The “Brotherhood” enemy was made very elaborately, and within a short time, the Muslim Brotherhood – and then the groups of political Islam – became the biggest enemy that threatens the Arab region and destabilizes it. The necessary executive and legislative measures have been taken to dismantle their institutions, control their properties, and arrest their cadres. Threatening those who beg for them to cooperate with them or defend them, and defame them in media, academic and cultural outlets. Not only that, but also presenting the moderate Islamic alternative that is reconciled with Western civilization, tolerant of the roots of historical hostility with it, and a defender of all the authority’s repression, oppression, injustice and tyranny, under the pretext that the authority is empowered to take whatever measures it deems appropriate to preserve the state’s stability and protect People from temptations.
It is very unfortunate and painful to talk about an internal enemy, made from among the people of the homeland who constitute a wealth of development for him in all fields, and they have always worked side by side with the ruling authorities in many countries of the region, in the interest of their stability, growth and prosperity, an enemy that was manufactured in a heinous criminal way. To achieve political goals, as part of preparation for the upcoming transformation process in the region for the benefit of the Zionist entity and its partners.
The results of making the “Brotherhood” enemy
The process of making the “Brotherhood” enemy was distinguished this time by several characteristics that occur for the first time in dealing with the Muslim Brotherhood. These characteristics had many extremely negative consequences, which were exacerbated by their severity coinciding with the process of making the “Zionist” friend and dismantling the enmities that were encapsulating him over the course of The previous decades of the Palestinian cause, the most prominent of these characteristics:
- The regional dimension:
Several Arab countries participated, for the first time, in a unified position towards the Muslim Brotherhood, and behind it the groups of political Islam, considering it the greatest enemy that threatens stability, and forces these countries to work together to eliminate it and get rid of it.
Countries hostile to the Muslim Brotherhood – for the first time as well – have classified it as an extremist terrorist group, subject to domestic and international terrorism laws.
The confrontations that the Muslim Brotherhood has been subjected to throughout its history have not witnessed what it is witnessing this time in terms of an acute tendency to eradicate its roots and destroy its organizational and intellectual structure, with the participation of several countries, some of which are at the top of the spear, and some are at the rear that provide support and support.
For the first time as well, the strong Arab supporter of the Muslim Brotherhood is declining, after being subjected to oppression and persecution in countries that are currently hostile to them, in the previous times in which they were subjected to repression and persecution at the hands of the regime of former President Gamal Abdel Nasser in Egypt, and former President Hafez al-Assad in Syria. The Gulf and the Arab Maghreb open their doors to the Muslim Brotherhood, and benefit from their presence in it politically and developmentally, including the United States and Western countries that were hostile to the regimes of Abdel Nasser and Assad, but this time only Turkey remained beside them, after both Qatar and Sudan retreated to Back due to pressure from their respective exceptional circumstances.
These four characteristics have resulted, as mentioned above, with a set of fatal consequences and effects on the Muslim Brotherhood, the most important of which are:
- The group’s leadership’s preoccupation with protecting the organization and preventing major splits in it, disrupting its performance in managing the crisis, and weakening its political mobility locally, regionally and internationally.
- The absence of a political vision that suits the size of the group’s political crisis in Egypt.
- A large number of the Muslim Brotherhood’s bases of all disciplines retreat from themselves, for fear of harassment or security accountability, or arrest, if their organizational intellectual identity is discovered.
- The decline of the public presence and the activities of solidarity and interaction with the various Arab and Islamic events and events that the group used to take advantage of continuously.
- The weakness of the Muslim Brotherhood’s ability to mobilize the masses, due to the masses ’fear of showing sympathy and solidarity with the Brotherhood.
- The attempt by some parties to benefit from the crisis the group is going through, and to attract complaining elements to deepen the fissures of the group’s organizational structure, and to further disintegrate it.
These results greatly weakened the Muslim Brotherhood’s ability to mobilize, mobilize and mobilize in the face of the major challenges sweeping the Arab region, which may have the countries hostile to the Muslim Brotherhood an indication of the success of the process of turning them into an enemy, which may push them to exert more pressure to expand the circle of hostility against them regionally. And internationally.
What happens after the “Brotherhood” enemy is made?
I have been making the “Brotherhood” enemy nearly eight years ago, and the process of nurturing the model and entrenching it among the masses of countries that made the enemy – in particular – is still in full swing, at the level of building ideas, directing positions and instilling alternative values, and the resulting behaviors. And the Muslim Brotherhood has become the pendulum on which hostile regimes hang over the disasters that occur in them, the failure that awaits their plans and projects, the plans they draw up, the agreements they enter into, the violations they commit, and the achievements they achieve in facing them. What then?
The countries that make the enemy envision how to deal with it, according to the strategies set for it, and the most famous of them are:
Preserving the enemy:
And nourishing it, to continue its vital role in unifying society’s position on it, and strengthening the people’s rallying around the regime, supporting its plans, and silence about its crimes, but with careful monitoring of its activities, so that it does not penetrate society and dismantle the system from the inside, as is the case with the Islamic State (ISIS) ( ISIS).
By stripping it of its characteristics and elements that distinguish it, and then dissolving it in society, as the United States did with the American Indians, its indigenous inhabitants, who were completely dissolved in the civilization of the white occupiers.
The United States did with the Soviet Union after World War II, leading to its dismantling and collapse in 1989, after more than 40 years of fierce cold war between them.
The United States also did with the regime of former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein, where he was implicated in the occupation of Kuwait, then drove him out of it, and besieged him for more than 10 years before it eliminated him in a violent war, under the pretext that it is a terrorist regime that supports terrorism and possesses weapons of mass destruction. With Al Qaeda, and threatens the security and stability of the United States and the world.
What is the strategy put in place by the countries that made the “Brotherhood” enemy to benefit from it or eliminate it?
Will it preserve the Muslim Brotherhood as a political pressure card to be used in internal and external political balances, especially those of a religious nature? The former Egyptian President Muhammad Anwar Sadat had removed the Muslim Brotherhood from the detention centers of the Nasser regime after his death, and provided them with some facilities to seek help from them against his political opponents, headed by the Communist movement, and when the former President Muhammad Hosni Mubarak took power, after the assassination of Sadat, he kept the Brotherhood card Muslims, but to strike with them this time the extremist Islamic groups, and continued to do so until he turned against them after the great success achieved by the Muslim Brotherhood in the elections of professional unions.
Or will it work to address the Muslim Brotherhood’s ideology, legalize their organizational presence, accommodate them within the national framework of the state under strict security control, and exploit them again to get out of the political impasse that these countries are going through, especially Egypt?
Or does the next phase that the region will witness, and the hegemony of the Zionist entity in it, does not allow the Muslim Brotherhood a foothold, and that the most appropriate strategy for it is the strategy of destruction? This is a long way off.
It is unfortunate and very painful that the conversation is focused on an internal enemy, made from the people of the country who constitute a wealth of development for him in all fields, and they have always worked side by side with the ruling authorities in many countries of the region, in the interest of their stability, growth and prosperity, an enemy that was manufactured in a heinous criminal way. To achieve political goals and authoritarian ambitions, as part of the preparation for the upcoming transformation process in the region for the benefit of the Zionist entity and its partners, who are working diligently and diligently in the opposite direction to dismantle the Zionist enemy and re-manufacture it as a friendly friend to the countries and peoples of the region. (Follow..)
More from the author