Hamas claims that is it a wing of the Muslim Brotherhood; to what extent is this statement accurate?

ANT3041 ASSIGNMENT 2

JAMES KIRTON

The organisation known as Hamas, or Haraket al Muqawamah al-Islamiyyah, is the governmental party currently in control of Palestine and the Gaza strip. This movement, listed by the United states and a number of other countries as a terrorist organisation, claims within article two of its charter that it is one of the wings of the Muslim Brothers in Palestine (Hamas Charter 1988: article 2). This charter, which was written with the establishment of the organisation in 1988, outlines a number of ideological ideas which should be followed by members of the group. The Muslim Brotherhood however appears to differ in terms of a number of ideological aspects regarding its purpose and interpretation of the Quran. The Brotherhood is a much larger organisation spanning over 17 countries throughout the world and was founded in 1928 with the motto, Islam is the Solution. The group is particularly well known for its condemnation of terrorism and its role in Egypt, and due to a number of reasons, such as the Brotherhood in Palestine being created by the Egyptian Brotherhood in 1935, this will therefore be the key study for the Muslim Brotherhood within this essay. This essay will discuss the key differences between the two organisations in terms of their ideological ideas and the perception of particular countries; focussing on the United States and Israel. The topic will then progress onto any comparison which exist between the two groups and whether this can be used to infer whether Hamas is a wing of the Muslim brotherhood in an ideological sense or otherwise. Firstly, the role of the two organisations within a political setting appears to be significantly different in this context in relation to the modern world. Hamas for example appears to have been created for a solely political role; this is illustrated within the charter itself through statements such as: Allah is its goal, the prophet its model and the Quran its constitution (Article 8: Hamas Charter 1988) and ...For the masses are of them and for them, and their strength is *ultimately+ their and their future is theirs. (Article 21: Hamas Charter 1988). These two statements could be utilised to suggest that Hamas has always intended on being a political institution through its reference to a constitution and indeed in the creation of a charter which is widely published in literature and online; this contrasts to the charter of the Muslim Brotherhood which does not appear to exist within literature, instead following a number of principles according to the subgroup to which you belong. The constitution of Hamas in itself follows Sharia or Muslim law, a set of rules interpreted from the Quran, implying the religious nature of the governmental organisation. The Muslim Brotherhood on the other hand does not appear to have been designed as a political institution, although it has often allied itself with governmental organisation to assist with elections and provide support. In Egypt for example, the Muslim brotherhood allied itself with a number of

parties throughout its existence. Once such government would be that of Sadat for his early leadership, who encouraged and succeeded in the introduction of Sharia Law in the state (Mitchell 1969: 152). The Brotherhood however has also been suppressed many times throughout its history for destabilising particular governmental parties implying its political power even without being a truly political movement (Wikipedia; Muslim Brotherhood). This is particularly well illustrated by a BBC article entitled Egyptian Brotherhood Mass Arrests, in which Mohamed Habib, the deputy leader of the Brotherhood in Egypt stated, This is an attempt to marginalise the role of the Brotherhood in Egyptian political life... (BBC NEWS: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6364689.stm). This infers that the Muslim Brotherhood is essentially a political force without politicians but in a number of countries, there are cases in which the Brotherhood creates a political group under a different name so as to allow more rigid political access and control; this however is a recent occurrence under the Muslim Brotherhood with groups such as the Freedom and Justice Party in Egypt, and also Hamas in Palestine. The original affiliation of sorts should not however lead one to assume that; due to Hamas creation by the Brotherhood, the organisation is still acting as the Brotherhood originally intended. Both parties however have a number of similar ideas regarding the nature of the ruling government in their respective countries. Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood are both of the opinion that religion should be associated with politics and therefore are against the secular governmental organisations which oppose them. The Hamas Charter for example explicitly states this fact within article 27 where it discusses the Palestinian Liberation Organisation (PLO); ...The PLO has adopted the idea of a secular state....Secular thought is diametrically opposed to religious thought....when the PLO adopts Islam as the guidelines for life, then we shall become its soldiers.... (Hamas Charter 1988) This quote shows that Hamas as a group is not willing to accept the idea of a secular state in Palestine, referring throughout its charter to the area as an Islamic waqf which means an implied ownership of God is suggested to the land (http://i-cias.com/e.o/waqf.htm ), thereby suggesting that the area of Palestine should be ruled by religious rule as opposed to secular. The Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt can also be shown as an antisecular government through its actions in regards to its support of particular political actions and the condemnation of others. One example of such an event would be the support of Sadat in view of the introduction of Sharia Law as Law in Egypt, but alternatively when secular organisations maintain control the Brotherhood

appears to protest to the point of being abolished, and in the past leaders sent to concentration camps such as in the mid 1950s Mitchell 1969: 141). Another major difference between Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood is in its attitudes towards the concept of Jihad in contemporary times; there does however appear to be some similarities in regards to the earlier work of the brotherhood against colonialism, particularly within Egypt. Hamas, considered a terrorist group among a number of western countries appears geared towards the concept of Jihad against Israel. This is shown and stated clearly throughout the Charter of 1988 in a number of statements, such as: Israel will rise and remain erect until Islam eliminates it as it has eliminated its predecessors (Introduction: Hamas Charter 1988) They have raised the banner of Jihad in the face of the oppressors.... (Article 3: Hamas Charter 1988) In order to face the usurpation of Palestine by the Jews, we have no escape from raising the banner of Jihad. (Article 15: Hamas Charter 1988) Above are just three of large numbers of references to jihad against Israel and its religion, suggesting that the aspect of Jihad is one of the main ideals of Hamas as an organisation. A number of surveys can also be used to suggest that the local populace also feels a similar way to achieve the required results. One survey, conducted in September 2006 interviewed 1,270 adults in 127 random locations throughout Palestine and received results that 63% of those asked believe that they should emulate Hezbollahs methods by using rockets against Israeli cities (Shikaki 2006: 54-5). This implies that the majority of those asked, with 17% of those interviewed being supporters of Fatah (Shikaki 2006: 53) believe that a more violent method of dealing with Israel is required; however a large percentage (Shikaki 2006: 75) also feel that diplomacy should be used in conjunction with violence as a means to end the tension around the Gaza strip (Shikaki 2006: 55). There is also evidence of such an idea within Palestine from an interview of Azzam Tamimi, an academic based in London and asked questions via email over a period of 3 weeks (Gaess 2006: 23). This person, when asked; What mandate do you think Palestinian voters have given Hamas, or have signalled to Abbas, in terms of how they should proceed if negotiations resume? The Oslo accords appear to have put the Palestinians at a continuing disadvantage, essentially letting Israel slip away from its commitments under Resolution 242, which also calls for a just settlement of the

refugee problem. Is the electoral endorsement of Hamas an attempt by Palestinians to restore the balance in terms of international acknowledgement of Palestinian rights and Israeli obligations? Tamimi replied: The Mandate Hamas acquired from Palestinians who voted on January 25 means that the Palestinians are fed up with the PLO, with Fatah and with all the wasting of time in negotiating useless deals. If the Israelis want peace, Hamas option is the way forward. If they do not want peace, there is little left for the Palestinians to lose. (Gaess 2006: 24-25) The Muslim Brotherhood on the other hand condones violence in its actions, particularly to reference of Egypt. However one can see that this is only a recent change in the ideals of the Brotherhood, where the formation of the organisation appears to have been associated with the downfall of a number of colonial regimes. This could therefore be used to suggest that Hamas is indeed a wing of the Muslim Brotherhood prior to its attitude change in a later period; from that of a populist movement to one of a reformist point of view. One only has to look at the original credo to see how the attitude within the movement has changed. The motto in itself stated that; God is our objective, the Quran is our constitution, the prophet is our leader, Jihad is our way, and death for the sake of God is the highest of our aspirations. This is similar in nature to the basic ideas illustrated above from the Hamas charter of 1988 regarding jihad as an important part of the movement as discussed above. Another example of the Brotherhoods original nature is also illustrated within Egypt; once again suggesting the role of Jihad was originally important to the movement in its earlier phases. The events of 1952 for example seem to suggest this; this is where a number of members were accused of arson on roughly 750 buildings throughout Cairo (Mitchell 1969: 92). Another key event in the history of the Brotherhood is the assassination of the prime minister for Egypt in 1948; this could also be used to suggest the more Jihadic nature of the movement prior to its divergence from particular individuals, notably Sayyid Qtab, an author who is known for being the Brotherhood member who suggested that: Muslim society was no longer Islamic and must be transformed by an Islamic Vanguard through violent revolution (Mitchell 1969: 91-96). This statement seems to have been particularly important in the creation of the Brotherhood in Egypt who chose to reject this course of action as the way forward. A number of other regional groups however took on this ideology in their actions.

The final point to be discussed is both governments attitudes towards the West; and through necessity, the Wests attitudes towards the two organisations. Hamas is primarily seen as a terrorist group in the West, although a number of countries such as Russia and Norway do not agree with this statement; showing that the western world in reality has a mixed view of Hamas in Palestine. An interesting point, also worth mentioning here is that of the view of a Palestinian Christian on the takeover of Hamas. Father Iyyad Twal, parish priest of Zababdeh in the West Bank states that; First of all we should not be afraid...I dont see the Palestinian Islamic Movement becoming as conservative or fanatical.....Hamas knows the challenges to building and fighting for a free and independent Islamic state.... (Network news: 17) implying that he believes Hamas is the best option for the state; even for those who do not share the same religion. The church leader also goes on to demonstrate his opinion of the west and its attitudes towards Palestine; Any anger or fear the international community feels toward the results of this election should not be directed at Hamas....Hamass victory can be traced to the dismal U.S. negotiated peace with Israel....For ten years the Palestinians waited on the peace process... (Network News: 18) And he then continues: Attacking Hamas for a being a fanatical movement is unfair in this context....the Keneset has produced a very fanatical movement....In fact some of these fanatical movements produce some of the most dramatic achievements towards peace.... (Network News: 18-19) This shows that the opinion of the Palestinian is that the U.S. is not taking negotiations seriously or alternatively focussing on the rights of Israel rather than mediating without prejudice, which has lead to the wests perception of Hamas as a fanatic group, and Hamas perception of the west as a corrupt society which is against a Muslim free state. Hamas also has a number of differences from that of an international terrorist organisation; implying that the perceived view of the movement should differ slightly to that of a group such as al Queda. There are however views within the population which suggest that the U.S. in particular should be treated in a similar way to that of Israel due to its involvement within the conflict (Levitt 2007: 925) and this appears to have created an anti-Hamas attitude through a number of statements. One such example is a statement issues on 18th December 2001 which stated; Americans *are+ now considered legitimate targets as well as Israelis (Levitt 2007: 925) implying that Hamas will begin to target these peoples. Hamas however shows a number of key differences in its creation and reasoning to that of other terrorist groups named as such by America. Hamas for

example is focussed only on a local Jihad as opposed to a global one, with any foreign casualties being considered incidental casualties of the attacks, rather than intentionally targeting others (Levitt 2007: 296). This suggests that although the west treats Hamas as a terrorist organisation for the most part, it is not completely comparable in its methods. The Muslim Brotherhood is considered in a number of ways within the west due to its many differing branches and ideas within the separate groups can differ greatly. A recent is example is that of the opinion of Barack Obama and its differences to the American people as illustrated in an article by Robert Spencer. This article states that Barack has shown an interest in becoming friendly with the Brotherhood, who, the author believes intends to destroy the U.S. from within (Spencer 2011: 15). This is however only one view; the Brotherhood for example is not considered a terrorist organisation officially; although this could be due to a number of reasons which are to varied to discuss within the scope of this assignment. To conclude, Hamas at first glance appears to be completely unrelated to the Muslim Brotherhood due to its number of ideological differences. However if one takes a deeper look into the history of the two organisation then it becomes clear that Hamas could have been considered a wing of the Muslim Brotherhood, which has recently taken on a number of different characteristics due to its location and attitude towards one different religious group, that of the Jews. The author would therefore conclude that due to the number of similarities between the two movements when Hamas was originally formed; that Hamas was a wing of the Muslim Brothers, but due to recent reforms within the Brotherhood the two movements have become separated on a number of key view points, particularly that of its attitudes towards Jihad and the others discussed above. It would therefore be worthwhile researching other wings of the Muslim Brotherhood to see how accurate their links are to the more recent ideas of the movement itself.

Bibliography

BBC NEWS 2006: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6364689.stm, viewed 20th June 2011 Gaess, R 2006, 'Interview: Hamas in Power', Middle East Policy, 13, 2, pp. 23-29, Academic Search Complete, EBSCOhost, viewed 21 June 2011. Levitt, M 2007, 'Could Hamas Target the West?', Studies in Conflict & Terrorism, 30, 11, pp. 925-945, Academic Search Complete, EBSCOhost, viewed 21 June 2011.
Mitchell, Richard P. 1969. The Society of the Muslim Brothers. London: Oxford University Press

Shikaki, K 2006, 'Dissatisfied with Hamas, But Would Not Vote for Fateh', Palestine-Israel Journal of Politics, Economics & Culture, 13, 3, pp. 52-56, Academic Search Complete, EBSCOhost, viewed 21 June 2011. Spencer, R 2011, 'Obama Has Many Muslim Brotherhood Ties', Human Events, 67, 7, p. 15, Academic Search Complete, EBSCOhost, viewed 20 June 2011. Twal, A 2006, 'A Palestinian Christian on the Hamas victory: "We should not be afraid."', Network News, 26, 1, pp. 17-18, Academic Search Complete, EBSCOhost, viewed 21 June 2011 Unknown. 1988. Hamas Charter . http://www.thejerusalemfund.org/www.thejerusalemfund.org/carryover/documents/charter html (June 20th 2011)
Unknown, http://i-cias.com/e.o/waqf.htm viewed 20th June 2011

Wikipedia. Muslim Brotherhood. Viewed 17th June 2011