Counterterrorism Blog

Robert Leiken and Steven Brooke, the co-authors of the recent Foreign Affairs piece called "The Moderate Muslim Brotherhood," have posted this response to my, and others', strong disagreement with their premise that U.S. policy should include a dialogue with the Muslim Brotherhood, who, they contend, do not endorse jihad and embrace democracy. This is, I think, one of the most important debates we can have at this time.

I think they are badly and dangerously off the mark, as I will describe below, but apologize for my initial, overly-personalized description of their work as "shoddy and slipshod," and hope the ongoing debate we can stay away from personal attacks, and will do my part. I would also note that, in their response, Leiken and Brooke incorrectly state that my friend Yousef Ibrahim's credentials include a dismissal from the Council on Foreign Relations. Mr. Ibrahim had a one-year fellowship there, paid for by BP, and he returned to his post there after the fellowship ended.

Two other quick points. Leiken and Brooke critique my lack of sources on my blog. I would only point to my extensive published work on the international Muslim Brotherhood, which, on a blog, I did not have the time and could not reproduce.

I also never expressed "shock" at Zawahiri's attack on Hamas, nor "surprise" at splits brewing between the Brotherhood and the "jihadists." I simply noted they were happening as important matters to be understood by policy makers. On matters of more substance, here is another good response to some of the issues raised by Leiken and Brooke in Front Page Magazine.

My biggest disagreement is the failure to factor in, mention or discuss the Muslim Brotherhood as a clandestine group well experienced in denial and deception tactics, honed for more than four decades. I have talked to some Brotherhood leaders and read their literature extensively. My full blog is here.