Arab Islamists run partial slates to intentionally lose?

[phk]

http://muse.jhu.edu/login?uri=%2Fjournals%2Fjournal_of_democracy%2Fv022%2F22.1.hamid.html

Abstract:

Most major political parties contest elections with the aim of ultimately governing. Supposedly, Islamist parties are no different. However, a careful consideration of their electoral behavior suggests a surprising reality: Islamists deliberately lose elections. They run “partial slates,” contesting on average only about one-third of total available parliamentary seats. This article considers the factors that lead Islamist parties to privilege self-preservation over political contestation. Democratic transitions require oppositions that are willing to both confront regimes and assume power. However, Islamists’ deference to regimes suggests they may be obstacles to democratic reform. Since Islamist groups are the main opposition in most Arab countries, this has significant implications for the likelihood of real democratic change in the region.

[ag]

When you are running as opposition in a de facto dictatorship, you are NOT running to win, and you want to show that. If you try running to win, you won't be allowed to run at all - assuming, that is, that you don't get killed. This is, of course, a compromise w/ the regime - but when you decide to run in sham elections, you compromise at every point.  As the islamic parties might have actually had a chance to win in an honest election, they have to be particularly careful to make sure everybody sees they are not in this election for real. But other groups also do this. And, in any case, in such situations it is extremely difficult to find enough selfless and/or insane people to run.

There is a difference between politicians and dissidents - dissidents are there to document the lack of real democracy and to maintain the flame until the circumstances change. The regimes we are talking about don't have oppositions - they only have dissidents.