Muslim Brotherhood’s Failure

02 July 2013 | 20:23 Code : 1918084 From Other Media General category
An essay by Rasool Ja’farian, an expert on Middle Eastern affairs, for Khabar Online
Muslim Brotherhood’s Failure

The biggest Islamic party in the past century is the Muslim Brotherhood Party which gained power in the recent revolution in Egypt. Now, one year after the election of the first president from the Muslim Brotherhood, the bitter experience of defeat is being tasted by this theoretician. Will the Muslim Brotherhood get past this failure?

From the first day that revolutionary developments, called the Arab Spring, occurred in the Arab world, there was the speculation that the Muslim Brotherhood was facing a difficult test in achieving the results of the theories for which it had worked for eighty years. What will really happen for recent ideology in the Arab world if this movement fails?

It has now been ten years that US policy is based on allowing domestic revolutions to achieve their goals without US intervention. One of the most obvious examples of this policy is Egypt which, as the biggest Arab country, was permitted to easily remove a US lackey of thirty years from power. This is while the US did not defend Mubarak. The question that must be asked is what were the results of this US position and why did it easily accept it?

Firstly, the US’ soft position displayed this administration’s support of the popular movements and its unwillingness to fight against people’s demands, which in general is the demand of the West for expansion of democracy. Such a position removes the accusation made against the public opinion that the US supports the dictators. This issue is very significant in the international scene. Therefore, even if an uprising happens in Saudi Arabia tomorrow which the government would not be able to extinguish, the US will not defend the Saudi King. It is natural that if the people have no claim against the government, US cooperation with these governments will not, at least in appearance, be interpreted as defending the authoritarian governments. Thus, the US attempts to maintain this asset, even in the public opinion, especially for the masses who are not aware of what goes on behind the scenes.

Another aspect of this issue is the chaos which has been created in these countries, and the Americans, and in general the western countries, have this opportunity to take the most political and economic advantages from this situation. In a country where there is order, even under the domination of an authoritarian government, foreign governments cannot easily have influence; they are rather bound to deal with the demands of the heads of these governments. An example is the present situation in Saudi Arabia. Under the present conditions, the existence of the Saudi government, besides all its benefits, has the great disadvantage that the mentioned government is, directly and indirectly, supporting many of the US’ enemies and on top of all al-Qaeda. The reason is that the financial aids of Saudi Arabia and Qatar have strengthened these movements, and their political efforts have led the US to kneel down against the Taliban in Qatar. It is the same in Iraq and Afghanistan where they fight against the US. This is while the political and economic disorder can change the situation to the US’ benefit.

Thirdly, the Arab revolutions are not as threatening as had been predicted. It means that they are neither anti-Israeli, and not even anti-US, nor do they defend a revolutionary country like Iran. How can a weak country like Egypt which receives billions of dollars of foreign aid annually be against the US or Israel, even if the Muslim Brotherhood is in power! These revolutions, which in many cases have led to the collapse of the economic structures of the mentioned countries, showed that the problem of these countries is not only the dictatorship, but also their old economic, social, and cultural structures and their poverty which is their most important problem. In the opinion of the Americans, if these people, after thirty-forty years, are allowed to revolt and comprehend that a mere revolution would not solve all their problems, then they will return to the previous conditions. Experience has shown that following these revolutions, similar to the revolutions of the 1960s, a political movement with the support of either the West or Russia will dominate and there would be no more threats and the people would not even think about a revolution any more.

But the most important point, particularly in Egypt, is the defeat of the revolutionary movements with an identity like the Muslim Brotherhood. In today’s Egypt, the Muslim Brotherhood, with its 80-year record, has not, hitherto, been able to dominate the situation and prepare the grounds for democracy on the path of the country’s progress. Almost all of the important decisions which were made last year by the Muslim Brotherhood were withdrawn and these days the fire of revolution and uprisings has been so intensified that even Mr. Morsi is not safe in his palace. Now the question is if the Muslim Brotherhood, with its long record, has not been able to rule a religious government with wisdom and prudence, then how could the other new movements which claim to lead the Arab revolutions in other countries govern their countries?

tags: arab muslim brotherhood saudi egypt morsi