Two New Brotherhood Administrations, Leaderships Provoke Egypt’s Political Circles

Mohammed Badie, former Muslim Brotherhood leader, in prison (File photo: Reuters)
Mohammed Badie, former Muslim Brotherhood leader, in prison (File photo: Reuters)
TT

Two New Brotherhood Administrations, Leaderships Provoke Egypt’s Political Circles

Mohammed Badie, former Muslim Brotherhood leader, in prison (File photo: Reuters)
Mohammed Badie, former Muslim Brotherhood leader, in prison (File photo: Reuters)

The recent developments within the Muslim Brotherhood, which Egypt classifies as a terrorist organization, have preoccupied the political circles, especially with the battle over leadership.

The competition became apparent after the recent decisions that led to establishment of two administrations and two acting guides in London and Istanbul.

Islamist specialists discussed the conflict between "London Front" and the "Istanbul Group" and the expected scenario.

The Istanbul Front appointed Mahmoud Hussein as acting guide, and hours later, the London Front responded by naming Moheddine al-Zait as their chief.

Earlier, London Front acting leader Ibrahim Munir dissolved the Administrative Office for Organization Affairs in Turkey and formed a supreme body as an alternative to the Brotherhood’s Guidance Office.

The crisis heightened after the London Front formed a new Shura Council, dismissing six members of the Istanbul Shura, including Hussein himself. The Istanbul Shura Council formed the "Acting Committee of the General Shura" led by Mustafa Tolba and dismissed Munir from his position.

In response, the London Front dismissed Tolba, declaring in a statement that it “did not recognize the decisions of the Istanbul Front or the so-called General Shura Council.”

Egyptian Islamist researcher Ahmed Sultan was not surprised by the recent development and said it was an extension of the dispute that began in 2020 within the organization, explaining that it was a structural division that reached the international organization.

Sultan told Asharq Al-Awsat that each front is seeking to lead the organization, adding that the division intensified between the two sides, and the differences deepened.

Last June, the Guidance Office met in London without Hussein. It issued a statement stressing the need to pledge allegiance to Munir in his capacity as an acting guide.

Sultan reported that Hussein was asked to solve his issues with the London group and acknowledge Munir as the acting guide, who refused and established a global organization and appointed Hammam Ali Yusef as its secretary general.

The expert confirmed that Hussein’s appointment was rightful regarding regulation, but the dispute involved managing the organization’s assets and funds.

The London Front viewed Hussein’s group as a dissident. Munir chose three deputies before his death, but they have not made a selection, which created a regulatory problem because Muni was not the organization’s guide.

The issue was whether the Chargé d’Affairs had the right to choose his deputy or deputies so that one could assume his duties in his absence or death.

Munir formed a committee to justify the procedure legally, and his measure was settled. The next step was for the General Shura Council in London to agree on one of the three deputies, but the council did not meet.

Sultan also explained that Hussein, after Munir's death, presented an initiative to regroup the organization and reached out to some leaders in London, but they refused.

Hussein activated Article 5 of the regulation by assuming the position while the London Front was still preparing to choose an official representative of the guide, according to the expert.

Sultan said that it was likely that the London front will likely choose Buhairi, and if that happened, there would be two guides for the Brotherhood for the first time in the history of the organization.

Meanwhile, Islamist researcher Ahmed Zaghloul told Asharq Al-Awsat that the conflict within the organization is intensifying, and it may deepen further if the London Front fails to choose an acting leader formally.

Zaghloul stressed that having two leaders as the acting guide would increase and deepen the conflict, which could lead to escalatory measures.

Asked about the form of leadership within the organization, the researcher explained there were three: London, Istanbul, and the Movement for Change, and two groups: the first, whose memberships are frozen, and the Egyptian domestic group.

He also noted that the position of the prison leaders regarding the developments remains unknown.

London front announced earlier that imprisoned leaders support Munir. Still, it did not resolve the dispute within the Brotherhood, said Zaghloul, noting that they might side with Hussein or that the London front might delay naming its leader to obtain their support and approval.



Israel’s Retaliatory Responses to Houthis Must Begin by Drawing Intelligence Plan

A person inspects damage at the site where a projectile fired from Yemen landed in Tel Aviv on December 21, 2024 (EPA)
A person inspects damage at the site where a projectile fired from Yemen landed in Tel Aviv on December 21, 2024 (EPA)
TT

Israel’s Retaliatory Responses to Houthis Must Begin by Drawing Intelligence Plan

A person inspects damage at the site where a projectile fired from Yemen landed in Tel Aviv on December 21, 2024 (EPA)
A person inspects damage at the site where a projectile fired from Yemen landed in Tel Aviv on December 21, 2024 (EPA)

Israel is considering options to respond to repeated attacks fired from Yemen in the past few days, the latest of which was a Houthi missile strike that injured more than a dozen people in Tel Aviv.
But military experts say Israel should first consider an intelligence plan for confronting the new front after it faced significant difficulties in both defending against and responding to the Houthi attacks.
On Saturday morning, Houthis launched a missile that triggered sirens throughout central Israel at 3:44 am. It was the second attack since Thursday.
Israel's military said the projectile landed in Tel Aviv's southern Jaffa area, adding that attempts to intercept a missile from Yemen failed.
“The incident is still being thoroughly investigated,” the army said, adding that following initial investigations by the Israeli Air Force and Home Front Command, “some of the conclusions have already been implemented, both regarding interception and early warning.”
Israeli military experts say the recent Houthi attacks have revealed serious security gaps in Israel's air defense systems.
“The pressing question now is why none of the other of Israel’s air defense layers managed to intercept the warhead,” wrote Yedioth Ahronoth's Ron Ben-Yishai. “The likely explanation is the late detection and the flat trajectory, which prevented the operation of all available defense apparatus.”
He said these incidents might expose a critical vulnerability in the army’s air defense system protecting Israel’s civilian and military home front.
According to Ben-Yishai, two main reasons might explain Saturday’s interception failure.
The first is that the missile was launched in a “flattened” ballistic trajectory, possibly from an unexpected direction.
As a result, Israeli defenses may not have identified it in time, leading to its late discovery and insufficient time for interceptors to operate.
He said the second, and more likely scenario is that Iran has developed a maneuverable warhead.
Such a warhead separates from the missile during the final third of its trajectory and maneuvers mid-flight—executing pre-programmed course changes—to hit its designated target, he wrote.
And while Israel has launched initial investigations into the failure of Israeli defense systems to intercept the missiles, it is now examining the nature, date and location of its response.
When Houthis launched their first missile attack on Israel last Thursday, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu warned them, saying, “The Houthis will learn the hard way.”
But Israeli political analyst Avi Ashkenazi wrote in the Maariv newspaper that Israel should look at reality with open eyes and say out loud that it cannot deal with the Houthi threat from Yemen, and has failed to face them.
Last Thursday, 14 Israeli Air Force fighter jets, alongside refuelers and spy planes, flew some 2,000 kilometers and dropped over 60 munitions on Houthi “military targets” along Yemen’s western coast and near the capital Sanaa.
The targets included fuel and oil depots, two power stations, and eight tugboats used at the Houthi-controlled ports.
But the Maariv newspaper warned about the increasing involvement of Iran in supporting the Houthi forces.
“Iran has invested more in the Houthis in recent weeks following the collapse of the Shiite axis, making the Houthi movement a leader of this axis,” the newspaper noted.
Underscoring the failures of Israel’s air defense systems, Maariv said the “Arrow” missile defense system, Israel's main line of defense against ballistic missiles, had failed four times in a row to intercept missiles, including three launched from Yemen and one from Lebanon.
Yedioth Ahronoth's Ben-Yishai also warned that the threat posed by maneuvering warheads on Iran's heavy, long-range missiles would become existential for Israel should Iran succeed in developing nuclear warheads for these missiles.
Meanwhile, Israel’s Channel 12 said that in recent months, the Middle East has changed beyond recognition.
The channel said that for the first time in more than half a century, a direct and threat-free air corridor has been opened to Iran through the Middle East. Israel will benefit from this corridor to launch almost daily attacks on the border crossings between Syria and Lebanon, it said.
Channel 12 also reported that according to the Israeli military, the new threat-free corridor will help Israel launch a future attack on Iran's nuclear facilities.
“From Israel's perspective, the fall of the Assad regime and the collapse of the Iranian ring of fire are changing the balance of power in the Middle East,” the report added.