A TV report on the divergent political stances towards Israel of the Muslim Brotherhood’s various branches across the Arab and Islamic world.
Source: Al Mayadeen TV (You Tube)
Date: June 7, 2021
(Note: Please help us keep producing independent translations by contributing a small monthly amount here )
UAE’s foreign minister Abdullah Bin Zayed put the name of the Muslim Brotherhood next to (the names of) Hezbollah and Hamas in a striking statement in which he attacked both resistance groups.
The Muslim Brotherhood movement however, no longer has a unified (political) direction, as it has undergone radical shifts following the so-called Arab Spring, especially when branches of (the movement) came to power in Egypt, Tunisia and Morocco. (The movement( was also strongly present in the Syrian crisis. (During this time), the objective of the US and the West in general was to support the movement’s branches in order to develop a new policy that accepts Israel, then normalizes (relations) with it.
It is normal for the branches of the movement in different countries to have their differences. However, with its rise into positions of power and its need to deal with projects such as the “Deal of the Century” and the subsequent surrender (to Israel) agreements, the movement has witnessed a deep divergence in attitudes and (political) positioning.
In Morocco, for example, the Justice and Development Party faced a dilemma in relation to its convictions (on the one hand), and the needs of the government (on the other), but this did not prevent it from normalizing (relations) with Israel.
In Tunisia, the Renaissance movement (Ennahda) has stifled – on many occasions – the (parliamentary initiative) to criminalize any normalization with the Israeli occupation, despite Ennahda expressing its support for the Palestinian people and its opposition to normalization.
While in power, the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt adhered to the Camp David Accords, (thereby) obliterating the history of the movement, However, after losing power, it rejected the American Deal of the Century and its implications.
The harm caused by the Syrian Muslim Brotherhood to the current fighting against the submissive (‘peace’) projects (with Israel), and the provocative stances of some of its leaders against the Palestinian resistance factions during the “Sword of al-Quds” battle also goes without saying.
Many labels have been used (by the movement) to justify abandoning (its) principles, such as rationality and keeping ‘in touch’ with the (changing) circumstances. In fact, Qatar and Turkey acted as the supporter and the model for some of the Brotherhood branches, in that Doha maintains strong relations with Tel-Aviv, while Ankara has official relations with the Israeli entity.
However, unlike the aberration and illusions of the aforementioned branches of the Muslim Brotherhood, other branches in Algeria and Jordan have taken honorable positions against normalization (with Israel) to the point where they called for direct confrontation against the ‘Deal of the Century’ and the Gulf normalization projects with Israel.
Subscribe to our mailing list!
Leave a Reply