Saudi Arabia and the Brotherhood: What the ‘New York Times’ Missed

Saudi Arabia and the Brotherhood: What the ‘New York Times’ Missed

Saudi Arabia and the Brotherhood: What the ‘New York Times’ Missed

The kleptocratic kingdom has long backed the Brothers.

Copy Link
Facebook
X (Twitter)
Bluesky
Pocket
Email

So, so many things wrong with David Kirkpatrick’s piece in the New York Times today about the first meeting between Mohammed Morsi, the new president of Egypt from the cult-like Muslim Brotherhood, and King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia, kleptocrat-in-chief from the cult-like Wahhabi kingdom. Kirkpatrick writes of the “profound ideological enmity” between the Brothers and the Saudis and the “legal ban on [the Muslim Brotherhood’s] existence [in Saudi Arabia] and deep animosity from the kingdom’s rulers.”

Well, not quite.

True, Saudi Arabia doesn’t allow the Muslim Brotherhood to operate openly in Saudi Arabia, but then Saudi Arabia doesn’t allow any group or party to function openly. 

But for more than half a century, Saudi Arabia has extended every form of support to the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and elsewhere, as I documented extensively in my 2005 book, Devil’s Game: How the United States Helped Unleash Fundamentalist Islam./p>

A bullet-point history: 

In 1948, Hermann Eilts, one of America’s premier Arabists, was a young diplomat in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. When I interviewed him for my book, he told me that he met Hassan al-Banna, the founder of the Muslim Brotherhood, in Jeddah. “He used to come to Saudi Arabia for money, actually. I met him at the home of the then-Saudi deputy minister of finance, who was a man who was himself very pious and who handled Banna. His name was Sheikh Mohammad Sorour…and it was Sorour who handled most of the financial matters with the Muslim Brotherhood.” In fact, Saudi Arabia has funded the Muslim Brotherhood throughout its existence.

In the 1950s and 1960s, the Muslim Brotherhood twice tried to assassinate President Nasser of Egypt, Saudi Arabia’s biggest enemy at the time. The Saudis weren’t unhappy about that.

In the 1970s, President Sadat of Egypt re-established the Muslim Brotherhood in Cairo, with the explicit help of Saudi Arabia’s chief of intelligence, Kamal Adham, who personally led a Muslim Brotherhood delegation from Saudi Arabia back to Egypt, where they quickly took root again, with Saudi financial help and Sadat’s patronage. The Saudis loved that the Brotherhood was anti-communist and anti–Arab nationalist.

From the 1970s on, Saudi Arabia poured millions of dollars into Egypt in support of the Muslim Brotherhood, among other things helping them push Al Azhar, the leading center of Islamic scholarship, increasingly into the camp of ultraconservatives, from the Muslim Brotherhood to the Salafis to the Wahhabis.

And so on.

Of course, Saudi Arabia wasn’t happy about the fall of President Mubarak, but not because they feared either the Egyptian military or the Muslim Brotherhood. They were decidedly unhappy about the left-leaning, secular, often socialist-minded opposition parties that filled Tahrir Square in the early, optimistic days of the 2011 revolt. Now Saudi Arabia will be a major player, mostly behind the scenes, in working out a happy marriage between the army and the Muslim Brotherhood. Welcome to Egypt’s future.

Support independent journalism that does not fall in line

Even before February 28, the reasons for Donald Trump’s imploding approval rating were abundantly clear: untrammeled corruption and personal enrichment to the tune of billions of dollars during an affordability crisis, a foreign policy guided only by his own derelict sense of morality, and the deployment of a murderous campaign of occupation, detention, and deportation on American streets. 

Now an undeclared, unauthorized, unpopular, and unconstitutional war of aggression against Iran has spread like wildfire through the region and into Europe. A new “forever war”—with an ever-increasing likelihood of American troops on the ground—may very well be upon us.  

As we’ve seen over and over, this administration uses lies, misdirection, and attempts to flood the zone to justify its abuses of power at home and abroad. Just as Trump, Marco Rubio, and Pete Hegseth offer erratic and contradictory rationales for the attacks on Iran, the administration is also spreading the lie that the upcoming midterm elections are under threat from noncitizens on voter rolls. When these lies go unchecked, they become the basis for further authoritarian encroachment and war. 

In these dark times, independent journalism is uniquely able to uncover the falsehoods that threaten our republic—and civilians around the world—and shine a bright light on the truth. 

The Nation’s experienced team of writers, editors, and fact-checkers understands the scale of what we’re up against and the urgency with which we have to act. That’s why we’re publishing critical reporting and analysis of the war on Iran, ICE violence at home, new forms of voter suppression emerging in the courts, and much more. 

But this journalism is possible only with your support.

This March, The Nation needs to raise $50,000 to ensure that we have the resources for reporting and analysis that sets the record straight and empowers people of conscience to organize. Will you donate today?

Ad Policy
x