The country of another Islam

How does Tunisia differ from the rest of the Arab countries? And what is it an exception that only confirms the rule, or a radiant example for others?

As expected, in this country the parliamentary elections had defeated moderate forces - first of all, the block of secular politicians "Tunisian appeal". Following him, the Islamist party of the An-Nahda (Renaissance), which, from the moment of the victory of the 2011 peaceful revolution, could receive all the fullness of power in the country, but announced, to the amazement of many, that the development of democracy and civil society for the party is more important than the triumph of Islamic ideology.

What is the matter? Why in Tunisia, where the Arab Spring began, everything goes differently than in Egypt and other countries that initially followed the Tunisian example?

I’ll start with what we were weaned to start in a Soviet school: the role of personality in history. For the thirty years since independence of independence by the country with an iron hand, Autocrat Khabib Burgiba rules. But it should be compared not with a nass or other dictators, but rather with Ataturk, and in some respects - with Nelson Mandelia. He was a professional politician and revolutionary, and not a military and not a native of the special services. A graduate of the Sorbonne, whose first wife was a Frenchwoman, he felt like a Tunisian European, and he saw his country with a tied thousand Uz with Western Europe and its culture. Before the Second World War, Bourgiba was an indomitable and indestructible leader in the struggle for independence, he spent many years in French prisons. It would seem that such a person had to hate France. From this came the German occupation authorities, who did not doubt that they would find the ally in the person of the burgit of the ally, because their experience of communication with other Arab nationalists spoke about this.

But Burgiba unpleasantly surprised them. When the Germans released him from the French prison, he said "thank you", but even refused to formally support the ideology of anti -Semitism. In Rome, the Italian fascists made him appeal to the Tunisians, in which, of course, as always, he called for a fight against French colonialism, but instead of the open support of the “axis powers” muttered something slurred. And returning with fascist help to his homeland, he ungratefully announced that his benefactors were doomed to defeat and that the fate of the future independent Tunisia is inextricably linked with their opponents - Western Europe and the USA.

As the first head of the Tunisian state, he was extremely popular and used three decades of his almost unlimited power in order to carry out the deepest reforms in the country. Under burgib in the country, a modern infrastructure was created, an excellent tourism industry, advanced (in comparison with other Arab countries) agriculture was applied. As a result, the country was recognized as the leader in the quality of life in Africa, and this well -being has been achieved despite the almost complete absence of natural fossils. Bourgiba deliberately conducted the matter of the formation of a large middle class, the class of owners, and the achievement of almost universal literacy. Sharia was supplanted from legal practice, women were given the rights unprecedented in the Arab world.

At the same time, Bourgib was not a democrat at all, the secret police threw dissidents in the bars, freedom of speech, meetings and associations remained on paper. But the middle class grown by Burgy, numerous city youth and the intelligentsia, having read French literature and having seen Western films, wanted Western freedoms.

The second time, Tunisia was lucky when Prime Minister Ben Ali peacefully, without excesses, removed the burgy from power after it became obvious that he had become inadequate. The last straw was the intention of the elderly ruler to untie the campaign of terror against the Islamists, to execute their leaders. The former head of the police and security agencies Ben Ali understood that this would lead to a bloody civil war (as happened soon in neighboring Algeria). But otherwise, Ben Ali continued the burgiba course, although he gave some concessions of the intelligentsia, allowing albeit limited, but openly opposition activities, and so on. But this was already not enough for the new Tunisian elites. Ben Ali and his corrupt environment were swept away by a wave of street protests.

Even more, the country was lucky with the leader of its Islamists. Rashid al-Ghannushi is a unique figure. Apparently, two decades of life in the UK and close acquaintance with the British political system had a great influence on the formation of his worldview. For a long time, he, calling for the struggle against the dictatorship, at the same time dreamed of "Islam, rejecting violence." His return to his homeland after two decades of forced emigration was very similar to the triumphant visit to Iran Ayatollah Khomeini. Tens of thousands of people were looking forward to him at the airport. But the first statements and practical actions of Al-Ghannushi disappointed his radical supporters. The country was ready to give this policy all the fullness of power over himself-he did not want to take it, preferred to remain an ideologist of "An-Nahda". He spoke mainly about democracy, about human freedoms, and only secondly - about Islam. Two women entered the Provisional Government approved by him, and one of them (about horror!) Refused Hijab. And he himself dresses in European, says: "I'm so used to it." He argued that of all the Islamists, only moderate figures of the Turkish Party of Justice and Development are ideologically close to him, but in practice he went much further than them: he encouraged the adoption of the Constitution in which even the word "Sharia" is absent.

The Tunisian "An-Nahda" seems much less radical and fundamentalist not only in comparison with the "Muslim brothers", but also, for example, with "United Russia"

So, in the coming years Tunisia will apparently manage the coalition in which secular politicians are driving. Moderate Islamists will either enter the coalition with them or go to the opposition. But at the same time, Tunisian democracy is still fragile. Among secular figures there are those that would prefer the “Egyptian version” - the power suppression of ideological opponents, and not a painful struggle with them in the elections. Great disappointment of the radical wing of the Islamists. No wonder in the Islamic State, which is building a medieval caliphate in Iraq and Syria, almost the largest community is Tunisian (about three thousand people). The radicals-salafites arranged terrorist attacks in Tunisia itself, al-Ghannushi for them-a traitor. The leaders of the Anga Nahdy are familiar with statistics showing: their party enjoys especially great support among the illiterate peasantry, but consciously refuse to indulge the instincts of the "broad masses". Understanding that this lies in a dangerous contradiction for them. Maybe, therefore, al-Ghannushi is in such a hurry, compromises in order to rather consolidate the foundations of civil society.

In the Soviet school, they taught to look for social and class reasons for any events. It is easy to explain the specifics of Tunisia by a relatively high level of life and education, the presence of a rather enlightened and wide -class city bourgeoisie and intelligentsia. Everything is so, but is this situation not the result of many years of creative efforts of power? And where is here, in this case, the chicken and where is the egg?

And one more strange thought: the Tunisian "An-Nahda" seems much less radical and fundamentalist not only in comparison with the "Muslim Brothers" and other similar parties, but also in comparison, for example, with "United Russia", who preachs the rejection of liberal values, which manages to create an atmosphere of intolerance for all "another". On the same base instincts who are afraid of the leaders of the "An-Nahda". And the latest elections in Tunisia are not without reason recognized as one of the most open, honest and fair in the modern world. What can not be said about any other Arab country. Well, about Russia - too.

Andrey Ostalsky - British political commentator and journalist

Opinions expressed under the heading "Law" may not reflect the point of view of the editorial office