Book: Iran and Brotherhood: Agreements and differences

Iran and the Muslim Brotherhood are the most controversial religious entities in the region.

Both entities mix religion with politics, promote their ideology and want to get to a position of power, using religion and the deception of the public.

Iranian researcher Abbas Khama Yaar made relations between the Muslim Brotherhood and Iran in Egypt the focus of his book "Iran and the Muslim Brotherhood: A study in agreements and disagreements".

Yaar dwells in his book on Islamic revolutionary conditions in Iran, both before and after the 1979 Islamic revolution.

He speaks in the first chapter of the book on fundamentalism by explaining what he describes as "Islamic revival". He says fundamentalists work hard to portray religion as a revolutionary set of ideas that struggle against societies.

He attributes the rise in fundamentalism in the region to oppression from the West, the lack of social justice and the absence of national projects. Yaar says the success of the Islamic revolution in Iran turned the Islamic Republic into a model for other countries.

The second chapter of the book focuses on the Muslim Brotherhood. Yaar explains in this chapter the local, regional and international conditions that led to the emergence of the Brotherhood in 1928.

He especially focuses on the history of the Brotherhood during the eras of Jamal Abdel Nasser and Anwar Sadat.

Yaar also focuses on the role Sayed Qotb played in the evolution of the Brotherhood. Qotb, he says, was influenced by the ideas of thinkers who tended to consider societies as "bunches of infidels". The same thinkers viewed rulers as "apostates".

The third chapter of the book focuses on agreements and disagreements between the Brotherhood and Iran. Yaar specifies the agreements in the following:

1 – The mullahs and the Brotherhood view nationalism as a negative idea.

2 – The mullahs and Iran believe that nationalism hinders the achievement of Islamic unity.

3 – The mullahs and Iran adopt hostile positions towards Israel.

Yaar also specifies disagreements between Iran and the Muslim Brotherhood as follows:

1 – The Brotherhood wants to be the only Islamic group that reaches power, whereas the Shiites are ready to accept the presence of anybody in power so long as this person has knowledge and is just.

2 – The Muslim Brotherhood views the West as a strategic ally, whereas Iran views it harbors enmity to this West.

3 – The Brotherhood renounces violence, even in words, whereas Iran is ready to use violence and publicly supports it.

The fourth chapter of the book talks about relations between the Brotherhood and the Islamic revolution in Iran. It says these relations date back to the years before 1952 when Brotherhood leaders held several meetings with Iranian luminaries.

These meetings, Yaar says, contributed to the presence of a common view between the Brotherhood and Iran on means of dealing with the challenges facing the Arab world.