The victory by Ennahda in Tunisia's elections and the speech by Mustafa Abdel-Jalil, the head of Libya's National Transitional Council, on the day he declared the country had been liberated from the rule of Muammar Gaddafi, are raising anxiety about the future of democracies in both countries. It is true that one should support the course of democracy and the revolutions that have freed these two peoples of tyrants who oppressed and impoverished their countries. However, what some have called the "Arab Spring" might turn into the dominance of Islamist parties, which are the best-organized, if secular parties fail to build a popular base and set down a strategy for building a truly democratic state. When they take power, Islamist parties usually want to eliminate freedoms by imposing a certain type of lifestyle, as in Iran, when the Khomeini revolution toppled the Shah. Some of those who supported Khomeini at first wanted democracy and freedom, and they ended up either in prison or outside the country. The revolution against the Shah of Iran did not take place via elections, but rather street demonstrations. Today, after the Tunisian elections, the Tunisian people must be very determined to respect human rights and freedoms. If not, the disappointment with democracy in the Arab world will be considerable. As for Libya, where elections will be organized, hopes are high that oppressive Islamic rule will not begin to replace the Gaddafi regime, which was one of the worst we have seen. Even an Arab official told his Libyan friends, "When you toppled King Idriss, the option was either Idriss or the Devil. So you toppled Idriss and you got the Devil, in the form of Gaddafi ." Mustafa Abdel-Jalil's speech should not mean that the dominance of religious fanaticism and the elimination of freedoms is what awaits Libya. Did Abdel-Jalil need to discuss polygamy in a speech in which he talked about the liberation of his country and a new future for building the state? At the beginning of Libya's uprising, Abdel-Jalil became angry when a reporter asked about the fears of partitioning Libya. It was a worrying answer from a revolutionary who was calling for democracy. He said he was ending the discussion, because of the provocative question, and seemed very far from being a democratic person. The anxiety about the future of revolutions should prompt democratic forces in these countries that have been liberated from tyrants to make constant and vigilant efforts to protect the gains of these revolutions. These uprisings should serve the interests of peoples and not the wishes of hard-line Islamic extremists who are better organized than the rest of the people, because they learned politics and resistance while carrying out secret activity under the rule of tyrants. Building a modern state should not be left to Islamist hard-liners, because they have nothing to do with modernity and progress. In 1991, Algeria halted an election process because Islamist parties were going to take power, and would have resorted to fear-provoking terrorism. But there was a big debate at the time about whether the elections should have been halted, or the Islamists should have been left to win, and rule. At the time, the answers came from the Algerian military, which halted the elections, with support from the west. Today, things have changed, because the west supports democracies, even if they result in the dominance of Islamists. Paris is keen to remind everyone of the need to respect human rights, or else the reason for the revolutions will disappear. Today, as the Syrian people fights an oppressive regime that kills citizens, the regime is using the Muslim Brotherhood to frighten Christians, and the west. The Islamists in Libya and Tunisia will serve the cause of the Syrian popular uprising if they truly respect human rights and freedoms in exerting their authority, which is based on a proper election process. But the anxiety over their behavior remains legitimate and there is hope that we will see, in the future of Libya and Tunisia, freedom and accountability remain the principle that dominates the revolutions in these countries.
