FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

Suleiman and the Muslim Brotherhood

While the drama of revolution plays out across Egypt, the capitols of former and current western imperial powers are abuzz with activity.  Much of this activity is focused on preventing the success of the Egyptian uprising by replacing the man Hosni Mubarak with another agent of those powers.  The top name in the hat at this time appears to be Egypt’s torture chief and recently appointed vice president Omar Suleiman.  As most observers of the region know (and as has been reported in media around the world) Suleiman’s history includes assisting in renditions, torture and operating the Egyptian internal security apparatus.

One of the primary targets of that apparatus over the years has been the Islamic social and cultural organization that calls itself Jama ‘at al-Ikhwan al-Muslimun (Muslim Brotherhood).  Founded in 1928 by Hasan al-Banna, the group is best known in Egypt for its network of cultural and social aid centers around Egypt.  Although founded as a transnational organization with the intent of spreading its form of Islam around the world, today’s Muslim Brotherhood considers itself as primarily an Egyptian movement.  However, its members and ideology have helped form similar movements in nations around the world.  The Palestinian group Hamas is probably the best known of all of them.  Originally a moderate movement that had little to do with politics, the group began changing to a more politically active organization  in the 1920s.  In this incarnation it became an enemy of secular government and the target of Egypt’s national government.  Its members were responsible for a 1954 assassination attempt on nationalist leader and hero Gamal Abdel Nasser, a 1982 attempt on Syrian president Assad, and the 1981 assassination of Anwar Sadat.  Yet, Nasser allegedly asked for and received the assistance of the Muslim Brotherhood in his overthrow of the throne in 1952 and Sadat enlisted the group and other Islamists in his government’s attempts to push the Egyptian left out of political power.  Further-more, Washington’s intelligence services have been known to involve the Brotherhood in their activities, especially during the Cold War.  In recent years, the organization has undergone a shift away from radical action and returned to a more moderate role engaging in political, social and cultural work.

According to an article by Robert S. Leiken and Steven Brooke in the Council on Foreign Relations journal Foreign Policy and other sources, the current version of the Muslim Brotherhood is a considerably more complex organization than that portrayed in most of the western media.  It is on the record as being opposed to jihad and in favor of the democratic process of elections, even though it has no plans to run a candidate for president in any upcoming elections.  Admittedly, there are elements within the organization that would like to see a socially conservative Islamic state put into place, but those elements seem to be in the minority.  A reasonable US analogy to those elements can be found among the right wing Christians that would like to restructure the United States into a Christian theocracy.  As long as the rest of the voting population in the United States continues to participate in the political process, there is little chance those folks will get their wish.  Likewise, as long as the majority of the Egyptian population continues to participate in the political process there, the likelihood of an Islamic theocracy appears to be quite remote.

As for its philosophy, the doctrine of the group is not that different from many politically involved religious groups in the United States.  In other words it is socially conservative, but not socially fascist.  For example, regarding a question of concern to many, the Muslim Brotherhood does not regard women as second class citizens unworthy of education or a life outside the home.  In fact, its website clearly states that “Any fair investigation of the teachings of Islam or into the history of the Islamic civilization will surely find a clear evidence of woman’s equality with man in what we call today “political rights”.  This includes the right of election as well as the nomination to political offices. It also includes woman’s right to participate in public affairs.” In other words, women should involve themselves in the political process.  In addition, the importance of education for all citizens is strongly emphasized in its documents.  Furthermore, the Muslim Brotherhood firmly believes in the duty of society to help the poor.  Indeed, in a country where over 40% live on less than two dollars a day, it is because of the Brotherhood’s aid network that many Egyptians have been able to survive.

It is not my intention here to portray the Muslim Brotherhood as something that it isn’t.  It is my intention, however, to explain it as an organization that defies the simplistic utterings of some US  officials and legislators as merely another jihadist bunch of terrorists intent on destroying freedom.  Those who insist on this interpretation of the group are not engaging in an honest discussion.  Instead, they are parroting the Israeli government, which fears any Egyptian government that will not continue the Mubarak regime’s history of collaboration in regards to the embargo on Gaza and the ongoing attempts by Washington and Tel Aviv to engineer a Palestinian surrender utilizing the guise of a “peace process.” It is quite clear that any post-Mubarak government–especially one that includes the Muslim Brotherhood –will be opposed to continuing the relationship with Israel as it exists today.  To be fair though, it seems clear that any government in Egypt that does not include Mubarak or his henchmen is unlikely to continue that relationship in its current form.

All of which brings us back to the current machinations by Washington and other western regimes to install Suleiman into any transitional government in Egypt.  The primary reason for these workings come down to one thing–Israel.  As long as Mubarak or Suleiman are in control, Tel Aviv and Washington believe they can continue business-as-usual.  Furthermore, his presence in the transitional regime would enable Washington to try and ensure that any upcoming elections in Egypt go the way Washington and Tel Aviv want them to go.  Of course, there are no guarantees when it comes to elections.  When Mr. Suleiman stated  that the protesters should accept Mr. Mubarak’s decision not to run and should go home because he needed time to prepare for the elections, he wasn’t just talking about repairing ballot boxes.  One can be pretty certain that the preparations Suleiman is considering have to do with removing certain elements of the opposition from the ballot and rigging the results.  After all, why should he change something that has worked so well for the past several years?

RON JACOBS is author of The Way the Wind Blew: a history of the Weather Underground, which is just republished by Verso. Jacobs’ essay on Big Bill Broonzy is featured in CounterPunch’s collection on music, art and sex, Serpents in the Garden. His first novel, Short Order Frame Up, is published by Mainstay Press. He can be reached at: rjacobs3625@charter.net

 

 

More articles by:

Ron Jacobs is the author of Daydream Sunset: Sixties Counterculture in the Seventies published by CounterPunch Books. His latest offering is a pamphlet titled Capitalism: Is the Problem.  He lives in Vermont. He can be reached at: ronj1955@gmail.com.

Weekend Edition
May 25, 2018
Friday - Sunday
Melvin Goodman
A Major Win for Trump’s War Cabinet
Andrew Levine
Could Anything Cause the GOP to Dump Trump?
Pete Tucker
Is the Washington Post Soft on Amazon?
Conn Hallinan
Iran: Sanctions & War
Jeffrey St. Clair
Out of Space: John McCain, Telescopes and the Desecration of Mount Graham
John Laforge
Senate Puts CIA Back on Torture Track
David Rosen
Santa Fe High School Shooting: an Incel Killing?
Gary Leupp
Pompeo’s Iran Speech and the 21 Demands
Jonathan Power
Bang, Bang to Trump
Robert Fisk
You Can’t Commit Genocide Without the Help of Local People
Brian Cloughley
Washington’s Provocations in the South China Sea
Louis Proyect
Requiem for a Mountain Lion
Robert Fantina
The U.S. and Israel: a Match Made in Hell
Kevin Martin
The Libya Model: It’s Not Always All About Trump
Susie Day
Trump, the NYPD and the People We Call “Animals”
Pepe Escobar
How Iran Will Respond to Trump
Sarah Anderson
When CEO’s Earn 5,000 Times as Much as a Company’s Workers
Ralph Nader
Audit the Outlaw Military Budget Draining America’s Necessities
Chris Wright
The Significance of Karl Marx
David Schultz
Indict or Not: the Choice Mueller May Have to Make and Which is Worse for Trump
George Payne
The NFL Moves to Silence Voices of Dissent
Razan Azzarkani
America’s Treatment of Palestinians Has Grown Horrendously Cruel
Katalina Khoury
The Need to Evaluate the Human Constructs Enabling Palestinian Genocide
George Ochenski
Tillerson, the Truth and Ryan Zinke’s Interior Department
Jill Richardson
Our Immigration Debate Needs a Lot More Humanity
Martha Rosenberg
Once Again a Slaughterhouse Raid Turns Up Abuses
Judith Deutsch
Pension Systems and the Deadly Hand of the Market
Shamus Cooke
Oregon’s Poor People’s Campaign and DSA Partner Against State Democrats
Thomas Barker
Only a Mass Struggle From Below Can End the Bloodshed in Palestine
Binoy Kampmark
Australia’s China Syndrome
Missy Comley Beattie
Say “I Love You”
Ron Jacobs
A Photographic Revenge
Saurav Sarkar
War and Moral Injury
Clark T. Scott
The Shell Game and “The Bank Dick”
Seth Sandronsky
The State of Worker Safety in America
Thomas Knapp
Making Gridlock Great Again
Manuel E. Yepe
The US Will Have to Ask for Forgiveness
Laura Finley
Stop Blaming Women and Girls for Men’s Violence Against Them
Rob Okun
Raising Boys to Love and Care, Not to Kill
Christopher Brauchli
What Conflicts of Interest?
Winslow Myers
Real Security
George Wuerthner
Happy Talk About Weeds
Abel Cohen
Give the People What They Want: Shame
David Yearsley
King Arthur in Berlin
Douglas Valentine
Memorial Day
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail