Washington, D.C. — U.S. President Donald Trump has renewed his push to designate the Muslim Brotherhood as a foreign terrorist organization, a move that could dramatically reshape Washington’s approach to political Islam and its relations with key allies in the Middle East.
Trump and his supporters argue that the Muslim Brotherhood has long acted as the ideological “mother ship” for modern Islamist movements, some of which have turned to violence. Critics, however, warn that a broad terrorist label would blur the line between violent extremist groups and non-violent political actors, and could criminalize ordinary activism and charity work.
As the debate intensifies, one core question keeps returning: Who exactly are the Muslim Brotherhood, and what would such a designation mean?
A Nearly Century-Old Islamist Movement
The Muslim Brotherhood (Arabic: al-Ikhwan al-Muslimun) was founded in 1928 in the Egyptian city of Ismailia by schoolteacher Hassan al-Banna. It began as a social and religious reform movement, calling for a return to Islamic principles in public and private life and resisting Western colonial influence in the region.
From the beginning, the Brotherhood combined three pillars:
- Religious preaching: encouraging a more conservative, observant interpretation of Sunni Islam.
- Social services: building schools, clinics, and charities to reach the urban poor and working classes.
- Political activism: gradually pushing for laws and constitutions based on Islamic principles.
Over time, the Brotherhood expanded far beyond Egypt. Branches, affiliates, and sympathetic movements emerged across the Middle East, North Africa, Europe, and even North America. Today, it is better described as a global network of related organizations rather than a single centralized party.
Ideology: Islam, Politics, and Power
At its core, the Muslim Brotherhood promotes the idea that Islam is not only a faith but also a complete way of life that should guide governance, law, and society. Key themes in its ideology include:
- Implementation of sharia-based legislation through gradual political and social change.
- Social conservatism, especially on issues like family, education, and gender roles.
- Opposition to Western domination and a strong stance against Israel and Zionism.
Within that broad framework, there is significant internal diversity. Some Brotherhood branches participate in elections, work in parliaments, and publicly commit to peaceful political engagement. Others have taken a more confrontational line or have been accused of providing ideological or logistical support to militant groups.
The writings of the Egyptian thinker Sayyid Qutb, who emerged from the Brotherhood’s milieu in the mid-20th century, later influenced many hard-line jihadist movements. His ideas about “holy struggle” against corrupt regimes and Western influence were adopted by groups far more radical than the mainstream Brotherhood claims to be.
From Ballot Box to Banned Organization
The Brotherhood’s political reach peaked after the 2011 Arab Spring uprisings. In Egypt, its political wing — the Freedom and Justice Party — won elections and brought Mohamed Morsi to the presidency in 2012. Just one year later, the military ousted Morsi after mass protests, banned the Brotherhood, and designated it a terrorist group.
Since then, several countries — including Egypt, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain and others — have outlawed the organization, accusing it of plotting against ruling regimes and encouraging violence.
In other states, however, Brotherhood-linked parties remain legal and active. In countries like Jordan, Kuwait, and Morocco, Islamists linked to or inspired by the Brotherhood have taken part in elections, sat in parliament, and sometimes entered coalition governments.
This mixed reality is at the heart of the international dispute: in some capitals the Brotherhood is treated as a dangerous conspiracy, while in others it is woven into the political system as a tolerated, if controversial, opposition force.
Why Trump Wants the Terrorist Label
Trump and his allies frame the Muslim Brotherhood as the ideological backbone of global Islamist extremism. Their main arguments include:
- The movement’s founding vision, they say, ultimately seeks an Islamic state and rejects the secular democratic model favored in the West.
- Brotherhood networks, charities, and front groups are accused of spreading an intolerant ideology that can serve as a stepping stone to violent radicalization.
- Some offshoots and allies — such as Hamas — are already on U.S. and European terrorist lists, reinforcing the claim that the broader movement is dangerous by nature.
Designating the Muslim Brotherhood as a foreign terrorist organization would open the door to freezing assets, banning financial transactions, and imposing travel restrictions on individuals and entities accused of ties to the group. It would also send a strong political signal to U.S. allies: Washington views the movement not as a legitimate political actor but as a terrorist network.
For Trump’s supporters, such a move is presented as a long-overdue step in the fight against radical Islam.
Critics Warn of a Legal and Diplomatic Minefield
Opponents of the designation come from across the political and expert spectrum — including some U.S. diplomats, intelligence officials, and scholars of political Islam. Their concerns are focused on several points:
- Over-broad definition:
The Muslim Brotherhood is not a single, tightly controlled organization. Different national branches vary widely in behavior and ideology. A sweeping U.S. terrorist label might treat non-violent political parties and charities the same way as armed militants. - Impact on civil society and Muslims in the West:
Any mosque, charity, student group, or activist accused — fairly or not — of having “Brotherhood links” could face legal pressure, freezing of funds, and public suspicion. Civil rights groups warn this could chill peaceful political participation by Muslims and fuel Islamophobia. - Diplomatic complications:
In some allied countries, Brotherhood-inspired parties are part of mainstream politics. If Washington suddenly brands them terrorists, that could strain relations with governments that are trying to manage, rather than eradicate, these movements. - Legal challenges:
U.S. law requires evidence that an organization engages in terrorism or terrorist activity and poses a threat to U.S. security. Critics say applying this standard to the entire global network of Brotherhood-linked groups would be extremely difficult and likely challenged in court.
What’s at Stake
If the United States were to formally label the Muslim Brotherhood a terrorist organization, it would do far more than add another name to a sanctions list. It would send a clear message that Washington no longer draws a sharp line between non-violent Islamist politics and violent extremism.
Supporters see that as clarity. Critics see it as a dangerous confusion that could undercut moderates, drive opposition movements underground, and complicate relations with key partners in a volatile region.
Behind the legal and diplomatic arguments lies a deeper debate: is the Muslim Brotherhood best understood as a terrorist network that hides behind politics and charity, or as a broad, complex movement whose branches range from hard-line to pragmatic?
Trump’s push forces that question back onto the global agenda — and whatever the final decision, the consequences will be felt from Cairo and Amman to Washington and beyond.
