Paris- The executive order signed by U.S. President Donald Trump, initiating the process of designating specific branches of the Muslim Brotherhood as Foreign Terrorist Organizations (FTOs) and Specially Designated Global Terrorists (SDGTs), places Washington firmly within a broader, steadily intensifying Western strategy both American and European to build a defensive barrier against the expansion of political Islamist movements operating under the guise of religious, educational, charitable, and community-based institutions across Europe and the United States.

A. Scope and Objectives of the U.S. Executive Order

According to the directive issued by the White House, President Trump instructed the Departments of State and Treasury working in coordination with the Attorney General and the Director of National Intelligence to produce, within a defined timeframe, an assessment on whether branches of the Muslim Brotherhood, particularly in Lebanon, Egypt, and Jordan, should be designated as FTOs and SDGTs under U.S. counterterrorism and sanctions laws.

1. Cross-Border Network Targeting

The order does not focus on the Brotherhood’s parent organization alone, but rather on branches suspected of involvement in violence or material support for terrorism, including:

Allegations that a Lebanese Brotherhood-affiliated military wing assisted in launching rocket attacks into Israel following the events of October 7, 2023.

Statements by a senior Brotherhood figure in Egypt encouraging violence against U.S. regional partners on the same day that Hamas launched its attack.

Intelligence assessments pointing to long-standing material support provided by Brotherhood leaders in Jordan to Hamas’s armed wing.

2. Tools Available After Designation

Once the designation process is completed, U.S. authorities would be able to:

-          Freeze assets of designated Brotherhood branches inside the United States.

-          Criminalize any financial or logistical support provided by individuals or institutions under U.S. jurisdiction.

Broaden the scope of federal investigations and legal actions against networks or individuals linked to these branches.

The administration argues that the ultimate objective is to deprive these branches of resources and disrupt their capacity to threaten U.S. national security or American interests abroad.

B. The Decision Within a Broader Strategy to Counter Political Islam

1. From Countering Violent Extremism to Confronting “Ideological Networks”

The U.S. measure reflects a wider shift in Western threat perception—moving from focusing solely on overtly violent jihadist groups such as ISIS and al-Qaeda, to addressing political Islamist networks accused of providing the ideological framework and organizational structure that enable violent radicalization.

2. Overlapping Arenas: Middle East – Europe – United States

Washington justifies its decision by pointing out that the Brotherhood’s transnational network extends far beyond the Middle East, operating in Europe and North America through:

-        “Human rights,” “charitable,” and “student” associations

-        Islamic colleges, research centers, and training institutes

-        Boards of major mosques and Islamic cultural centers

These structures, according to recent research and intelligence assessments, propagate political Islamist ideology under the veneer of moderate religious discourse, while working in the long term to reshape the values and loyalties of segments of Muslim communities in Western societies.

C. Parallel European Measures Against the Muslim Brotherhood and Islamist Networks

In parallel with Washington’s increasingly assertive position, Europe has over several years adopted a series of escalating steps against the Brotherhood and political Islamist entities. The most prominent examples include:

1. Austria: Banning Brotherhood Symbols and Tightening Oversight

In 2019, Austria added the Muslim Brotherhood’s emblem to its list of prohibited extremist symbols, criminalizing public display or promotion.The government launched the controversial “Islam Map,” identifying hundreds of mosques and associations suspected of ideological or foreign-funded influence, signalling a stricter approach toward Islamist-linked networks.

2. France: The “Separatism Law” and Dissolution of Brotherhood-Linked NGOs

In 2021, France adopted the Anti-Separatism Law, which tightened controls on religious and educational associations and expanded state authority to shut down mosques and centers accused of promoting hate speech or rejecting republican values.

Following the murder of schoolteacher Samuel Paty, France dissolved several organizations, including:

BarakaCity,CCIF (Collective Against Islamophobia in France), after accusing them of advancing Islamist narratives hostile to the Republic.

These dissolutions were upheld by France’s highest administrative court.

In May 2025, a government-commissioned report warned of the long-term ideological threat of the Muslim Brotherhood’s penetration of educational, civic, and religious institutions.

3. Germany: Intelligence Surveillance and Banning Islamist Groups

Germany’s domestic intelligence agency (BfV) classifies the Brotherhood as part of the “Islamist spectrum” seeking to undermine the democratic constitutional order, describing the group as “totalitarian” and a long-term threat more capable of institutional penetration than some violent organizations.

In November 2025, Germany banned Muslim Interaktiv and several other Islamist groups, accusing them of promoting the supremacy of sharia over German law. Measures included raids, asset freezes, and prohibition of symbols.

D. European Union Level: Parliamentary Inquiries and Political Pressure

Between 2024 and 2025, the European Parliament submitted written questions to the European Commission regarding EU funding for Brotherhood-linked NGOs, calling for strict auditing and the suspension of support for groups propagating political Islamist ideology.

In November 2025, the European Parliament hosted the presentation of “Unmasking the Muslim Brotherhood,” a report exposing the organization’s influence across European institutions.

Protests in Brussels and The Hague demanded that the EU formally designate the Brotherhood as a terrorist organization, under the campaign ClassifyMBNow.

While the EU has not formally banned the Brotherhood, European momentum increasingly positions the group as a long-term strategic threat.

E. Convergence of the U.S. and European Tracks: Toward a Western “Protection Doctrine”

Taken together, the U.S. executive order and Europe’s mounting actions form what can be interpreted as the early stages of a broader Western doctrine of protection against the ideological and organizational expansion of political Islamist networks.

1. Unified Threat Assessment

The U.S. and several European governments increasingly view the Brotherhood as a cross-border ideological and organizational network exploiting:

-        Islamic seminaries and educational institutes

-        Major mosques and cultural centers

-        Student unions and youth associations

Its objective, according to this assessment, is to cultivate new elites loyal to a transnational political project rather than to democratic values and national integration.

2. Targeting “Soft Infrastructure” Before It Turns Violent

While Washington is currently focusing on branches directly implicated in violent activity, European experience shows a shift toward monitoring non-violent Islamism, which provides the intellectual foundation for extremism. These measures include:

-        Banning symbols (Austria)

-        Dissolving NGOs and closing mosques (France, Germany)

-        Tightening oversight of foreign funding and religious education

3. The Transatlantic Dimension

Research institutions in both the U.S. and Europe warn that Brotherhood-linked entities are similarly active across American university campuses and civil-society organizations. Any U.S. designation is therefore likely to mark only the first step in a longer-term confrontation with the group’s strategies of institutional penetration.

4. Balancing Security With Freedom of Religion

Western governments face the challenge of ensuring that these measures do not stigmatize ordinary Muslims or fuel Islamophobic narratives. The current debates in France, Germany, and the European Parliament highlight this tension between safeguarding national security and protecting civil liberties.

Conclusion

The U.S. decision to initiate terrorism designations against Muslim Brotherhood branches—combined with escalating European measures in Austria, France, and Germany, and the rising political pressure at the EU level marks a significant new phase in the Western approach toward political Islamist movements.

Actions such as banning symbols, dissolving NGOs, tightening mosque oversight, and restricting foreign funding signal the emergence of a Western protective framework aimed at shielding societies from an ideological project that advances quietly through religious, educational, and charitable institutions while leveraging legal and civil freedoms to entrench itself.

The key challenge ahead lies in strengthening this protective posture without harming millions of peaceful Muslims in Europe and the United States by precisely targeting the Brotherhood’s ideological and organizational infrastructure while upholding citizenship rights and freedom of worship.