaders should not influence voters,(2)Religious leaders have a responsibility to direct voters to the right candidate,(3)Religious leaders should not

influence policies of elected governments,(4)Religious leaders should direct governments to policies which meet religious teachings. Economy axis: (1)Free economic competition should be

respected and the government’s interference in the economy kept at a minimum,(2)government has a big economic role, because competition does not serve the well-being of the public.

9

What Explains the Primacy of Religion in Politics?

10

I

It’s Not Just Values:

Egyptians voted more Islamist than their values indicate

The parties that voters place in the religious end of

the spectrum gained a majority of votes

1

…but it is only a small minority of Egyptians that

have the same strong religious values

2

Voters’ Political Values

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

22

24

26

28

30

32

34

36

38

8,9 %

5

2,8 %

3,7 %

4 3 2

37,5 %

1

27,8 %

Religious

9,2%

Secular 9 8 7 6

1,6 % Egypt National Party

Al Wafd

Egyptian Bloc

Revolution

Continue All.

Al Wasat

Freedom and Justice Party

Nour Party

Placement of political parties on a

religious-secular scale

% votes at

parliamentary

elections 2011

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

22

24

26

28

30

32

34

36

38

Secular

26.1%

9

18.1%

8

16.3%

7 6

8.6%

5

12.1%

4

4.9%

3

4.4%

2 1

4.8%

Religious

4.7%

% of Egyptians

Source: Parliamentary survey 2, 4, 5 & 6. *Religious and secular values is defined according to the scores on the two variables: Agreement on the phrase "Religious leaders have a

responsibility to direct voters towards the best candidate“ and agreement on the phrase "Religious leaders should not influence decision of elected government“. Party’s placement is

based on how the voters place them on a scale from 0-10

11

Support and favorability towards the Islamist parties varies,

growing in the lead up to the election

The Islamic parties’ support grew during the

election campaign

1

Source: Parliamentary survey 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 & 6.

The citizens’ view of the Nour Party also grew more

favorable during the election campaign

2

4447

31

2625

-29-30

-23

-34

-39-39

1617

8

-8

-14

-40

-35

-30

-25

-20

-15

-10

-5

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Unfavorable

Favorable

Late

December

2011

Early

December

2011

November

2011

October

2011

September

2011

August

2011

-25

14 Favorable

minus

unfavorable

52

42

3432

19

23

77

10

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

55

Late

December

2011

Early

December

2011

November

2011

10

October

2011

September

2011

August

2011

Al Nour Party

FJP

12

While values appear stable over time:

Preferences for Islamic, democratic and strong state remain similar

7% 9% 10% 8% 6% 6%

September 2011

53%

38%

August 2011

55%

42%

56%

38%

51%

May 2012

39%

November 2011

46%

47%

October 2011

44%

46%

Strong state

Democratic- civil state

Islamic state

June 2012

Source: Parliamentary survey 1,2,3 4,5 & 6. Presidential survey 1, 2

13

Voters with religious values is a minority in all the major parties in Egypt

Source: Parliamentary survey 4,5 & 6.

The Freedom and Justice party

75%

25%

Al Nour Party

60%

40%

Secular values

Religious values

Egyptian Bloc

94%

6%

Al wafd party

88%

12%

14

To some extent, this is an issue of identity:

1%

2%

100%

Citizen of the world

Saedi, coastal

A human being

Arab

Egyptian

Muslim or Christian

What is the first word you

would use to describe yourself

2% 2%

43%

50%

9%Strong state even though not democratic

Civil state 37% Islamic state 54%

10%

37%

52%

Civil state

Strong state even though not democratic

Islamic state

Source: Parliamentary survey 3

15

But the Center is the Largest Group of Egyptians

Party

preference

Mixed

Secular political

values and voted

FJP and Nour

Consistent

Islamist

Religious political

values and voted

for FJP and Nour

Consistent

Secular

Secular political

values and voted

for secular party

Mixed

Religious political

values and voted

for secular parties

Political Values

Secular Religious

Secular

party

Islamist

party

Segment Definitions

Source: Parliamentary survey 4,5 & 6

51%

Mixed

Consistent Secular

Consistent Islamist

19%

30%

Size of Segments

16

Why Did Islamists Do Well?

17

Catering to Populations in Need:

Car ownership, as a poverty indicator,

shows that a fewer percentage of

Islamic party voters own a car

1

Islamic party voters have lesser education

than non-Islamic party voters

2

Source: Parliamentary survey 4, 5 & 6.

No

Car owner

Islamic

party voter

91%

9%

Non-islamic

party voter

86%

14%

17%13%

44%

39%

Islamic

party voter

19%

29%

Non-islamic

party voter

17%

22%

High and Upper

Highschool

Illiterate/

barely read

College

Below High

School

Rural

Urban

Islamic

party voter

64%

36%

Non-islamic

party voter

52%

48%

Islamic party voters are

living more in rural areas than

non-Islamic party voters

3

18

Islamist are more politically active than secularist

No

Yes

Secular

98%

2%

Mixed

98%

2%

Islamist

98%

2%

No

Yes

Secular

94%

6%

Mixed

92%

8%

Islamist

89%

11%

The segments have joined

political parties to the same extent

1

Islamist were more active in

protests

2


19

With superior organizational resources at their disposal

Source: Presidential survey 1

Islamic parties mobilized

more volunteers for their

campaigns

1

Islamic parties have four

times as many active members

2 The Islamic parties have a

greater share of full time staff

working in the parties

3

11.900

Islamic parties

25.000

Non-Islamic

parties

Non-Islamic

parties

24.500

Islamic parties

100.000

Full time

Part-time

Non-Islamic

parties

38%

63%

Islamic parties

75%

25%

Total number of campaign volunteers Total number of active members Type of staff in parties

20

Conclusions and Implications

Discourse

Conclusions

• The discourse of the campaigns

were increasingly religious

• Need to resist supporting efforts to

limit liberal freedoms, discourse

• Emphasis on media freedoms,

freedom of association, political

parties laws, etc

Implications

• Transition politics

fundamentally shaped by

religious-secular divide

• International actors need to avoid

temptation to shore up secularists vs.

Islamists

• Undermines secular forces

• Reinforces the divide at the expense of

democracy

Transition

Politics

The Centre

• Egyptian electorate has a large

center

• Respond to the needs of the center

• Need to emphasize iterative

processes and seek ways to avoid

entrenchment of early winners

• Roles of local level elections

21

Conclusions from the Data

Transition politics fundamentally shaped by religious-secular divide:

• Religion was the main dividing line in the elections and the voters are primarily able to

differentiate the parties on a secular – religious scale

• This is partly related to a divide in identity, between Egyptians focusing on Egyptian national

identity and those focused on Muslim identity.

Ideological competition not reflecting deep-seated beliefs:

• The strong results for the Islamist parties should not be interpreted as religious values

running deep in Egyptian society, as only a small segment of 19 % harbour strong Islamist

values.

• The largest group in Egypt is clustered around the middle having not strong preferences for

either a secular or an Islamist state.

Organizational capacities a key factor in explaining Islamist current success, but fluid:

• Islamist parties had superior campaign strategies and organizational capacity

22

Implications for Transitional Politics?

• Secularists – domestic and abroad – tend to view “Islamist

takeover” reflecting deep-seated, values

• Fear of spreading message and power prompts support for

illiberal and anti-democratic policies

However,

• Illiberal policies have potential for inducing preference

falsification that strengthens Islamist parties

23

Moving Forward: Recognize Fluidity and Keep the

Playing Field Open

• Need to resist supporting efforts to limit liberal freedoms, discourse

• International actors need to avoid temptation to shore up secularists

vs. Islamists, focus on liberal/democratic vs. illiberal, anti-democratic

• Counter-productive

• Not necessarily more liberal, democratic outcomes

• Respond to the needs of the center

• Need to emphasize iterative processes and seek ways to avoid

entrenchment of early winners

• Roles of local level elections

• Emphasis on media freedoms, freedom of association, political

parties laws, etc

• Push toward mult-issue elections

24

Appendix

25

Only minor difference in the evaluation of state institutions

10% 8% 11%

23%21% 19%

17%

13% 13%

Very poor

Poor

Mediocre

Good

Very good

Secular

41%

17%

Mixed

42%

17%

Islamist

38%

13%

7%4% 7%

12%12%

13%

5% 9%8%

Very poor

Poor

Mediocre

Good

Very good

Secular

38%

35%

Mixed

38%

36%

Islamist

38%

38%

13% 16%20%

29%30%

28%

16%

16%15%

Very poor

Poor

Mediocre

Good

Very good

Secular

27%

9%

Mixed

29%

8%

Islamist

33%

10%

Islamist are more negative

towards the judiciary

1

Islamist are slightly more positive

towards the SCAF

2 Only minor difference on

evaluation of Sharaf’s second

government

3


Evaluation of judiciary Evaluation of the SCAF Evaluation of the Sharaf government

26

Appendix: islamist, mixed and secular Dependent (0=islamist) and (1=mixed + secular)

Independent

Coeff. Sign Income: Does the family own a car? -,182 ,396

Urban/rural -,492 ,000 ***

Education -,019 ,845

Age ,202 ,015 **

Dependent variable 0=islam, mixed=1 and secular=2

Independent Coeff. Sign Urban/ Rural -,161 ,000 *** Edu_rec -,011 ,649

Age_rec ,071 ,000 *** Income: Does the family own a car? -,116 ,017

**

Dependent (0=islamist+mixed) and (1=secular)

Independent

Coeff. Sign Income: Does the family own a car? -,395 ,006 ***

Urban/rural -,422 ,000 ***

Education -,036 ,621

Age ,194 ,001 ***

27

Overview of Egyptian Surveys

Date of collection, number of respondents and contents

Parliamentary survey 1

Survey

• 5 – 17 August, 2011

Date of collection




• 11 – 22 September, 2011

• 10 – 26 October, 2011

• 7 – 17 November, 2011

• Current issues

• Future prospects

• Political participation and election

• Political competence

• Political system

• Political parties

• Presidential candidates

• Values

• Trust

• Identity

• Social networks

Contents

• 2400

Respondents

• 2400

• 2400

• 1200



Presidential survey 1

Presidential survey 2

• 1 – 8 December, 2011

• 17 – 27 December, 2011

• 1200

• 1200

• 1200 • 19 – 22 May, 2012

• 6 – 11 June, 2012 • 1200

28

Content

Depth of the divide

Ideology and religion 2

3

Who are the Islamist and non-Islamist? 4

Introduction and survey data overview 1

29

Support for Islamic parties has grown over time

Source: Parliamentary survey 1,2,3 4,5 & 6. Presidential survey 1, 2

Islamic party

Non-Islamic party

June 2012

71%

29%

May 2012

66%

34%

November 2011

70%

30%

October 2011

45%

55%

September 2011

45%

55%

August 2011

39%

61%

30

Content

Depth of the divide

Ideology and religion 2

3

Who are the Islamist and non-Islamist? 4

Introduction and survey data overview 1

31

Islamists are more rural and younger than secularists

Rural

Urban

Secular

50%

50%

Mixed

60%

40%

Islamist

68%

32%

13% 12% 14%

Illiterate

Secular

55%

31%

Mixed

57%

31%

Islamist

54%

33%

Primary

school to

middle

diploma

College

and above

15%18%

24%

51+

31-50

18-30

Secular

39%

37%

Mixed

38%

43%

Islamist

38%

48%

Islamists live in rural areas

1

No differences in education level

2

Islamists are younger

3


the islamist-secular divide - transitional governance project

Documents