Exclusive, Voice of Emirates – In a deep and thorough political analysis of the roots of the structural crisis within the Muslim Brotherhood, researcher and political writer, Tariq Abu Zeinab, confirmed in exclusive statements to the “Voice of Emirates” website that the group is facing an intractable historical and intellectual dilemma related to the existence of the “Special Organization,” describing it as a secret armed wing that adopted violence and assassinations as a tool to achieve political goals under a religious cover,
which has caused great damage to the image of Islamic movements and their historical course.
The Special Organization: A “Black Spot” and a School of Violence
Abu Zeinab explained that the “Special Organization” served as the group’s secret and armed wing,
and its history is replete with operations carried out during its activity in Egypt (the 1930s and 40s),
leaving deep and devastating effects on Egyptian society and the development of political Islamic movements in the region.
The researcher considered that period a “dark chapter” in the group’s history, characterized by extremism
and the establishment of a highly dangerous model of organized, transnational political violence.
He emphasized that studying this period is essential to understanding the shift of some movements
from social and political activism to direct violence, and to interpreting the repercussions of this legacy on Arab and Islamic societies.
He affirmed with firm conviction that “violence cannot produce development or prosperity, nor can it be a means to achieve justice or peace.”
The structural dilemma of loyalty and the conflict of the nation-state
Abu Zeinab pointed out that the problem, in his estimation, is not limited to the group’s field activities,
but extends to the very core of its intellectual and organizational structure.
He explained that this structure, particularly its clandestine wing, gives absolute priority to “organizational loyalty”
at the expense of the logic of the nation-state and its institutions, inevitably leading to
a state of permanent structural tension with the state in any context in which the group operates.
In defining extremism and terrorism as one of the most serious global threats, Abu Zeinab explained that extremism is a deviation
from moderation through the adoption of rigid positions that reject dialogue and justify hatred,
while terrorism is the actual use of violence or the threat of violence to achieve political goals by inciting panic and targeting civilians.
The UAE approach: A proactive vision
In his analysis of efforts to combat these phenomena, Abu Zainab emphasized to “Voice of Emirates”
that addressing extremism requires a comprehensive approach that transcends the security dimension to encompass education, development,
and dialogue, with the aim of building stable societies that respect diversity and uphold human values.
In this regard, he pointed out that the United Arab Emirates was among the first countries to recognize the danger of extremist ideology
at an early stage and dealt with it as an existential threat requiring direct and decisive confrontation.
He noted that extremism is defined as a deviation from moderation in thought and behavior
through the adoption of rigid positions that reject dialogue or differing opinions
and often justify violence or hatred towards others.
Terrorism, on the other hand, is the use of violence or the threat of violence to achieve political or ideological goals,
and often targets civilians to incite fear and chaos.
A direct threat to the concept of national sovereignty
He added that the analysis reveals the UAE’s reliance on a comprehensive package of proactive security
and legislative measures aimed at curbing any potential organizational infiltration within state institutions.
This stems from a strategic vision that considers these organizations and their ideologies
a direct threat to the concept of national sovereignty and social cohesion.
Abu Zeinab concluded his political analysis by noting that experiences in several Arab countries have clearly demonstrated
that the presence of the Muslim Brotherhood in the public sphere is often linked to increased tension,
intensified internal divisions, and heightened political and social polarization.
