Many people will be depressed about the result of the presidential elections in Egypt, some angry. That at least seems to be the feeling in the West, although I think it is mistaken.
For many, again particularly in the West, the Arab spring was a secular affair. In those days of the crowds in Tahrir Square it was easy to dream of a Western style democracy, with rights for everyone, but in truth whilst it may have started this way it was only because the Muslim Brotherhood was late on parade.
In the end the contest turned out to be between Ahmed Shafiq, a former Mubarak henchman whom nobody quite trusted and Muhammad Mursi, the Muslim Brotherhood candidate. Mursi won, but omewhere in the political mix lies the spectre of the military.
Mubarak was of course a military officer and he exerted his power through them. And the military have been reticent about giving up power, a surprise to some people but not to everyone. They want to be entrenched in the constitution, in the way the Turkish Army is. But Egypt hasn't yet got a constitution. The similarity is that like the Turks, the Egyptian army sees itself as a bulwark against Islam.
So if Egypt had voted fr the Mubarak henchman Ahmed Shafiq they would have got more army control. With Mursi there will be tensions, of course, particularly as he fights for authority in the constitution to come, but one side might well balance the other.
An Islamic government is probably bad news for women and quite possibly for minorities such as the Copts, but people may come to view it as the best of a bad job.