- Islamic Movements
- August 21, 2007
- 5 minutes read
The MB, between the Turkish AKP and Hamas
“The victory of the Turkish Justice and Development Party in the last legislative elections for the second time was widely echoed in the ranks of the political and intellectual elite in the Arab world. The latter started to compare the new Islamic experience in Turkey with the experience of the Muslim Brotherhood… [with some] calling upon the MB to benefit from this experience and progress and [some] believing it is linked to “Turkish specificity”.
“On the other hand, the MB”s comments either condemned the exit of the AKP from the Islamic ideological line or considered it as having been done “out of necessity”… The paradox is that there is another ongoing debate in the political and Islamic circles after Hamas gained control over the Gaza Strip by military means and after the actions and pictures that were circulated in the media contributed to weakening the popularity of Hamas and the Islamic movement in public opinion, according to many observers.
“However, intellectuals and writers from the Islamic movement or among its supporters had a completely different opinion, for they felt the rush of the military victory that was achieved and considered it as a consecration of a new pattern in the relation between the Islamists and the regimes. The Hamas model is completely opposite the “Turkish model”. While Turkish Islamists sought to weaken the authority by abiding by utter pragmatism which necessitated the restructuring of slogans, principles, priorities and abandoning the Islamic headline, the victor in the Hamas model was the armed ideological line which saw that arms were the only “right” way to face the authority and its strength.
“There is no doubt that for each experience there are specific terms imposed on the choices of the Islamists. However, the MB now has both models in front of it: either a full pragmatic political experience or arms… Chief Editor of Al-Zaytouna [The Olive] which is issued in the US in Arabic, Osama Abu Irsheid, provides a special reading of the Gaza events and their repercussions on the rhetoric and intellectual and political vision of the MB. He was a member of the Islamic movement in Jordan before he moved to America and settled there… The article which was originally published in Al Quds Al Arabi put forward dangerous ideas and conclusions which require a long and deep pause.
“What was odd however was that it was re-posted on the official MB website in Jordan, a website that only posts what goes in line with the MB”s political and intellectual line in what could be understood as an approval of the article. The article addressed the political circumstances which made Hamas decide to settle the situation militarily in Gaza. It then immediately jumped to asking the MB in thegother countries to follow in the footsteps of Hamas in facing the regimes instead of continuing to receive blows while abstaining from responding on the basis of the call of the Prophet (PBUH) in Mecca in which he forbid the “Islamic group” from responding to the attack…
“Abu Irsheid said: “Hamas decided, whether it was aware or unaware of that, to put an end to the “Mecca era” in the ideology of the MB… The paradox is that while Hamas was engaged in the battle with Fatah, its brothers in the MB in Egypt were undergoing the greatest suffering in the last Shura elections”.
“He then pointed out the dimensions of the drastic ideological change of Hamas by saying: “Since the end of the nineties of last century, i.e. with the establishment of the MB, the latter have been moving from one crisis to another. Their “sensibility” and “wisdom” did not procure them safety. It is true that the situation in Gaza and the Palestinian territories is different than the situation of the MB in the different Arab countries, however, Hamas”s move might force the MB to think of other “creative” ways to face the oppression they and their people are undergoing at the hands of the regimes”.
“But what are the creative ways Abu Irsheid is talking about: “This doesn”t mean they should resort to “violence” for they will surely by losers. They should at least change the rules of the game with the regimes and move the tensions to the street in the form of a widespread civil disobedience. This should be considered by the MB in its areas of influence”. This is a call for a drastic change in the MB”s political ideology not toward political pragmatism but toward the adoption of escalation…
“I believe that this approach carries a revolutionary ideological rhetoric through which the MB would readopt the option of armed action that they had relinquished following the experience of the Egyptian detention camps and prisons and the Hama disaster in Syria… Is this approach the direct repercussion of what Hamas did in Gaza on the MB? Does the MB feel it is closer and better than the experience of the Turkish AKP? Only the MB leaders have the answer.”