Skip to main content

Re: Willful Blindness, etc.

Paul Marshall

Further apropos to James’s Clapper’s contention that that the Muslim Brotherhood is “largely secular,” has “eschewed violence,” and really just wants “social ends,” Corner readers may want to look at the C-SPAN video of the Hudson Institute’s Tuesday panel on Egypt, much of which focused on the Brotherhood.

I argued that one way to judge the Brotherhood, apart from repeatedly parsing its contradictory statements, is to look at what Christian leaders in Egypt are saying. They are not skilled overall political analysts but, as a persecuted minority, they are highly adept at judging how events might affect them. Orthodox, Catholic, and Anglican leaders have all expressed their view that the present, bad as it is, may be better than a likely future with a powerful Brotherhood.

Another way is to compare Egypt’s neighboring territories. It is not only Gaza that is ruled by a Brotherhood offshoot — so is Egypt’s neighbor to the South, Sudan. It seized power in 1983 (when it was only the third largest of the Muslim parties), killed its opponents, and has engaged in two genocidal wars. Nor has it shown signs of mellowing in power. Egypt is very unlikely to be like Sudan, but when two of Egypt’s neighbors are already run by MB offshoots, and both are horrendous, it suggests that an Egypt with strong Brotherhood would be a grim place.

Related Articles

Christianity Flourishing Where Communism Once Thrived

Lela Gilbert

Lela Gilbert on Christianity in Central and Eastern Europe...

Continue Reading

Secessionism’s Dangerous Return

Walter Russell Mead

Ethnic nationalism is up. So is competition between great powers. It sounds like 1914...

Continue Reading

How WW II American Leaders in North Africa Learned to Disregard the Interests of Jews

Michael Doran

Old fashioned anti-Semitism played a role, but the greater part had to do with a fear, justified or not, of provoking the Arabs...

Continue Reading