Politics
Playing chess with the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt
Reading Time: 4 minutesThe US is facing a dilemma on how to deal with the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt. On one hand, accepting them means accepting an Islamist system that will certainly have an anti-American and anti-Israeli agenda, and on the other hand rejecting and delegitimizing this group can turn some of its members to the use of violence.
The US is facing a dilemma on how to deal with the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt. On one hand, accepting them means accepting an Islamist system that will certainly have an anti-American and anti-Israeli agenda, and on the other hand rejecting and delegitimizing this group can turn some of its members to the use of violence. The group has very strong anti-American and Anti-Israeli views, and hence defeating them requires wisdom similar to playing chess rather than direct confrontations especially in the current volatile situation. This approach is possible because we know that the leaders of the Muslim Brotherhood, unlike other Jihadi groups, can sit at a table to negotiate. In chess, one may win the game by executing a proper gambit’, or a well-calculated sacrifice. Direct confrontations with the Muslim Brotherhood may be much less effective than well planned ‘gambits’.
The current reality in Egypt is that despite being officially banned, the Muslim Brotherhood exists. For nearly 30 years, the Mubarak regime has been unable to suppress the spread of the ideology of this group. For example, the Brotherhood managed during the ruling of President Mubarak to increase the Islamic-based hatred of Israel and both anti-Americanism and anti-Semitism have reached very high levels in the country. In addition, they managed to Islamize a significant portion of the society. Currently, most Muslim women are wearing the hijab, Islamic jargon is used in mainstream media, and the support of Sharia is prevalent among the population. During the time of President Sadat, anti-Semitism and anti-Americanism was declining and during Nasser’s time, signs of Islamisation of the society were virtually non-existent. This indicates that the Muslim Brotherhood achieved its best success during the time of Mubarak.
The reliance of Israel and the US on one person in power in Egypt without pressuring him to change the educational systems and the government-controlled media to actively fight anti-Semitism and anti-Americanism was a short-sighted approach that was doomed to fail. It was much better that the US – instead of pressuring Mubarak on democracy – should have used its relation with the President to make changes in education and to implement effective strategies to weaken Islamism. This would have guaranteed a much better long-term relationship between Egypt and the US and Israel.
Mubarak’s approach that allowed anti-Semitism to flourish in the country while pretending to be a friend to Israel was schizophrenic and indicates that he was not a true ally to these countries. His refusal to visit Israel even for once during his 30 years of presidency is another indication of the lack of sincerity in his relationship with Israel – despite receiving billions of dollars in aid from the US. A man who truly believes in peace would not have allowed anti-Semitism to flourish to such pathological levels in his country. For example, President Sadat who believed in peace took many active steps to change Egyptian society and used religion effectively to fight rather than promote anti-Semitism. Sadat’s approach was to a great extent successful in decreasing anti-Semitism in the country – despite him being assassinated by extremists who deemed him an "apostate".
While the Muslim Brotherhood flourished over the last few decades in Egypt, they lost a significant amount of their popularity in the last few years due to several reasons. These include:
1- The emergence of open criticism of Islam and the exposure of radical teachings that contradict human conscience. The Internet and modern media allowed a level of debates and discussions that weakened the appeal of political Islam to many people. This was evident by the refusal of the protestors in Egypt to use the flag of the Muslim Brotherhood.
2- The failure of sharia-inspired Islamic groups in Somalia, Taliban, and Gaza (Hamas) to provide a better life for their people contradicted the basic slogan of the Muslim Brotherhood that "Islam is the Solution". Furthermore, the failure of the Islamic solution proved to many that the wealth in Saudi Arabia was not necessarily because they implement Sharia.
3- The refusal of the Muslim Brotherhood to join the demonstrations at the beginning (they only joined them when they started to succeed!). This made the group to be perceived by many as a group of political opportunists. The Muslim Brotherhood had no other option to use their flag in the protests but to arrange a few separate insignificant parallel demonstrations. It is important to note that, the prayers that were held during the protests represented a common ritual level of Islam in the country rather than an ideological movement belonging to the Muslim Brotherhood.
In the current volatile and exploding situation in Egypt dealing with the Brotherhood has become a very sensitive and demanding issue. The following are a few – but essential – recommendations on how to handle the current situation with the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt in a way to avoid complete collapse of the country.
1- Try to ‘contain’ or ‘accommodate’ the group to some extent as direct confrontations with them in this situation can turn some of its members to become violent or support other more violent Islamic groups to do terrorist acts in the country. Stability at this stage is vital to defeat this group in the long run.
2- Allow some of the members of this group to have limited roles in the next government in areas that do not allow them to control the strategic policies of the country, education, or the sensitive security and military apparatus. One could assign more technical ministries to them to test their competence – such as the ministries related to environmental affairs, or water and irrigation or housing and utilities. This offer to the Muslim Brotherhood MUST be conditioned by their approval of the former international treaties of Egypt including the peace with Israel.
3- Fight the group ideologically – as putting their members in prisons without fighting their ideology has been ineffective and failed to stop the proliferation of their ideology.
4- Use religion to fight the Muslim Brotherhood and embarrass them. For example the secular government can declare that they must respect the peace treaty with Israel and ask the group to agree with this as the Quran stated clearly that:
Quran 17:34 Fulfill (every) promise and treaty
Quran 5:1 O ye who believe! Fulfill (all) obligations.
Quran 13:20 Those who fulfill their oath and never break their treaties (the context is praising them)
5- Provide humanitarian aids from non-Islamic organizations to compete with the Muslim Brotherhood in using this humanitarian tactic to win the hearts and minds of people.
This ‘gambit’ to accept a limited and controllable role of the Muslim Brotherhood in the next stage of Egypt’s political future, while using effective approaches to win them at the ideological level, will be vital to avoid further instability in the country that can breed uncontrollable radicalism.
Note: This does not in any way mean that I do not see the threat of the Muslim Brotherhood. I am only trying to put pragmatic approaches that deal with the reality as banning the group simply did not stop them from promoting their ideology.
Featured
FC Sheriff Tiraspol victory: can national pride go hand in hand with political separatism?

A new football club has earned a leading place in the UEFA Champions League groups and starred in the headlines of worldwide football news yesterday. The Football Club Sheriff Tiraspol claimed a win with the score 2-1 against Real Madrid on the Santiago Bernabeu Stadium in Madrid. That made Sheriff Tiraspol the leader in Group D of the Champions League, including the football club in the groups of the most important European interclub competition for the first time ever.
International media outlets called it a miracle, a shock and a historic event, while strongly emphasizing the origin of the team and the existing political conflict between the two banks of the Dniester. “Football club from a pro-Russian separatist enclave in Moldova pulls off one of the greatest upsets in Champions League history,” claimed the news portals. “Sheriff crushed Real!” they said.
Moldovans made a big fuss out of it on social media, splitting into two groups: those who praised the team and the Republic of Moldova for making history and those who declared that the football club and their merits belong to Transnistria – a problematic breakaway region that claims to be a separate country.
Both groups are right and not right at the same time, as there is a bunch of ethical, political, social and practical matters that need to be considered.
Is it Moldova?
First of all, every Moldovan either from the right or left bank of Dniester (Transnistria) is free to identify himself with this achievement or not to do so, said Vitalie Spranceana, a sociologist, blogger, journalist and urban activist. According to him, boycotting the football club for being a separatist team is wrong.
At the same time, “it’s an illusion to think that territory matters when it comes to football clubs,” Spranceana claimed. “Big teams, the ones included in the Champions League, have long lost their connection both with the countries in which they operate, and with the cities in which they appeared and to which they linked their history. […] In the age of globalized commercial football, teams, including the so-called local ones, are nothing more than global traveling commercial circuses, incidentally linked to cities, but more closely linked to all sorts of dirty, semi-dirty and cleaner cash flows.”
What is more important in this case is the consistency, not so much of citizens, as of politicians from the government who have “no right to celebrate the success of separatism,” as they represent “the national interests, not the personal or collective pleasures of certain segments of the population,” believes the political expert Dionis Cenusa. The victory of FC Sheriff encourages Transnistrian separatism, which receives validation now, he also stated.
“I don’t know how it happens that the “proud Moldovans who chose democracy”, in their enthusiasm for Sheriff Tiraspol’s victory over Real Madrid, forget the need for total and unconditional withdrawal of Russian troops from Transnistria!” declared the journalist Vitalie Ciobanu.
Nowadays, FC Sheriff Tiraspol has no other choice than to represent Moldova internationally. For many years, the team used the Moldovan Football Federation in order to be able to participate in championships, including international ones. That is because the region remains unrecognised by the international community. However, the club’s victory is presented as that of Transnistria within the region, without any reference to the Republic of Moldova, its separatist character being applied in this case especially.
Is it a victory?
In fact, FC Sheriff Tiraspol joining the Champions League is a huge image breakthrough for the Transnistrian region, as the journalist Madalin Necsutu claimed. It is the success of the Tiraspol Club oligarchic patrons. From the practical point of view, FC Sheriff Tiraspol is a sports entity that serves its own interests and the interests of its owners, being dependent on the money invested by Tiraspol (but not only) oligarchs.
Here comes the real dilemma: the Transnistrian team, which is generously funded by money received from corruption schemes and money laundering, is waging an unequal fight with the rest of the Moldovan football clubs, the journalist also declared. The Tiraspol team is about to raise 15.6 million euro for reaching the Champions League groups and the amounts increase depending on their future performance. According to Necsutu, these money will go directly on the account of the club, not to the Moldovan Football Federation, creating an even bigger gab between FC Sheriff and other football clubs from Moldova who have much more modest financial possibilities.
“I do not see anything useful for Moldovan football, not a single Moldovan player is part of FC Sheriff Tiraspol. I do not see anything beneficial for the Moldovan Football Federation or any national team.”
Is it only about football?
FC Sheriff Tiraspol, with a total estimated value of 12.8 million euros, is controlled by Victor Gusan and Ilya Kazmala, being part of Sheriff Holding – a company that controls the trade of wholesale, retail food, fuels and medicine by having monopolies on these markets in Transnistria. The holding carries out car trading activities, but also operates in the field of construction and real estate. Gusan’s people also hold all of the main leadership offices in the breakaway region, from Parliament to the Prime Minister’s seat or the Presidency.
The football club is supported by a holding alleged of smuggling, corruption, money laundering and organised crime. Moldovan media outlets published investigations about the signals regarding the Sheriff’s holding involvement in the vote mobilization and remuneration of citizens on the left bank of the Dniester who participated in the snap parliamentary elections this summer and who were eager to vote for the pro-Russian socialist-communist bloc.
Considering the above, there is a great probability that the Republic of Moldova will still be represented by a football club that is not identified as being Moldovan, being funded from obscure money, growing in power and promoting the Transnistrian conflict in the future as well.
Photo: unknown
Politics
Prime Minister Natalia Gavrilita meets high-ranking EU officials in Brussels

Prime Minister of the Republic of Moldova, Natalia Gavrilita, together with Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs, Nicu Popescu, pay an official visit to Brussels, between September 27-28, being invited by High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, Josep Borrell Fontelles.
Today, Prime Minister had a meeting with Charles Michel, President of the European Council. The Moldovan PM thanked the senior European official for the support of the institution in strengthening democratic processes, reforming the judiciary and state institutions, economic recovery and job creation, as well as increasing citizens’ welfare. Natalia Gavrilita expressed her confidence that the current visit laid the foundations for boosting relations between the Republic of Moldova and the European Union, so that, in the next period, it would be possible to advance high-level dialogues on security, justice and energy. Officials also exchanged views on priorities for the Eastern Partnership Summit, to be held in December.
“The EU is open to continue to support the Republic of Moldova and the ambitious reform agenda it proposes. Moldova is an important and priority partner for us,” said Charles Michel.
Prime Minister Natalia Gavrilita also met with Paolo Gentiloni, European Commissioner for Economy, expressing her gratitude for the support received through the OMNIBUS macro-financial assistance program. The two officials discussed the need to advance the recovery of money from bank fraud, to strengthen sustainable mechanisms for supporting small and medium-sized enterprises in Moldova, and to standardize the customs and taxes as one of the main conditions for deepening cooperation with the EU in this field.
Additionally, Prime Minister spoke about the importance of the Eastern Partnership and the Deep Free Trade Agreement, noting that the Government’s policies are aimed at developing an economic model aligned with the European economic model, focused on digitalization, energy efficiency and the green economy.
A common press release of the Moldovan Prime Minister with High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy/Vice-President of the Commission, Josep Borrell Fontelles, took place today, where the agenda of Moldova’s reforms and the main priorities to focus on in the coming months were presented: judiciary reform; fighting COVID-19 pandemic; promoting economic recovery and conditions for growth and job creation; strengthening state institutions and resilience of the country.
“I am here to relaunch the dialogue between my country and the European Union. Our partnership is strong, but I believe there is room for even deeper cooperation and stronger political, economic and sectoral ties. I am convinced that this partnership is the key to the prosperity of our country and I hope that we will continue to strengthen cooperation.”
The Moldovan delegation met Didier Reynders, European Commissioner for Justice. Tomorrow, there are scheduled common meetings with Oliver Varhelyi, European Commissioner for Neighborhood and Enlargement, Adina Valean, European Commissioner for Transport and Kadri Simson, European Commissioner for Energy.
Prime Minister will also attend a public event, along with Katarina Mathernova, Deputy Director-General for Neighbourhood Policy and Enlargement Negotiations.
Photo: gov.md
Politics
Promo-LEX about Maia Sandu’s UN speech: The president must insist on appointing a rapporteur to monitor the situation of human rights in Transnistria

The President of the Republic of Moldova, Maia Sandu, pays an official visit to New York, USA, between September 21-22. There, she participates in the work of the United Nations General Assembly. According to a press release of the President’s Office, the official will deliver a speech at the tribune of the United Nations.
In this context, the Promo-LEX Association suggested the president to request the appointment of a special rapporteur in order to monitor the situation of human rights in the Transnistrian region. According to Promo-LEX, the responsibility for human rights violations in the Transnistrian region arises as a result of the Russian Federation’s military, economic and political control over the Tiraspol regime.
“We consider it imperative to insist on the observance of the international commitments assumed by the Russian Federation regarding the withdrawal of the armed forces and ammunition from the territory of the country,” the representatives of Promo-LEX stated. They consider the speech before the UN an opportunity “to demand the observance of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights by the Russian Federation with reference to this territory which is in its full control.”
“It is important to remember about the numerous cases of murder, torture, ill-treatment, forced enlistment in illegal military structures, the application of pseudo-justice in the Transnistrian region, all carried out under the tacit agreement of the Russian Federation. These findings stem from dozens of rulings and decisions issued by the European Court of Human Rights, which found that Russia is responsible for human rights violations in the region.”
The association representatives expressed their hope that the president of the country would give priority to issues related to the human rights situation in the Transnistrian region and would call on relevant international actors to contribute to guaranteeing fundamental human rights and freedoms throughout Moldova.
They asked Maia Sandu to insist on the observance of the obligation to evacuate the ammunition and the military units of the Russian Federation from the territory of the Republic of Moldova, to publicly support the need for the Russian Federation to implement the ECtHR rulings on human rights violations in the Transnistrian region, and to request the appointment of an UN Human Rights Council special rapporteur to monitor the human rights situation in the Transnistrian region of the Republic of Moldova.
**
The Promo-LEX Association concluded that 14 out of 25 actions planned within the National Action Plan for the years 2018–2022 concerning respecting human rights in Transnistria were not carried out by the responsible authorities.
The association expressed its concern and mentioned that there are a large number of delays in the planned results. “There is a lack of communication and coordination between the designated institutions, which do not yet have a common vision of interaction for the implementation of the plan.”
Promo-LEX requested the Government of the Republic of Moldova to re-assess the reported activities and to take urgent measures, “which would exclude superficial implementation of future activities and increase the level of accountability of the authorities.”
Photo: peacekeeping.un.org