On October 9, 2013, the Brookings Doha Center (BDC) hosted a policy discussion with Abdulkhaleq Abdulla, Professor of Political Science at United Arab Emirates University; Jassim Sultan, General Supervisor of An Nahda Website based in Qatar; and Hussein Shobokshi, a businessman and prominent columnist from Saudi Arabia. The discussion, moderated by BDC Director Salman Shaikh, focused on the Gulf states\u2019 views on the Muslim Brotherhood and, in a wide ranging discussion, the panelists discussed the Brotherhood\u2019s ideology, its failures in government in Egypt, the group\u2019s relation to terrorism, and the Brotherhood\u2019s future. They offered their explanations for the Brotherhood\u2019s loss of power, the reasons for recent arrests of Brotherhood members in the UAE, and their understandings of the flaws in the Brotherhood\u2019s ideology.<\/p>\n
Hussein Shobokshi attributed the Brotherhood\u2019s fall from power in Egypt to a rejection of its policies at the popular level. He emphasized that the Brotherhood had failed to adapt to the evolution of Egyptian society and tried to unilaterally force unpopular social changes. When questioned about the Brotherhood\u2019s electoral victories, Shobokshi stressed that the Brotherhood had governed in an exclusionary fashion after its victory, stating \u201cYou cannot govern a nation of Copts while refusing to meet them; you cannot govern by dividing yourself from the population.\u201d Jassim Sultan agreed that the Morsi government had placed excessive focus on social and cultural issues. He also suggested that the Brotherhood never accepted the idea of a civil state with equality for all its citizens and instead remained tied to the idea of an Islamist state where minorities were respected but unequal. Still, Sultan was slightly more critical of the Egyptian army\u2019s crackdown on the Brotherhood, describing the current situation as a clash between the Islamic project and militarization. Neither side, he argued, was treating society as capable of its own choices. Sultan attributed the Brotherhood\u2019s shortcomings to a wider failure by Islamist groups to adjust to modern times, arguing that these groups remain convinced that an Islamic state built on Islamic jurisprudence could be implemented today.<\/p>\n
Abdulkhaleq Abdulla also suggested that the Brotherhood had gained power because Egyptians \u201cvoted their hearts and not their minds.\u201d He said that Egyptians trusted members of the Brotherhood to be pious and good people, and therefore ignored their lack of technocratic qualifications. Arguing that the Brotherhood\u2019s fall was a continuation of the revolution and result of their immoderate government, Abdulla strongly criticized accusations of a foreign conspiracy to oust the Brotherhood. At the same time, he criticized American policymakers who trusted the Brotherhood\u2019s promises of moderation.<\/p>\n
Jassim Sultan dismissed the notion that the Brotherhood could gain a political foothold in the Gulf, where poverty is minimal and societies are harmonious. He suggested that the Brotherhood\u2019s views would not make inroads in these societies particularly because Gulf countries are organized along tribal and family loyalties rather than along ideological lines. The only role the Brotherhood can play in the Gulf, then, is a charitable one, primarily active in supporting international causes. Although Sultan noted the Brotherhood\u2019s potential role in the charity sector, he stressed that the idea of Islam as a total governing system, which the Brotherhood\u2019s founder Hassan al-Banna propagated, would not be transferrable to the Gulf.<\/p>\n
When queried on the UAE\u2019s recent crackdown on its Brotherhood affiliate, Al-Islah, Abdulkhaleq Abdulla argued that the Brotherhood in that country was almost entirely a political movement, with its charitable and religious activities only a tiny percentage of the organization. He claimed that the Emirati authorities had been forced to arrest Brotherhood members because the organization was a political one, and political groups are forbidden by law. Cases against members of the Brotherhood therefore are, in his eyes, purely legal and not ideological. At the same time, Abdulla suggested the Brotherhood had begun a vicious campaign against the Emirati government, charging that the Brotherhood supported Iran against the UAE and then attacked the UAE when it did not back the Brotherhood in Egypt.<\/p>\n
In response to reports of an attempted attack on the head of the Saudi mutaween<\/em> (Islamic religious police), Hussein Shobokshi stated that there had been escalation, at least in rhetoric, by the Brotherhood in Saudi Arabia after Morsi\u2019s fall, describing their bitter mental state as a \u201cshattered dream syndrome.\u201d He also criticized the Brotherhood\u2019s role in education in the kingdom and elsewhere, describing their teachings as being in opposition to the idea of the state. Shobokshi argued that these teachings made many young people hate their countries and inhibited national development around the region. In response to BDC Director of Research Shadi Hamid\u2019s question about whether panelists believed that the coup would cause alienated Brotherhood supporters to turn to terrorist groups after the failure of peaceful means, Shobokshi suggested that the Brotherhood\u2019s ideology was already responsible for the development of terrorist groups across the region. Abdulkhaleq Abdulla agreed, suggesting the Brotherhood might respond to their loss of power by encouraging terror, but this would speed the destruction of their movement.<\/p>\n Responding to strong criticism from some audience members over the speakers\u2019 anti-Brotherhood positions and their failure to discuss problems in their own states, Hussein Shobokshi and Abdulkhaleq Abdulla argued that the Brotherhood had proven itself to be incompetent at governance, constantly adopting a narrative of victimization rather than recognizing their own shortcomings.<\/p>\n Jassim Sultan offered a slightly different perspective, calling for a radical reform of Islamic thought. He suggested that the Brotherhood failed to understand that its position in power depended on popular support, as the organization\u2019s believed elections had granted them total legitimacy. Sultan argued against such a \u201cdictatorship of the majority.\u201d Nonetheless, Sultan also suggested the current situation, under military rule, would have negative repercussions, as the military\u2019s heavy handed treatment of protests could recreate the cycle of violence the region experienced in the 1950s and 1960s. He objected to the idea that if the Brotherhood was eliminated all problems would be solved, and he called for a unity government to help restore balance in Egyptian society.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"featured_media":72698,"template":"","class_list":["post-72697","event","type-event","status-publish","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","entry"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/mecouncil-afkar.fuegodigitalmedia.qa\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/event\/72697","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/mecouncil-afkar.fuegodigitalmedia.qa\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/event"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/mecouncil-afkar.fuegodigitalmedia.qa\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/event"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mecouncil-afkar.fuegodigitalmedia.qa\/en\/wp-json\/"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/mecouncil-afkar.fuegodigitalmedia.qa\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=72697"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
\nDuring the question and answer period, the panelists faced a diverse array of questions from audience members on issues such as the conflict between secularists and Islamists, potential changes in Islamic jurisprudence, the relationship between the Brotherhood and terrorist groups, and criticism over their disapproval of the Brotherhood. In response to a question about whether the confrontation in Egypt represented a conflict between Islam and secularism, Hussein Shobokshi pointed to the role of al-Azhar University in supporting the military and the protests. He said that Egypt\u2019s rejection of the Brotherhood was popular and went far beyond the secularists. Abdulla agreed, stating that Salafi groups also supported the military\u2019s position. In his view, \u201cI don\u2019t think what\u2019s happening in Egypt is over identity, the religious vs. the secular. What\u2019s happening is everybody has a problem with the Muslim Brotherhood and their methodology.\u201d<\/p>\n