What's new

Salafi vs Muslim Brotherhood

kalu_miah

SENIOR MEMBER
Joined
Jan 4, 2009
Messages
6,475
Reaction score
17
Country
Bangladesh
Location
United States
By: Khalil al-Anani for Al-Monitor Posted on February 21.

The ongoing quarrel between the Muslim Brotherhood and the Salafi’s Nour Party comes as no surprise. Indeed, I would have been worried if they didn’t clash, given their increasing politicization and strong tendency to grab as much power as they can.

While many stories and conclusions can be drawn from the clash between the Muslim Brotherhood and Salafi, the most striking aspect, however, is the obscene language and mutual accusations and allegations between both sides that overwhelmed the local media over the past few days. They reflect what I called elsewhere “desacralization of Islamism,” where Islamists’ indulgence in politics decreases their credibility and appeal. And the more they do, the less they can maintain their symbolic and moral power.

Nevertheless, the crucial question is: Why the Muslim Brotherhood and Salafi, the two major Islamist forces in Egypt, have clashed now? Apart from the theological and ideological differences between both currents (which they have deliberately sought to avert after the revolution), the political conflict between Salafi and Brotherhood is an old and rooted one.

It dates back to the end of the 1970s and the outset of the 1980s, when both groups attempted to dominate the public sphere, particularly in mosques, universities, and charity organizations in Egypt by the end of Anwar Sadat’s reign. Moreover, this conflict turned into violent clashes between the followers of both sides in 1980 when the Muslim Brotherhood attempted to prevent Salafists from disseminating their ideology at Alexandria University. Since then the relationship between the Brotherhood and Salafi was never mended or changed to be friendly.

However, the recent fight between the Muslim Brotherhood and Salafists came after the dismissal of Khaled Alam Eldin, one of President Mohammed Morsi’s advisors who belong to the Nour Party, under allegations of corruption and abusing his office. It was a charge that provoked the Nour Party’s leaders and was forcefully denied by Alam Eldin, who is now asking for an apology from the presidency.

Nonetheless, putting it in the larger picture, this fight is nothing but a new episode in the bitter power struggle between the Brotherhood and the Salafists. It reveals the increasing tendency of Islamists to acquire as much power as they can in order to fill the immense political vacuum that was left after the ouster of Hosni Mubarak’s regime in 2011.

Over the past two years, Salafists, particularly the Nour Party, have been keen to preclude the Muslim Brotherhood from consolidating its grip on power. This started during the 2011 elections when the Brotherhood undervalued the political weight of the Salafists and disregarded their political aspirations.

“Morsi (who by then was the head of the Brotherhood’s Freedom and Justice Party) treated us as novice politicians who shouldn’t seek power. He had contempt for us,” a Salafi leader told me last year, in reference to negotiations with the Brotherhood over distributing constituencies and candidates during the last parliamentary elections, which ended with both contesting against each other. After the Salafists’ abrupt victory in the elections — they won around 24% of parliamentary seats — the Muslim Brotherhood attempted to contain Salafis and defuse their political rise while the latter became more politically unruly and aspired for more gains.

Emboldened by their political achievement, Salafists have attempted to thwart the Brotherhood’s path to power. The Nour Party and its patronage the Salafi Call (Al-Da‘wa Al-Salafiyya) in a striking move decided not to support the Brotherhood’s presidential candidate in Morsi during the first round of the presidential elections that took place last June, before returning to support him in the second round under the banner of “protecting the Islamic project”.

Furthermore, after Morsi took office, the Salafists became even more apprehensive and suspicious of the Brotherhood’s intentions. They sought on the one hand to enhance their political sway in Egypt’s politics, and on the other hand to compel the Brotherhood to respect (and accept) their power aspirations. For its part, the Muslim Brotherhood has adopted a more shrewd strategy with the Salafists that is twofold: co-opting them, and employing them at the same time.

The bargain or the trade-off between the two sides was simple: The Salafists would have a much greater role in drawing Egypt’s new constitution and in return they would line up with the Brotherhood in the face of secular and liberal forces, and resisting any external pressure or calls for genuine democratic reforms. It is a bargain that enabled Morsi to survive street pressure that followed his “autocratic” constitutional declaration and helped the Brotherhood to pass its controversial constitution. This was until the Salafists realized the growing attempts of the Muslim Brotherhood to marginalize and exclude them after the ratification of the constitution.

As opposed to what might appear on surface as a “holy” alliance against secular and liberal forces, the inherited mistrust and divergence between the Salafists and the Brotherhood is enormous. Over the past few months, the conflict between both sides has turned into a cat-and-mouse game. Where Salafists attempted to benefit from the mounting resentment against Morsi and the Brotherhood in order to achieve more political gains, the latter sought to encourage internal divisions among the Salafists.

The Nour Party issued a political initiative to end the standoff between the National Salvation Front (NSF), a loose alliance of secular and liberal forces, and Morsi. The step was perceived by the Muslim Brotherhood as an attempt by Salafists to strengthen their political clout and image before the parliamentary elections planned for spring. In addition, by escalating the conflict with Morsi, the Salafists are attempting to dismiss the accusation of being a subordinate and lackey to the Muslim Brotherhood. Not surprisingly, Salafi leaders have recently asserted that the Nour Party “will never ally with the Muslim Brotherhood”.

In short, the current crisis between the Brotherhood and the Salafists reveals that power, and neither religion nor ideology, is the ultimate goal of Islamists, and their bid to grab it might usher in a new era of intra-Islamist conflict with unpredictable consequences.

Khalil al-Anani is a Scholar of Middle East Studies at the School of Government and International Affairs at Durham University and former visiting fellow at the Brookings Institute in Washington, D.C. He is the author of the forthcoming Unpacking the Muslim Brotherhood: Religion, Identity and Politics (tentative title). He can be reached at: kalanani@gmail.com On twitter: @khalilalanani

Read more: The Salafi-Brotherhood Feud in Egypt - Al-Monitor: the Pulse of the Middle East
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Questions for @Yzd Khalifa @Arabian Legend @al-Hasani and other bros in KSA : Is it possible for the Salafi and Brotherhood to unite against the Shia onslaught in Arab world?

I personally neither support political Islam nor the Salafi creed, but if I have to choose, I feel that Brotherhood is more pragmatic, while Salafi's seem like going back in time. Also Brotherhood accepts and works with democracy, which I believe is inevitable eventually for all society, although the timeline and the evolutionary path is different for different societies.

Also, I have seen in some of the above articles that Brotherhood was supporting groups in Gulf countries to overthrow Monarchies. That definitely was meddling in internal affairs of other countries, in my opinion, and irresponsible on their part, a practice they should stop absolutely.

For Arab world and greater Sunni world to unite, I think a reconciliation and unity between these two groups is essential, of course in a path that is free from violence and anti-west polemics, like it happened in the case of Afghan war veterans like OBL and Zwahiri. Egypt could be a great place to make this unity work, specially after Morsi moved away from Iran and started supporting Syrian opposition just about a month ago. But may be it was too little too late?

So going forward, is there a way to reconcile the difference between these two forces?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Questions for @Yzd Khalifa @Arabian Legend @al-Hasani and other bros in KSA : Is it possible for the Salafi and Brotherhood to unite against the Shia onslaught in Arab world?

I personally neither support political Islam nor the Salafi creed, but if I have to choose, I feel that Brotherhood is more pragmatic, while Salafi's seem like going back in time. Also Brotherhood accepts and works with democracy, which I believe is inevitable eventually for all society, although the timeline and the evolutionary path is different for different societies.

Also, I have seen in some of the above articles that Brotherhood was supporting groups in Gulf countries to overthrow Monarchies. That definitely was meddling in internal affairs of other countries, in my opinion, and irresponsible on their part, a practice they should stop absolutely.

For Arab world and greater Sunni world to unite, I think a reconciliation and unity between these two groups is essential, of course in a path that is free from violence and anti-west polemics, like it happened in the case of Afghan war veterans like OBL and Zwahiri. Egypt could be a great place to make this unity work, specially after Morsi moved away from Iran and started supporting Syrian opposition just about a month ago. But may be it was too little too late?

So going forward, is there a way to reconcile the difference between these two forces?

To tell you the truth then I don't even understand that division to begin with and the need for it. Both groups are Muslims and adhere to the Sunni doctrine. Both groups are Egyptian. Both are supposed to work for the greater good of Egypt and the Muslim world. Then why the hell are they unable to unite?

Same with Palestine. They are probably the best of examples of how pathetic our Muslim world can be in terms of politics and leadership when they of ALL PEOPLE are unable to truly unite.

Also honestly political Islam is a foreign word on our beautiful Arabian Peninsula. We don't have a tradition for it nor is there even a need for it since Islam is already a completely natural part of our lives and have been that for 1400 years. Even without noticing it.

I do know that Islam's birthplace is the Arabian Peninsula and so on so it is probably unique in that way.

To be honest then the Shias only cause a problem in Syria. The main problem is the heretical and satanical fake Iranian Wannabe-Arab Mullah's and their stooges. They are a tiny minority compared to us Sunnis and they will never have any real influence since there are only 4 majority Shia countries in the world and they are Iran, Iraq, Azerbaijan and Bahrain in that other (population).

Azerbaijan are enemies of Iran and have been that since they were created. They are the least practicing Muslim country of all in the world probably and they are Turkic first of all.

Then there is tiny Bahrain and the 500.000 strong LOCAL population (citizens). Among those 40% are Sunnis. Bahrain is a little island located outside the Eastern Province in KSA and connected with a bridge and historically and culturally part of the Arab/Semitic world and the Arabian Peninsula since Bahrainis are fellow Arabs. So it will continue to be under our (Sunni and Arab influence).

Then there is Iraq. A fragmented country. Virtually two countries in one (Central government in Baghdad and Kurdistan in Northern Iraq). 40% of the total population are Sunnis too. The only Shia stronghold is Southeastern Iraq.

Then there is Iran which is already a country full of non-Persian minorities that make up 40% the population. Political Islam is on a downward spiral due to the heretical Mullah regime and their un-Islamic actions and it's a question of time before they are toppled, gone or reform totally.

So all in all there is absolutely nothing to worry about. We Sunnis will continue to make up 90% of the world's Muslim population and Makkah and Madinah will continue to be in Sunni hands as it always have been.

We only need to deal with Syria and that is a work in process. But be sure that it will once again be ruled by us Sunnis and be under Sunni Arab influence being a Sunni Arab majority country already and always (historically) and to this very day.

So, I would be calm brother.

I am actually more worried about our brothers and sisters across the beautiful Red Sea in Egypt than anything.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Some correction ^^

40% sunnis is including the Kurds who could not care about religion, the rest are secularists, Baath secularism brainwashing has taken place on them, as you see most of them vote on secular parties rather then a party like the MB of Iraq.
 
Some correction ^^

40% sunnis is including the Kurds who could not care about religion, the rest are secularists, Baath secularism brainwashing has taken place on them, as you see most of them vote on secular parties rather then a party like the MB of Iraq.

Well, I was just proving all those users who think that Iraq is a province of Iran wrong. Iraqi Sunni Arabs do not like Iranians as much as other Arabs in the region. In fact they have fought against them and their proxies more than any other Arabs in the region.

Yes, but Kurdistan is still part of Iraq. So I included them. Without the Kurds the Sunnis make up 25-30% and are the vast majority in 4 entire provinces that are rich in oil, phosphor and of a strategical importance. They also have quite a lot of farm land and are Iraq's connection to Turkey, Levant and the Arabian Peninsula.

Kurds are nationalistic but they are also Muslim. Islam is very strong in that region.

Ok, they are maybe not as religious as Iraqi Arabs but still more religious than most from what I know of.

Also ordinary Shias are not a problem especially not the Arab ones. Frankly the worry is the Iranian Mullah regime and their fake Wannabe-Arab Mullah's and their stooges which their actions show.

There were no Sunni-Shia problems in the Arab world before 1979 of any note.

I believe that nearly all of that current animosity will disappear once the Iranian Mullah's will be gone.

Sunnis and Shias are not killing each other in Yemen or KSA or Kuwait. That would be the case if it was that bad as some claim.
 
Well, I was just proving all those users who think that Iraq is a province of Iran wrong. Iraqi Sunni Arabs do not like Iranians as much as other Arabs in the region. In fact they have fought against them and their proxies more than any other Arabs in the region.

Yes, but Kurdistan is still part of Iraq. So I included them. Without the Kurds the Sunnis make up 25-30% and are the vast majority in 4 entire provinces that are rich in oil, phosphor and of a strategical importance. They also have quite a lot of farm land and are Iraq's connection to Turkey, Levant and the Arabian Peninsula.

Kurds are nationalistic but they are also Muslim. Islam is very strong in that region.

Ok, they are maybe not as religious as Iraqi Arabs but still more religious than most from what I know of.

Also ordinary Shias are not a problem especially not the Arab ones. Frankly the worry is the Iranian Mullah regime and their fake Wannabe-Arab Mullah's and their stooges which their actions show.

There were no Sunni-Shia problems in the Arab world before 1979 of any note.

I believe that nearly all of that current animosity will disappear once the Iranian Mullah's will be gone.

Sunnis and Shias are not killing each other in Yemen or KSA or Kuwait. That would be the case if it was that bad as some claim.

I dont think Kurds are religious, at least the majority.
If you look at PKK or Kurdish women how many of them wear the veil ? barely any

Kurds will not go independent, it is not that we are not allowing them, its better for them like this, unless they want to put their lifeline in the hands of Turkey... or they manage to get a coastline which is impossible.
In Syria they are against SAA and FSA, they took this chance as an oppurtunity.
 
I dont think Kurds are religious, at least the majority.
If you look at PKK or Kurdish women how many of them wear the veil ? barely any

Kurds will not go independent, it is not that we are not allowing them, its better for them like this, unless they want to put their lifeline in the hands of Turkey... or they manage to get a coastline which is impossible.
In Syria they are against SAA and FSA, they took this chance as an oppurtunity.

Many Muslims I know do not wear the veil and are still Muslims. Also PKK is a socialistic/communistic organization and completely secular. But what is their percentage of the Kurdish population? 0,5%. Islam is actually pretty deep-rooted in Kurdistan. I mean Salah ad-Din ibn Ayyub (ra) was from there. They also have a strong conservative "village-mentality". Many stories of stoning women accused of adultery, honor killings etc. Not that it has anything to do with mainstream Islam but this just shows the conservative nature.

All the Kurdish immigrants here in Denmark I have met are conservative. I mean their families.

Well, I do not know what will happen. I just said that they are de facto a sovereign state or try to be. But don't forget that many Iraqi Arabs have moved to Arbil etc. to live there and work there.

I don't understand one thing. Why are Iranian proxy/puppet Islamist Shia parties so popular in Southern Iraq? Why are they the only proxy/puppet parties in Iraq. The Iraqi Sunni Arabs do not have this. They are independent. Why?

Also why are people such as Muqtada al-Sadr not arrested while many Iraqi Sunni Arab politicians are targeted and accused of terrorism?

I think that such moves are not winning hearts in the Sunni Arab areas where many already are not happy about Al-Maliki and dislike Iranian political influence greatly.

Oh, did I tell you that one of my relatives in Iraq have taken part in a American documentary about the resistance in Iraq, LOL? He got his 2-3 minutes of fame.:omghaha:
 
Also honestly political Islam is a foreign word on our beautiful Arabian Peninsula. We don't have a tradition for it nor is there even a need for it since Islam is already a completely natural part of our lives and have been that for 1400 years. Even without noticing it.

I must disagree on this note, political Islam was and is being used by Al Saud and their salafi bastards clerics. claiming that Al Saud are not using religion as a tool to rule the people is an absolute lie. They and their mentor "Ibn Abdulwahab" conquered the entire Arabia by claiming to spread the true "Islam". They are ultra secular and pragmatic on the international level and ultra conservative on their own people. Their only disagreement with MB is that MB is telling the truth about Islam and politics. MB are advocating the true method of politics in Islam, which is democracy. MB can't lie and bend the truth like the salafists, MB can't support monarchy type of ruling.


In the other hand, I my self can't tell what I feel of this. I don't know if I'm happy the Islamust are thrown away or I'm sad the the experiment of democracy have failed in Egypt. People outside of the Arab world can't understand the place of Egypt among all Arabs. Egypt was and still is the heart of the middle east. Egypt was the one the defended Islam and Arabs in it weakest point. Egypt defended the middle east from colonies and Imperialist. Egypt is the gate of civilization to the middle east. If democracy failed in Egypt, then sure as hell it will fail across the Arab world.


One day the Islamist and the monarchs will be kicked out of my country. I truly hope they don't get kicked in the same way.
 
I must disagree on this note, political Islam was and is being used by Al Saud and their salafi bastards clerics. claiming that Al Saud are not using religion as a tool to rule the people is an absolute lie. They and their mentor "Ibn Abdulwahab" conquered the entire Arabia by claiming to spread the true "Islam". They are ultra secular and pragmatic on the international level and ultra conservative on their own people. Their only disagreement with MB is that MB is telling the truth about Islam and politics. MB are advocating the true method of politics in Islam, which is democracy. MB can't lie and bend the truth like the salafists, MB can't support monarchy type of ruling.


In the other hand, I my self can't tell what I feel of this. I don't know if I'm happy the Islamust are thrown away or I'm sad the the experiment of democracy have failed in Egypt. People outside of the Arab world can't understand the place of Egypt among all Arabs. Egypt was and still is the heart of the middle east. Egypt was the one the defended Islam and Arabs in it weakest point. Egypt defended the middle east from colonies and Imperialist. Egypt is the gate of civilization to the middle east. If democracy failed in Egypt, then sure as hell it will fail across the Arab world.


One day the Islamist and the monarchs will be kicked out of my country. I truly hope they don't get kicked in the same way.

What? Use Islam? In what way? Our population has been Muslims for 1400 years. Our country is the cradle of Islam. The Al-Saud are completely irrelevant. Every ruler on the territory of KSA or the Arabian Peninsula have been bound by Islam otherwise they would not be able to rule. Simple as that.

What? Which Salafists? Are you talking about the Hanbali fiqh? We have the most diverse makeup of religious sects that are indigenous to our region. Sunni madahbi such s the Hanafi fiqh in the Northern Areas, the Shafi'i fiqh in Hejaz, the Maliki fiqh among the Sunnis in the Eastern Province, the Hanbali one in Najd and across the country. Among the Shias the Zaydi's in Najran, the Ismailis in the South and the Twelver sect among the Shias in the Eastern Province.

Can you name me just one country that are as diverse? No, they don't exist.

All in all I am not sure what you are hoping for. If I remember then you are not even a Muslim and a gay too. Such opinions are only shared by a tiny little minority.

Regarding Egypt then what democracy? There is no Western democracy in the Middle East. Don't get fooled by the ability to vote every 4 years or so as democracy.

Look how stable and prospering our country is. Most Saudis are satisfied otherwise the Al-Saud would not be here. No need to kid yourself. I am sure all Saudis here agree.

The Egyptian people spoke and we have to respect that. Egypt did not stop being Muslim overnight. The Muslims in Egypt being all Sunnis (99,9%) should unite instead of fighting for power. Egypt is our neighbor and we hope first of all for stability and peace because unrest will effect us and all of the Arab world.

Oh, if you think that Islam will disappear from KSA then I must wake you up from your dream.

BTW, you should visit how people live in Hejaz and the remaining KSA outside the cities and visit private families etc. Not much has changed in terms of our regional culture, dialect, religion, cuisine, traditions etc.

Uniting KSA instead of having 1000 different small countries, regions, emirates, kingdoms is the best that could have happened given that we are all Arabs.

Also all that ultra-conservative is nonsense. This is highly exaggerated. We both know all this. But that does not mean that we are not proud Muslims.

My point. Islam is part of our lives more naturally than most and this is undeniable. Even non-Saudis and analysts often say this. This is not something I invented tonight. Nothing to do with our rulers.

EDIT: Egypt was a Ottoman and later English colony for hundreds of years. I am not sure where you read all your history from.
 
@Naifov

بالرغم من الاختلافات لا توجد حاجة لنعطي لأعدائنا وللذين يكرهوننا فرصة لتشويه سمعتنا

كما ذكر من قبل، المجتمع السعودي ليس مجتمعًا مثاليًا لكنني أقول إنه من بين أفضل المجتمعات بدون شك، فقد عشت خارجه وزرت بلدان عربية أخرى

نحن ببساطة لا نريد هذا السلوك في البلاد

أيضًا، مهما كانت الاختلافات بيننا، أفترض أننا نتشارك في رغبتنا بجعل بلدنا أفضل مما هي عليه
 
Last edited by a moderator:
@Naifov I did not know there were any Saudis who actually were anti-monarchists. :coffee:
@al-Hasani He is right that Egypt for a long time defended Islam from invaders which was the case when the Fatimids fought off the crusaders many times before the Turks took that over and when the Egyptian Mamluks defeated the Mongols or Mecca and Medina may have been in danger. Egypt was only colonized in recent history its past history it has been a bulwark against anti-Islamic forces. Also Egypt is the heart of the Arab world being the largest Arab nation when something happens in Egypt its after effects are felt in many Arab countries. An example being when Nasser the secularist took over Egypt within a decade similar regimes popped up in many Arab countries.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
@Naifov I did not know there were any Saudis who actually were anti-monarchists. :coffee:
@al-Hasani He is right that Egypt for a long time defended Islam from invaders which was the case when the Fatimids fought off the crusaders many times before the Turks took that over and when the Egyptian Mamluks defeated the Mongols or Mecca and Medina may have been in danger. Egypt was only colonized in recent history its past history it has been a bulwark against anti-Islamic forces. Also Egypt is the heart of the Arab world being the largest Arab nation when something happens in Egypt its after effects are felt in many Arab countries. An example being when Nasser the secularist took over Egypt within a decade similar regimes popped up in many Arab countries.

Naifov is anti-Islam. Nothing to do with being anti-monarchist or whatever. Besides then Abdullah is the Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques.

Well, that was shared by many Arab countries throughout the history and mostly the Arab Caliphates such as the Rashidun, Umayyad and Abbasid Caliphates. Later the Ottomans.

Well, Egypt was under Ottoman influence for centuries and under English influence for 70 years (1880-1950).

Egypt is not the biggest Arab country but the most populous.

About Egypt being very important for the stability of the region and the Arab world in particular, I have repeated many times including in my latest post aside from this one.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Naifov is anti-Islam. Nothing to do with being anti-monarchist or whatever. Besides then Abdullah is the Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques.

Well, that was shared by many Arab countries throughout the history and mostly the Arab Caliphates such as the Rashidun, Umayyad and Abbasid Caliphates. Later the Ottomans.

Well, Egypt was under Ottoman influence for centuries and under English influence for 70 years (1880-1950).

Egypt is not the biggest Arab country but the most populous.

About Egypt being very important for the stability of the region and the Arab world in particular, I have repeated many times including in my latest post aside from this one.

Well idk if he is an atheist or whatever but I agree with some that he said. Actually I like Abdullah and think he has slowly tried to reform KSA so hes ok but I still believe monarchies are haram and eventually the people of KSA will themselves remove monarchy and am against other people trying to interfere in the Saudi affairs.

Yes it was shared but afaik a large number of crusades came during Fatimid rules when the Egyptians battled them back, I will go back to double check. Also do read up on the battle of Ain Jalut where the Egyptians literally perhaps saved Islam. Even under Ottoman influence the Egyptians were still relatively autonomous and provided forces when need be. Read up on Muhammad Ali of Egypt and his influence although I suspect you already know what I am talking about. :)

Yeah that is what I meant by the biggest, the most people. :D
 
Salafi are a evil sect, they should be banned. If they come in power, there will be nothing but destruction, or they will make Egypt in to something like Saudi Arabia.

MB was bad, but they are 100 times better then Salafis
 
Back
Top Bottom