Tharwat al-Kharbawi: Designating the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist organization reveals the secrets of the clandestine organization
In a significant development reflecting a qualitative shift in the international approach to political Islamist groups, Saudi Arabia welcomed the US steps to designate branches of the Muslim Brotherhood in several countries as terrorist organizations. This welcome comes as the culmination of a long history of Saudi and Arab warnings about the dangers of the ideology espoused by the group, which is seen as a major source of extremism in the region.
Historical context: From calling for confrontation with the nation-state
To understand the depth of this event, it is necessary to return to the historical roots of the group, which was founded in 1928. For decades, the Muslim Brotherhood's project has clashed with the concept of the "nation-state" in the Arab world. Historical events, from the assassinations of the 1940s in Egypt to the events following 2011, have demonstrated that the group relies on a parallel structure to the state, known as the "Special Organization." This has made its designation as a terrorist organization in several countries (such as Egypt, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Russia) an inevitable consequence of its practices that threatened the national security of those countries.
Testimony from inside the “temple”: Tharwat El-Kharabawy speaks
In this context, the interview with the dissident leader and lawyer Tharwat al-Kharbawi takes on paramount importance. Al-Kharbawi, who has been intimately involved with the group for many years, believes that the American designation represents an “existential” blow, not merely political pressure. In his interview with Al-Youm, he asserts that the group received these decisions with a state of “structural confusion,” attempting to take refuge behind the historical narrative of “victimhood” crafted by its early ideologues to maintain the cohesion of its organizational base.
The shift towards “cluster” and crypto finance
Al-Kharbawi reveals the new tactics the group will resort to in order to evade security forces and cut off its funding sources. He points to a dangerous shift in the organizational structure from the traditional "family" system to very small "cluster cells," designed to minimize losses in the event of security breaches. Financially, with tightening global banking controls, the group is turning to cryptocurrencies and informal money transfer systems (hawala) to circumvent sanctions, posing new challenges for counter-terrorism financing agencies.
The intellectual roots of violence: an organic relationship with extremism
At a crucial juncture, Al-Kharbawi dissects the relationship between the Muslim Brotherhood and extremist organizations, affirming an undeniable historical fact: the Brotherhood was the breeding ground for most of the leaders of global violence. He cites the influence of Sayyid Qutb's writings, particularly his book "Milestones," and the concept of "sovereignty" (hakimiyya), which forms the cornerstone of declaring societies infidels and justifying bloodshed, on organizations like al-Qaeda and ISIS. He points out that figures like Ayman al-Zawahiri and Abdullah Azzam were merely products of this ideology before their descent into direct armed violence.
Why did the governance project fail?
Regarding the group's brief experience in governing Egypt, Kharbawi attributes its failure to an "organizational" mentality that fails to grasp the concept of the "state." In his view, the group treated the state as spoils of war and sought to "Brotherhoodize" its institutions rather than manage them, prioritizing loyalty to the Supreme Guide over belonging to the nation. This ideological rigidity made its clash with state institutions and the people inevitable.
An uncertain future and a message for young people
Al-Kharbawi concludes his remarks with a bleak vision for the group's future, describing it as suffering from "intellectual and organizational stagnation." He directs a warning message to sympathetic youth, urging them to protect their minds from intellectual indoctrination and emphasizing that religion is far too vast to be confined to a secret organization. He asserts that breaking free from the group's grip, however painful, is the only way to reclaim one's identity and conscience, free from the illusions of false "empowerment.".
