On the second anniversary of the revolutionary wave that flowed from Tunisia and rolled across Libya, Egypt, Yemen and Syria, one can see the beginnings of the process of radical change in the Arab world. What started as an ideologically free, all-inclusive mass movement of youths calling for freedom and justice has, after the fall of authoritarian regimes, witnessed the emergence of Islamists at the forefront of transitional phases. Islamists guided by the Muslim Brotherhood movement have taken power in Egypt, while in Tunisia the Ennahda Movement is the strongest party in the legislature and the executive, dominating the state apparatus. One can confidently argue that the Arab world has moved from the Facebook phase to the faith book phase of the revolution.

It should have been expected that Islamists, in particular the Muslim Brotherhood, would gain power. It was the only organized force in Egypt, had a strong ideology, and could count on dedicated members to follow its lead when mobilized. It also had legitimacy, respect and popular support stemming from the decades of imprisonment and exile suffered by it leaders and other members. The Brotherhood easily consolidated power through its strong, dedicated human network and tremendous resources in the political desert created by the toppled regime. They won as a thin minority in a fragmented majority, as the so-called Sofa Party — those who abstained because of general political confusion and absence of democratic practices — proved to be important. Winning was not such a difficult task in a now more traditional and increasingly religiously conservative society.

Many challenges await the Brotherhood in Egypt and Ennahda in Tunisia, the first being the radical, more conservative Islamists from the different branches of Salafism, excluding the jihadists, who reject politics because of their Manichaean views and their totalitarian concept of reorganizing society and regime based on exclusion and a hierarchy of values.

The Muslim Brotherhood movement will develop cracks over time like any other ideological force once in power but lacking governing experience. Democracy in many ways can be reduced to electoral procedure, rather than an inclusive approach of building a pluralistic society based on the concept of citizenship that necessitates the participation of all components of a society. It does not, however, allow one to hide behind an electoral victory to decide alone the system of governance, including its nature and sources of legitimacy, or define the system of societal values and hence repercussions for individual freedoms and liberties. Exclusive, religious-based definitions, even if supported at one point by a majority, only set the stage for more social tension, political stalemate and national crises.