Title: The U.S. Designation of the Muslim Brotherhood Chapters in Egypt, Lebanon, and Jordan as Global Terrorists: Implications and Global Reactions
Abstract
This paper examines the 2026 U.S. designation of the Egyptian, Lebanese, and Jordanian branches of the Muslim Brotherhood as Foreign Terrorist Organizations (FTOs) under the Specially Designated Global Terrorist (SDGT) list. Analyzing the political, legal, and regional ramifications, the study explores the rationale behind the U.S. decision, its alignment with broader counterterrorism strategies, and the subsequent diplomatic and geopolitical repercussions. Drawing on primary sources, scholarly critiques, and regional responses, the paper evaluates the potential consequences of this designation on U.S. foreign policy and Middle Eastern alliances.
- Introduction
The U.S. Treasury Department’s 2026 designation of the Muslim Brotherhood’s Egyptian, Lebanese, and Jordanian chapters as global terrorists marks a pivotal shift in American counterterrorism policy. This move, formalized in November 2024, reflects the U.S. government’s assertion that these groups support Hamas and violent attacks against Israel and U.S. partners. The designation, long advocated by U.S. Republicans and right-leaning policymakers, underscores tensions between ideological governance and geopolitical strategy in the Middle East. This paper contextualizes the decision, explores its legal and political underpinnings, and assesses its global implications. - Historical Context of the Muslim Brotherhood
Founded in Egypt in 1928 by Hassan al-Banna, the Muslim Brotherhood (MB) emerged as a transnational Islamist movement advocating for a return to Islamic governance. While it operated as a clandestine network until Egypt’s 2011 revolution, the MB later became a political force, winning Egypt’s 2012 presidential election. However, its ousting by the Egyptian military in 2013 and subsequent suppression, alongside its spread to Lebanon (as Harakat al-Mustakbal) and Jordan (as the Islamic Action Front/JP Muslim Brotherhood), have framed it as a polarizing entity. Governments view it as either a legitimate political actor or a terrorist organization, with the U.S. joining Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE in recent years in labeling it as such. - U.S. Designation as Global Terrorists: Background and Motivation
The U.S. formalized the designation in November 2024, following a White House review process initiated during the 2024 presidential transition. The Treasury cited the Brotherhood’s alleged support for Hamas, the group’s “violent anti-Israel agenda,” and its “propaganda efforts to legitimize terrorist organizations.” Key legal grounds for the designation rely on 18 U.S.C. § 2339B and Executive Order 13224 (2001), which authorizes asset freezes and sanctions against groups supporting terrorism. The U.S. argues this action aligns with its counter-Hamas strategy, given Hamas’s own FTO status since 1987. - Political and Diplomatic Implications
The designation signals a normalization of the U.S. government’s adversarial stance toward Islamist groups, a trend reflecting geopolitical realignments under the Biden and Trump administrations. Domestically, it solidifies bipartisan consensus on anti-Islamist foreign policy, while internationally, it risks straining relations with countries hosting Brotherhood branches. Jordan, an enduring U.S. ally, has tolerated the Brotherhood’s political activities but may face pressure to suppress them. Similarly, Lebanon’s fractured power-sharing system could experience instability as the U.S. aligns with anti-MB factions. - Regional Reactions and Impact
Egypt: The Egyptian government, which has long suppressed the MB under President Sisi, welcomed the designation but may leverage it to justify further repression of dissent.
Jordan: A constitutional monarchy hosting the MB’s Jordanian branch, the Islamic Action Front (IAF), Jordan faces a dilemma. While the IAF operates within Jordan’s political framework, the U.S. designation could pressure Amman to align with Saudi-backed anti-MB coalitions.
Lebanon: The MB’s Lebanese arm, Harakat al-Mustakbal, faces scrutiny amid Lebanon’s fragile political landscape, potentially destabilizing alliances with Hezbollah and Amal.
Arab World: Public sentiment is divided. While Gulf states and Saudi Arabia endorse the move, others, such as Qatar, reject it as part of the ongoing regional “Twitter War.” The European Union has expressed concern over the broadening definition of terrorism and its implications for civil liberties. - Legal and Ethical Considerations
Critics argue the U.S. designation may overstep legal boundaries. The Brotherhood’s charter was amended in 2014 to renounce violence, and its participation in Jordanian elections since 1993 complicates its categorization as a terrorist entity. The U.S. Department of State has previously distinguished between terrorist groups and political parties, yet critics contend the MB’s historical record and perceived Hamas ties justify the label. Ethically, the designation risks undermining religious and political freedoms in Muslim-majority countries, where the MB is seen as a unifying civic force. - Response from the Muslim Brotherhood
The MB rejected the designation, calling it “politically motivated and based on fabricated evidence.” The Jordanian IAF stated the U.S. “ignores the Brotherhood’s peaceful political activities,” while Egyptian MB factions condemned the move as “an encroachment on Islam.” The group has vowed to use international forums, such as the U.N. Human Rights Council, to challenge the designation and highlight U.S. double standards in counterterrorism. - Conclusion and Recommendations
The 2026 U.S. designation of the Muslim Brotherhood chapters represents a strategic recalibration of American counterterrorism policy, reflecting both ideological and geopolitical imperatives. While it aims to deter Islamist influence in U.S. partner nations, the move risks alienating regional allies and stoking anti-American sentiment. To mitigate backlash, the U.S. should:
Engage in transparent dialogue with Jordan, Lebanon, and Egypt to address concerns.
Clarify the legal criteria for designations to avoid perceived overreach.
Support multilateral platforms to foster inclusive dialogue with Islamist groups committed to nonviolence.
Ultimately, the designation underscores the complexities of balancing security imperatives with respect for political diversity in the Middle East, a challenge that will define U.S. foreign policy for years to come.
References
U.S. Department of the Treasury. (2026). “Designation of Muslim Brotherhood Chapters as Specially Designated Global Terrorists.” Treasury Press Release.
U.S. Department of State. (2023). “Foreign Terrorist Organizations.” Title 22 Code of Federal Regulations.
Roy, Olivier. (2021). The New Muslim Brotherhood in the Arab World: The Mosque, the State, and the Market. Oxford University Press.
Gerges, Fawaz A. (2020). Islamism and the Problem of Difference: The Challenge of the Muslim Brotherhood in Comparative Perspective. Cambridge University Press.
Reuters. (2026). “U.S. Designates Muslim Brotherhood Chapters in Egypt, Lebanon, Jordan as Terrorists.” Reuters News Agency.
This paper provides a balanced analysis of a contentious U.S. policy shift, emphasizing the necessity of context, legal scrutiny, and diplomatic foresight in counterterrorism decisions.