
US terror designation of Muslim Brotherhood and Cair 'in the works'
While calls to do so have come from several US lawmakers in the past, they have not borne fruit. But now, a cabinet-level official is making the assertion.
"Why wouldn't you guys designate the Muslim Brotherhood and Cair?" asked the radio host, Sid Rosenberg, referencing the Council on American-Islamic Relations, the largest Muslim civil liberties organisation in the country.
"I just - I look at these organisations. I have a mayor's race here in New York City with this psycho, this lunatic Mamdani," he added, referencing the current Democratic candidate for mayor, Zohran Mamdani, who also happens to be Muslim.
"Both of these groups, you know, are behind him, especially the Muslim Brotherhood," Rosenberg said of Cair's indirect financial support for the progressive candidate. "Is that something you think we can count on maybe in the near future? Maybe not Cair just yet, but certainly the Muslim Brotherhood?"
New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch
Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters
" Yeah, all of that is in the works," Rubio responded.
"Obviously, there are different branches of the Muslim Brotherhood, so you'd have to designate each one of them... these things are going to be challenged in court, right?"
" We are constantly reviewing for groups to designate for what they are: supporters of terrorists, maybe terrorists themselves, whatever it may be. We haven't done this in a long time, so it's - we've got a lot of catch-up to do. And you've mentioned a couple names, particularly the Muslim Brotherhood, that are of grave concern," he said.
Last month, a bill was introduced in the House of Representatives called the "Muslim Brotherhood Terrorist Designation Act of 2025", which called on the Trump administration to do just that.
And a letter was sent just last week by Republican Senator Tom Cotton, calling on the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) to revoke Cair's nonprofit status for its alleged "ties to terrorist activities" linked to "Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood".
US senator asks tax authority to strip Muslim civil rights organisation of nonprofit status Read More »
Middle East Eye reached out to Cair for a response on Rubio's comments, and was referred to a statement released by the Muslim Public Affairs Committee (Mpac) instead, which condemned the move to "smear" a domestic group "or treat political disagreement as grounds for terrorism designation".
Mpac's vice president of policy and programming, Haris Tarin, is a former senior policy advisor to the Secretary of Homeland Security, and was at the agency under three different presidents since the Obama administration.
"For the Secretary of State to comment on Cair... that's extremely problematic and concerning to us. He does not have the right to say that. He does not have the authority. He does not have the mandate," Tarin told MEE.
"The conversation around Cair [now]... that was never in previous administrations, including Biden, Trump 1.0, Obama, and Bush," he added. "There was never conversations about banning Cair. There was conversations about engaging Cair and whether the federal government thought it was a politically right or politically savvy thing for them to engage Cair".
The public, Tarin said, should be "extremely alarmed when it comes to designating a domestic institution" precisely because Americans fund it and it is not a foreign institution.
What could happen - should the Trump administration compile clear evidence for such a case - is that it would have to file charges through the Department of Justice, he explained.
What is The Muslim Brotherhood?
The Muslim Brotherhood is most commonly known in the Arab world as a political party founded on Islamic principles and laws, whose support skyrocketed in the wake of the 2011 Arab protests aimed at overthrowing autocratic rulers.
It was established in the late 1920s in Egypt and gained popularity as the mid-century ushered in secular governments that saw modernisation and westernisation interchangeably.
In 2012, after the toppling of Egypt's ruler of three decades, Hosni Mubarak, an internationally-monitored election in Egypt saw the victory of its first Muslim Brotherhood president, Mohammed Morsi.
Within a year, he was toppled by the military, imprisoned, and died in prison in 2019. The Muslim Brotherhood is now banned in Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, and the United Arab Emirates, and most recently in Jordan.
'Islamophobia and anti-Muslim sentiments have created a narrative in the US where democracy is good, except when religious Muslims win to govern their own countries'
- Raed Jarrar, Dawn
"Islamophobia and anti-Muslim sentiments have created a narrative in the US where democracy is good, except when religious Muslims win to govern their own countries," Raed Jarrar, the advocacy director for Democracy for the Arab World Now (Dawn), told MEE.
"We saw that narrative come out of Gaza when Hamas won the elections. We saw that narrative come out of Egypt when the Muslim Brotherhood won the elections. We saw that narrative in Tunisia, in Libya, in Jordan, and many other countries where religious Muslims won democratic elections," he said.
Jarrar added that there is no singular Brotherhood entity or "headquarters" because it's an ideology and a movement that springs up independently across each of the countries in the Middle East and North Africa - so a US designation would have to be detailed and country-specific to hold up in court, just as Rubio indicated.
For lawmakers pushing for a terror designation, the Muslim Brotherhood "poses a direct threat to US national security through radical jihadist attempts to eliminate and destroy America and its allies", Florida Congressman Mario Diaz-Balart, who sponsored the House bill, said in a press release.
MEE put the question to George Washington University professor Nathan Brown, who is an expert on Middle East politics and sits on the board of trustees at the American University in Cairo.
In what ways is the Muslim Brotherhood a threat to US national security?
" None at all," he said.
Anti-Muslim, anti-Palestinian sentiment
When Senator Cotton wrote to the IRS, he alleged that Cair was listed as a member of the Muslim Brotherhood's Palestine Committee and that the group participated in a meeting of Hamas supporters in Philadelphia.
Cair firmly rejected the claims and said they're tied to anti-Muslim bigotry.
"You have some very heated anti-Muslim forces [in the State Department] that are a little bit more eager to try to find and make those connections, but they're going to run into the same problem: you can't. There's no smoking gun anywhere, because there's no real, tangible connection," Shahed Amanullah, a former State Department senior staffer under Hillary Clinton and John Kerry, told MEE.
What's so scary about the Muslim Brotherhood? Read More »
The State Department is the agency that is responsible for any terrorist designations, as well as visa revocations.
"In the past, I would say that people at the State Department were sophisticated and smart enough to understand the nuances of those affiliated movements overseas, and that it wasn't some kind of command and control structure," Amanullah said of the Muslim Brotherhood.
"Those people have been hollowed out from the State Department," he said.
Unlike past attempts at designating the Brotherhood and going after Cair, this time in particular, it's also taking place with the backdrop of the genocide in Gaza, Tarin told MEE.
"Anything that has to do with American-Muslim institutions... it has to do with their support for pro-Palestinian organisations," he said.
The Trump administration has made it a priority to go after international students and some of the most prestigious universities in the country for pro-Palestine protests and activism. Students have been jailed in immigration detention centres, deported, and the institutions they attended were effectively sued for hundreds of millions of dollars by the government.
Jewish Voice for Peace, which has joined pro-Palestine demonstrations, has previously noted that the administration's playbook is taken from the Heritage Foundation's 'Project Esther' report, "which is a blueprint for using the federal government and private institutions to dismantle the Palestine solidarity movement and broader US civil society, under the guise of 'fighting antisemitism'".
"I think pro-Israel groups feel that American Muslim institutions that support the pro-Palestinian movement are a threat to their existence here in the US, and their dominance of US foreign policy," Tarin told MEE.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Arabian Post
13 minutes ago
- Arabian Post
US Government Eyes Stake in Intel Amid Chip Manufacturing Push
The U. S. government is reportedly negotiating a potential stake in semiconductor giant Intel, as part of efforts to bolster the nation's chip manufacturing capabilities. According to sources familiar with the matter, the deal could be a significant move in Washington's ongoing strategy to strengthen domestic manufacturing of critical technologies, particularly semiconductors. Intel has been facing mounting challenges in the competitive semiconductor industry, with delays in its manufacturing projects, including the much-anticipated Ohio chip factory. The U. S. government's interest in taking an equity stake in the company signals a broader push to reduce dependency on foreign chip production, especially from Asia, and ensure the security of critical supply chains. This move is seen as part of a strategic initiative to revitalise America's technological leadership and secure its position in global markets. Intel's Ohio facility, which is poised to become one of the largest semiconductor manufacturing plants in the world, has faced delays partly due to supply chain disruptions and increasing construction costs. The involvement of the U. S. government could provide much-needed capital and oversight, accelerating the development of the plant and helping Intel compete more effectively with rival manufacturers, particularly Taiwan's TSMC and South Korea's Samsung, who have been expanding their presence in the U. S. market. ADVERTISEMENT The discussions come on the heels of significant policy shifts, such as the CHIPS Act, passed by Congress in 2022, which aims to incentivise semiconductor manufacturing on American soil. The act includes $52 billion in subsidies for semiconductor companies to develop and expand production facilities within the United States. By taking a stake in Intel, the government would not only provide financial support but could also play a role in shaping the company's long-term strategy in an increasingly geopolitical semiconductor landscape. Intel's shift towards increasing domestic production comes at a time when geopolitical tensions and supply chain issues have exposed vulnerabilities in global chip supply chains. These concerns were particularly underscored during the COVID-19 pandemic, which led to widespread shortages and underscored the need for diversified production capabilities. As the U. S. government navigates this complex environment, its stake in Intel could also be seen as an effort to counter China's rising influence in the semiconductor space, which is a growing concern for U. S. policymakers. For Intel, the U. S. government's involvement could provide the company with a much-needed financial cushion to accelerate its plans. With Intel's long-term ambitions to manufacture leading-edge chips in the U. S., this partnership could be a critical factor in its race to catch up with competitors who have already established more advanced production processes. Industry experts suggest that the collaboration between the government and Intel could reshape the dynamics of semiconductor production in the U. S. The push for a self-sufficient chip supply chain could lead to a wave of investment in U. S.-based manufacturing plants, potentially creating thousands of jobs and boosting local economies. The implications for the broader tech sector are also significant, as the development of these high-tech manufacturing plants could drive further innovation and research in the field of semiconductor design and fabrication. However, some analysts caution that while the partnership could provide substantial benefits, it also comes with risks. The involvement of the government in a private company could lead to concerns about political interference in business decisions, especially in an industry as vital to national security as semiconductor manufacturing. Critics argue that the focus should be on creating an environment that encourages private sector growth without overt government involvement. As discussions continue, it remains unclear how much of a stake the U. S. government would take in Intel and the specific terms of the agreement. However, the move is widely seen as part of a broader strategy to revitalise the U. S. semiconductor industry and ensure that it is equipped to meet the growing demand for chips in everything from consumer electronics to military technology.


Gulf Today
an hour ago
- Gulf Today
VIDEO: Trump, Putin shake hands at start of Alaska summit
Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin shook hands and smiled at an air base in Alaska on Friday as they opened a high-risk summit that will test the US president's promise to end the bloody war in Ukraine. In choreographed drama, Trump and Putin each arrived in their presidential jets and walked under gray skies to greet each other on the tarmac, before walking a red carpet together to an honor guard salute. As fighter jets circled overhead, a reporter shouted audibly to Putin, "Will you stop killing civilians?" Neither leader answered as they posed at a podium that said "Alaska 2025" before Putin -- in a highly unusual move -- followed Trump into the US presidential limousine. For the Russian president, the summit marks his first foray onto Western soil since he ordered the invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, triggering a relentless conflict that has killed tens of thousands of people. Both leaders have voiced hopes of a productive meeting. But while Trump warned he could judge it a failure after just a few minutes if Putin does not budge, the Kremlin said the two would speak for at least six or seven hours. In recent days Russia has made battlefield gains that could strengthen Putin's hand in any ceasefire negotiations, although Ukraine announced as Putin was flying that it had retaken some villages. Speaking to reporters aboard Air Force One en route to Anchorage, Trump sounded a positive note. "There's a good respect level on both sides and I think something's going to come out of it," he said. Trump has insisted he will be firm with Putin, after coming under some of the most heated criticism of his presidency for appearing cowed during a 2018 summit in Helsinki. The White House on Friday abruptly announced that Trump was scrapping a plan to see Putin alone and instead would be joined by Secretary of State Marco Rubio and his roving envoy Steve Witkoff before a working lunch. Every word and gesture will be closely watched by European leaders and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, who was not included and has refused pressure from Trump to surrender territory seized by Russia. "It is time to end the war, and the necessary steps must be taken by Russia. We are counting on America," Zelensky said in a social media post. Trump has called the summit a "feel-out meeting" to test Putin, whom he last saw in 2019, and said Friday he was not going to Alaska to negotiate. "I'm here to get them at the table," he said of the Russian and Ukrainian leaders. Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said Moscow would not forecast the outcome of the meeting. "We never make any predictions ahead of time," Lavrov told Russian state TV after he reached Alaska, wearing what appeared to be a shirt with "USSR" written across it in Cyrillic script. Trump has promised to consult with European leaders and Zelensky, saying that any final agreement would come in a three-way meeting with Putin and the Ukrainian president to "divvy up" territory. Trump has boasted of his relationship with Putin, blamed predecessor Joe Biden for the war, and had vowed before his return to the White House in January that he would be able to bring peace within 24 hours. But despite repeated calls to Putin, and a February 28 White House meeting in which Trump publicly berated Zelensky, the Russian leader has shown no signs of compromise. Saying he "would walk" from the table if the meeting didn't go well, Trump told reporters he "wouldn't be happy" if a ceasefire could not be secured immediately. The talks were taking place at Elmendorf Air Force Base, the largest US military installation in Alaska and a Cold War facility for surveillance of the former Soviet Union. Adding to the historical significance, the United States bought Alaska in 1867 from Russia -- a deal Moscow has cited to show the legitimacy of land swaps. Neither leader is expected to step off the base into Anchorage, Alaska's largest city, where protesters have put up signs of solidarity with Ukraine. The summit marks a sharp change in approach from Western European leaders and Biden, who vowed not to hold discussions with Russia on Ukraine unless Kyiv was also involved. Agence France-Presse


Dubai Eye
2 hours ago
- Dubai Eye
Trump says it will be up to Ukraine to decide on territorial swaps
US President Donald Trump said he would not negotiate on behalf of Ukraine in his Friday meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin and would let Kyiv decide whether to engage in territorial swaps with Russia. Trump said his goal was to get the two sides to start a negotiation, with any territorial swaps to be addressed then. "They'll be discussed, but I've got to let Ukraine make that decision, and I think they'll make a proper decision. But I'm not here to negotiate for Ukraine, I'm here to get them at a table," Trump told reporters aboard Air Force One. Trump's remarks are likely to offer some assurance to Ukraine, which is worried that the US-Russia talks could freeze the conflict at Ukraine's expense. Trump said the Russian offensive in Ukraine was likely aimed at helping to strengthen Putin's hand in any negotiations to end the war. "I think they're trying to negotiate. He's trying to set a stage. In his mind that helps him make a better deal. It actually hurts him, but in his mind that helps him make a better deal if they can continue the killing," he said. The US president said he expected his meeting with Putin to produce results, given the stakes involved and weakness in the Russian economy. "He's a smart guy, been doing it for a long time but so have I... we get along, there's a good respect level on both sides, and I think, you know, something's going to come of it," he said. Trump said it was a good sign that Putin was bringing business executives with him from Russia, but said no deals could be made until the war was settled. "I like that 'cause they want to do business, but they're not doing business until we get the war settled," he said.