What's new

Iran and the Muslim Brotherhood: The best of enemies?

Kuwaiti Girl

SENIOR MEMBER
Joined
May 8, 2016
Messages
2,287
Reaction score
0
Country
Kuwait
Location
Kuwait
Iran and the Muslim Brotherhood: The best of enemies?

They had much in common when the Arab Spring began before falling out over Syria. But could reconciliation be on the cards?

http://www.middleeasteye.net/news/iran-and-muslim-brotherhood-best-enemies-2061107490

When the Arab Spring revolutions broke out in 2011, the Islamic Republic of Iran hailed them as an “Islamic awakening” and considered them as a continuation of its own revolution in 1979. The affinity that Iran saw in the Muslim Brotherhood was real.

Even today Iran recognises the Brotherhood and Tehran have much in common, particularly the notion of “Islamic democracy”.

Mustapha Zahrani, the head of the Institute for Political and International Studies which is the research centre of the Iranian Foreign Affairs Department, said: “The Muslim Brotherhood’s ideas do really matter for the founders of the Iranian Islamic Republic. We believe in the Islamic democracy and in a moderate Islam: as do organisations close to the Muslim Brotherhood in Turkey and in Egypt."

Then there is the history: the Ayatollah Ali Khamenei translated into Farsi the works of Sayid Qutb, an intellectual and one of the founding thinkers of the Brotherhood, who was killed in prison in Egypt in 1966. They also share the same politics: both support Palestine and are opposed to Western powers.

During the 1980s, the Iranian Islamic Republic had been a role model for many leaders of the Brotherhood, such as Fathi Yakan in Lebanon or Rached Ghannouchi in Tunisia, founder of the Movement of Islamic Tendency, now known as Ennahda.

In June 2012, Mohamed Morsi, leader of the Freedom and Justice Party, close to the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, became the country's first democratically elected president of the Republic. Iran applauded.

Two months later, Morsi went to Iran, during the Non-Aligned Movement Summit. That was a real event for, since 1979, Iran had not forgiven Egypt for signing a peace treaty alone with Israel. Nevertheless, after a 33-year diplomatic freeze, an Egyptian president was invited in Tehran as a Muslim brother.

When Morsi was overthrown by the army in July 2013, Hossein Amir-Abdulahian, Iran's deputy minister of Arabs affairs, claimed that Iran had condemned the coup.

"We did assure the Egyptian authorities that we do not consider the Muslim Brotherhood like a terrorist organisation. However, we did attend the investiture ceremony of President Sisi," he said.

Amir-Abdulahian said Iran had called on the Egyptian army to exercise restraint, condemning the brutalities that occurred in Egypt against the Muslim Brotherhood. In January 2014, the Egyptian authorities, offended by the Iranian support to the Brotherhood, called in the Iranian ambassador in Egypt, Mojtaba Amani.

"This coup d’etat did more bad than good for Egypt. Indeed, there are now two forces: the Brotherhood and the partisans of Marshal Sisi. Egyptian society is split in two," said Amir-Abdulahian.

Relations aggravated by Syrian crisis

But a bigger split occurred over Syria. Tehran has not forgiven the former Egyptian president for attending in Cairo, in June 2013, an Islamic conference "for the victory of Syrian people". Morsi had announced then that Egypt would cease all diplomatic relations with Syria, and criticised the military intervention carried out by the Lebanese Hezbollah - the key Arab partner for Tehran - while supporting Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.

Patrick Haenni, a former researcher at the Centre for Economic, Judicial, and Social Study and Documentation in Cairo and an expert on Egypt, called the conference a turning point.

“Important Salafi leaders attended, like a Sunni front to support the Syrian revolution. The Brotherhood felt threatened. Some of their leaders, such as Khayrat al-Shater, were close to the Salafists, who at that time, represented 25 percent of the Egyptian voters," he said.

The Syrian crisis confused Iran and all organisations who claim some sort of affiliation with Hassan al-Banna, the founder of the Muslim Brotherhood. In February 2012, Ennahda was leading Tunisia, where an international conference of Syria’s friends was taking place. That conference was supporting the Syrian National Council, bringing together all the major opposition parties - among them the Syrian Muslim Brotherhood who represented the majority.

Around the same time, the Palestinian Hamas, who had been funded in part by Tehran, moved closer to Qatar and Turkey. In June 2013, its leader, Khaled Meshaal, attended in Qatar a conference in support of the Syrian opposition, where the Egyptian preacher Youssef al-Qaradawi, a leading contemporary theorist of the Muslim Brotherhood, harshly attacked Hezbollah - in English the Party of God - and called it the ‘Hezb al-Shaitan’ - the party of the Devil.

In February 2016, Fahmi Howeidy, an Egyptian writer and intellectual close to the Muslim Brotherhood, was invited by the Department of Foreign Affairs in Tehran. He criticised Iranian regional politics but his criticisms were still published on the Iranian Foreign Affairs thinktank's website.

He said: "Iran overthrew the Shah. And now they are supporting Bashar al-Assad. Syria's government had been turning a blind eye to the welfare of its population which led to foreign interventions as we know them. I had been supporting the Islamic revolution for the past 37 years. But when I started to criticise Iranian positions, I got attacked."

Iran does not view the Syrian uprising as a popular revolution. It worries more about how Gulf states are supporting the Syrian opposition, how Sunni militant movements are rapidly expanding in the region, and how since 2011 western countries have been silent about how the Shia population is being crushed by the authorities in Bahrain.

‘How can we call it a ‘Syrian’ uprising since during the first weeks, western diplomats were participating?” Mustapha Zahrani said. This was a reference to a visit to Hama, in July 2011 by Robert Ford and Eric Chevallier, the former American and French ambassadors in Syria.

Speaking on condition of anonymity, a member of the Islamic Research Institute for Culture and Thought (IRICT), a centre close to the Iranian sheikh Ali Akbar Rachad, is realistic: "Iran knows that it has partially lost the support of Sunni Arabs, among them the Muslim Brotherhood. Syria is a dictatorship. However for Iran, the war in Syria remains a defensive war. Our current main issue is our conflict with Saudi Arabia and the terrorist threat.”

The isolated case of Turkey and Palestine

Despite disagreements about Syria - and Yemen - some of the Muslim Brotherhood's representatives in the Arab world are still considered by Iran as representatives of a ‘moderate Islam’. For instance, Tunisia's Ghannouchi, still has some sort of intellectual credibility with the Iranian religious authorities.

He has maintained friendly relations with the Iranian diplomatic representation in Tunisia, even though he supports the Syrian opposition. In September 2015, he met with Mohammad Javad Zarif, Iran's foreign minister. In February 2016, he attended the ceremonies of the 37th anniversary of the Islamic revolution.

However, Iranian leaders fear that the Muslim Brotherhood might turn into a Salafist movement. In January 2016, Ayatollah Nasser Makaram Shirazi’s office - one of the main religious authorities in the country - published a series of brochures about "extremist and takfiri movements" that included a history of the Muslim Brotherhood.

The relationship between the Muslim Brotherhood and Iran has gone from mutual respect to mutual distrust, potentially fuelling the further polarisation between Sunni and Shia in the region.

There are however two notable exceptions to this decline in relations. The first, surprisingly, is Turkey. Its president, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, a member of the the AKP (Justice and Development Party), has become the guardian of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, Syria and Tunisia. In Syria, his animosity against towards Assad is uncontested.

And yet, since 2011, Iran and Turkey have maintained diplomatic relations that go beyond mere cordial niceties. In March 2016, Turkish Prime Minister Ahmed Davutoglu went to Iran with five ministers and several Turkish businessmen. Economic partnerships and a common viewpoint on the Kurdish issue explain the good relations between Ankara and Tehran.

The second exception is Hamas. It is true that in November 2014, Salah Raqab, a member of its political office, accused Iran of trying to establish "a Persian empire" in the region, claiming that more Palestinians were becoming Shia Muslims. And yet Hamas and Iran have made one step towards a reconciliation.

In February 2016, Osama Hamdan, in charge of the Palestinian Foreign Affairs for Hamas, went to Tehran. Immediately after meeting with the Iranian authorities, Hamas issued a straightforward press release: "We want a clean slate with Tehran."

The question of Palestine is deeply rooted in the Iranian ideology. And even though they share a different point of view about the Syrian crisis, Hamas has never stopped receiving Iranian support.

Historical links between Iran and organisations claiming affiliation with the Muslim Brotherhood are not binary relationships. They are a mix of confessional suspicions, disagreement about the Syrian crisis and difficulties to discuss through Ankara or Gaza. Iran and the Brotherhood have not yet disappeared from the regional political scene: they need now to remain the best of enemies.
 
Muslim-brotherhood can't be seen as a single entity, depending on how much a Sunni individual is affected by wahhabi ideologies, he may love or hate cannibal terrorists in Syria and Iraq.

also as far as I remember Morsi's position on Syria was the same as Iran, no intervention by foreign forces. but he was fooled by his so called saudi brothers, the same brothers who didn't hesitate a second to prevent the foundation of a Islamic regime in Egypt.
 
Muslim-brotherhood can't be seen as a single entity, depending on how much a Sunni individual is affected by wahhabi ideologies, he may love or hate cannibal terrorists in Syria and Iraq.

also as far as I remember Morsi's position on Syria was the same as Iran, no intervention by foreign forces. but he was fooled by his so called saudi brothers, the same brothers who didn't hesitate a second to prevent the foundation of a Islamic regime in Egypt.
Ironically, Saudi Arabia did Iran a huge favor by funding the 2013 Egyptian coup. Had Morsi remained in power, he would've eventually dragged Egypt into war against Syria in order to topple al-Assad's government. You and I both know that. (And, by the way, Morsi never took orders from the Saudis. Saudi Arabia has always been against the Muslim Brotherhood coming to power. Instead, Morsi was close to the Qataris and Turks.)

Iran's supreme leader is a huge fan of Sayyid Qutb's work. Sayyid Qutb was a takfiri, and yet that didn't seem to bother Khamenei at all. Don't you find that even remotely hypocritical of him?

Iran supported the rise of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, Libya and Tunisia, but it opposed its rise in Syria. In Syria, the Iranian leaders described the the Muslim Brotherhood's attempt to take over the country as a "Wahhabi/takfiri invasion", but in other Arab countries the Iranian leaders described the rise of the Muslim Brotherhood as an "Islamic awakening".

Again, don't you find that hypocritical?

Iran still appears to be interested in reviving its ties with the Qatar-backed Muslim Brotherhood. I'm not the least bit surprised, considering the fact that the Iranian mullahs know very well that if political Islam fails in the region, then eventually it will fail in Iran as well.
 
Ironically, Saudi Arabia did Iran a huge favor by funding the 2013 Egyptian coup. Had Morsi remained in power, he would've eventually dragged Egypt into war against Syria in order to topple al-Assad's government. You and I both know that. (And, by the way, Morsi never took orders from the Saudis. Saudi Arabia has always been against the Muslim Brotherhood coming to power. Instead, Morsi was close to the Qataris and Turks.)

Iran's supreme leader is a huge fan of Sayyid Qutb's work. Sayyid Qutb was a takfiri, and yet that didn't seem to bother Khamenei at all. Don't you find that even remotely hypocritical of him?

Iran supported the rise of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, Libya and Tunisia, but it opposed its rise in Syria. In Syria, the Iranian leaders described the the Muslim Brotherhood's attempt to take over the country as a "Wahhabi/takfiri invasion", but in other Arab countries the Iranian leaders described the rise of the Muslim Brotherhood as an "Islamic awakening".

Again, don't you find that hypocritical?

Iran still appears to be interested in reviving its ties with the Qatar-backed Muslim Brotherhood. I'm not the least bit surprised, considering the fact that the Iranian mullahs know very well that if political Islam fails in the region, then eventually it will fail in Iran as well.
well, I would take my chance with Morsi, but apparently U.S already calculated our win chance! and I believe they calculated it very well.
Morsi's warming relation with Iran, visiting Iran, Admadinejad visiting Egypt and Al-Azhar, it all assured them that the result isn't in their favor. but more than that, and in the bigger picture a democracy and an Islamic constitution is what Americans and Zionists are most afraid of in the middle east.

what you ignored about Syria is it's people.
difference between a revolution and coup. between civilians and bunch of foreign backed armed thugs. we didn't interfer in Syria before the other countries, also we are keen to protect our shrines from Wahhabi cannibals, we will protect them at all cost. it's our religion whether a Shiah kid or Mullah we all share the same opinion on that.
what we see in KAS or Qatar isn't political Islam but political puppet dictators with a paint job.
 
well, I would take my chance with Morsi, but apparently U.S already calculated our win chance! and I believe they calculated it very well.
Morsi's warming relation with Iran, visiting Iran, Admadinejad visiting Egypt and Al-Azhar, it all assured them that the result isn't in their favor. but more than that, and in the bigger picture a democracy and an Islamic constitution is what Americans and Zionists are most afraid of in the middle east.

what you ignored about Syria is it's people.
difference between a revolution and coup. between civilians and bunch of foreign backed armed thugs. we didn't interfer in Syria before the other countries, also we are keen to protect our shrines from Wahhabi cannibals, we will protect them at all cost. it's our religion whether a Shiah kid or Mullah we all share the same opinion on that.
what we see in KAS or Qatar isn't political Islam but political puppet dictators with a paint job.
The Americans/Westerners aren't afraid of the rise of Islamism lol. If anything, they helped the Islamists come to power in Turkey in 2002, and they even indirectly helped Khomeini's regime come to power in Iran in 1979 because they considered it to be a reliable bulwark against Soviet encroachment in the oil-rich Persian Gulf region.

In the 1920s, the British tried to keep the Ottoman caliphate alive and prevent Turkey from becoming secular because they wanted to control the Islamic World via their puppet sultan in Istanbul.

If the Iranian government is genuinely against takfirism, then why is the supreme leader (Khamenei) a huge fan of Sayyid Qutb?
 
The Americans/Westerners aren't afraid of the rise of Islamism lol. If anything, they helped the Islamists come to power in Turkey in 2002, and they even indirectly helped Khomeini's regime come to power in Iran in 1979 because they considered it to be a reliable bulwark against Soviet encroachment in the oil-rich Persian Gulf region.

In the 1920s, the British tried to keep the Ottoman caliphate alive and prevent Turkey from becoming secular because they wanted to control the Islamic World via their puppet sultan in Istanbul.

If the Iranian government is genuinely against takfirism, then why is the supreme leader (Khamenei) a huge fan of Sayyid Qutb?
It's not just our leader, but whole muslims love Sayyed Qotb. He wasn't a takfiri at all, his ideas were most similar to those of Shaih.
Unlike takfiris he was worst enemy of imperialism and was demanding peace and unification between muslims, shiah and sunni, prior to success of our revolution he send a letter to one of our top mullah and described the oil nationalization as an Islamic movement under the leadership of a mullah which will cut the hands of imperialism and would lead to an islamic government (and indeed what this great martyre predicated came true), the term 'American Islam' first was used by him and later it was used by our leaders too. The kind of Islam which bows to Imperialism and bullies, limits Islam to salat, siam and haj, and leaves main policies to whatever west dictates.

Turks real Islamic movement was ended with a coup. what U.S supports in Turkey is secularism and anybody who would agree with this ideology (american islam) would receive their support. As it's happeing in turkey today. Also we remember the Ataturk as a dictator and british agent whose only goal was wiping Islam from turkey, in the bigger plot of destroying an Islamic empire.

Your comment about American supporting khomeini is the most childish one which is far from reality. The reality in which khomeini was exiled for 14 years, from one country to another to cut his connection to Iranian and his eldest son was assasinated by american agents, his supporters were being tortured by american equipments and trained agents, and if wasn't the fear of an all out uprising they would have assaainated him too, as they tried it after revolution success during a coup named nojeh. Their desired replacement was a self-sold mullah named Shariatmadari.

And that was just the revolution, their amount of hostility against Iran after revolution is endless and clear.
 
It's not just our leader, but whole muslims love Sayyed Qotb. He wasn't a takfiri at all
I stopped reading right here.

Sayyid Qutb was a takfiri of the highest order. His ideology (i.e. Qutbism) was embraced by the likes of Al-Qaeda and ISIS.
 
I stopped reading right here.

Sayyid Qutb was a takfiri of the highest order. His ideology (i.e. Qutbism) was embraced by the likes of Al-Qaeda and ISIS.
I give you one peace of advise, don't believe whatever sh!t which Zionists and their Wahhabi puppets advertise.

what Sayyed Qotb is saying is that a Muslim should care about Islam in all of his life aspects including politics and this will lead to an Islamic government (Shiah ideology) and that's why Imperialism and their Wahhabi puppets didn't tolerate him.

there is no way you could link sayyed Qotb to Al-qaeda and ISIS terrorist activities.
This isn't either Islam or the idea of an Islamic government which has turned ISIS and Al-Qaeda to terrorist activities, That's Wahhabi (Takfiri) ideology: the idea of anybody who rejects you, you are free to kill him, (kill 3 Shiahs and go to heaven) or west equivalent: you are either with us or against us.
this is why a terrorist or American soldier kills civilians without even blinking.
 
Last edited:
@Kuwaiti Girl
Ayatollah Kashani supported the American coup against Mossadeq. He declared that Mosaddegh deserved to be executed because he had committed the ultimate offense: rebelling against the shah, 'betraying' the country, and repeatedly violating the sacred law. Kashani was an important member of Islamic republican party which became the one-party system of todays Iran.

His son who works for Khamenei even denies that there was a coup, he said that Mossadeq was a British agent. One of his sons visited Israel in 1981 :lol:

The group called Fadayan-e Islam, tried to assassinate the right hand of Mossadeq, Dr. Fatemi. They wanted to assassinate Mossadeq also. Now they hijack the name of great Mossadeq :lol:. They should stick to takfiris and idiots like qutb, osama bin laden etc. As you said Takfirism is an important part of Qutbism, and ISIS and Al-Qaeda are also inspired by Qutb.

The most controversial aspect of Qutbism is takfir, Qutb's idea that Islam is "extinct." According to takfir, with the exception of Qutb’s Islamic vanguard, those who call themselves Muslims are not actually Muslim. Takfir was intended to shock Muslims into religious re-armament. When taken literally, takfir also had the effect of causing non-Qutbists who claimed to be Muslim in violation of Sharia law, a law that Qutb very much supported. Violating this law could potentially be considered apostasy from Islam: a crime punishable by death according to Qutbis
 
Iran and the Muslim Brotherhood: The best of enemies?

They had much in common when the Arab Spring began before falling out over Syria. But could reconciliation be on the cards?

http://www.middleeasteye.net/news/iran-and-muslim-brotherhood-best-enemies-2061107490


If anything Iran needs to remove it's self from supporting particular political parties in countries like Turkey and Egypt

At the end of the day it's not for Iran to decide what type of government should be in those countries nor is it in Iran's interest for them to gain power...
To top that off the idea that Turkey or even Egypt would ever become an "Islamic Democracy" is absolutely delusional!

Both Turkey & Egypt rely heavily on tourism & today tourism is one of the if not the largest industry in the world and the people of those countries from simple shop keepers & small business owners to the rich and the elite are fully cognizant of that fact!!!
So one must truly be delusional to think that either one of those countries would EVER become an Islamic Democracy and turn into a country with no night life, where alcohol is banned and women are forced to cover their hair.

If you want a Tourism industry you can't go around telling people what close to wear and telling women to cover their hair!
If you want a Tourism industry you can't go around banning fun!
If you want a Tourism industry you can't ban Alcoholic beverages
If you want a Tourism industry you can't ban night life
etc, etc...

SO

You have to be DELUSIONAL to think that either Turkey or Egypt would EVER become an "Islamic Democracy"
so supporting parties with such goals is nothing but a waist of time are resources!
 
@Kuwaiti Girl
Ayatollah Kashani supported the American coup against Mossadeq. He declared that Mosaddegh deserved to be executed because he had committed the ultimate offense: rebelling against the shah, 'betraying' the country, and repeatedly violating the sacred law. Kashani was an important member of Islamic republican party which became the one-party system of todays Iran.

His son who works for Khamenei even denies that there was a coup, he said that Mossadeq was a British agent. One of his sons visited Israel in 1981 :lol:

The group called Fadayan-e Islam, tried to assassinate the right hand of Mossadeq, Dr. Fatemi. They wanted to assassinate Mossadeq also. Now they hijack the name of great Mossadeq :lol:. They should stick to takfiris and idiots like qutb, osama bin laden etc. As you said Takfirism is an important part of Qutbism, and ISIS and Al-Qaeda are also inspired by Qutb.

The most controversial aspect of Qutbism is takfir, Qutb's idea that Islam is "extinct." According to takfir, with the exception of Qutb’s Islamic vanguard, those who call themselves Muslims are not actually Muslim. Takfir was intended to shock Muslims into religious re-armament. When taken literally, takfir also had the effect of causing non-Qutbists who claimed to be Muslim in violation of Sharia law, a law that Qutb very much supported. Violating this law could potentially be considered apostasy from Islam: a crime punishable by death according to Qutbis
bunch of lies according to the U.S and Mosaddeq backed media. good for you.

yet Mosaddeq was nothing more than another dictator, his only difference with Mohammad Reza shah was that he didn't even tolerate the parliament and wanted the legislation right for himself too! (as he did it)
That's why the very same Kashani (head of Parliament) who once helped him reach the power and even saved his a$$ in "30 tir", decided to stand against this new Ataturk in Iran.

your biased sources also don't like to talk about Kashani's letter to Mosaddeq in which he informed him about the coup, yet Mosaddeq didn't do anything and replayed "people are backing me". the reason is that he was behind the coup himself. also they forgot to mention that very same Kashani which you claim to be the pro shah, once even was exiled by the charge of partnership in trying to kill the Shah. Mosaddeq was overthrown and no Iranian demonstrated against it cause they knew he had turned into a lunatic himself.

"28 mordad" coup was in fact a coup in the coup, Mosaddeq forgot the historic fact that every puppet has an expiration date, and he was not an exception. so in the end he was drown in the coup which he ran himself.

this is how you twisted Sayyed Qotb's ideas:
Europeans believed in secularism and they have established the secular countries, anybody who acts against the nation security of that country can be punished with death, so Seculars are Takfiris! see your shining logic?
by your biased definition of Takfir, everybody on the planet including yourself, religious or secular are all Takfiri, cause after all we accept our own definition of religion.

It's obvious who is sticking to whom today. the close cooperation between terrorist Takfiris like Al-Qaeda and ISIS with U.S and seculars is more than obvious.
 

Back
Top Bottom