\

By: Fern Sidman – Jewish Voice News

In a move reflecting one of the most consequential policy escalations in Washington’s long-running confrontation with Islamist extremism, the U.S. House Foreign Affairs Committee voted on Wednesday to advance legislation that would designate the entire Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist organization. The decision, reported by The Algemeiner on Thursday, signals a bipartisan convergence on an issue that for years had been mired in hesitation, geopolitical caution, and bureaucratic ambivalence.

The vote comes just days after President Trump signed an executive order directing his administration to assess whether specific Brotherhood chapters — particularly in Egypt, Jordan, and Lebanon — should be designated as foreign terrorist organizations or as specially designated global terrorists. But the bill approved Wednesday goes significantly further, compelling the U.S. government to proscribe the organization and all of its global branches in totality, thereby treating the Brotherhood as a unitary transnational actor rather than a diffuse ideological ecosystem.

According to the information provided in The Algemeiner report, the legislation was spearheaded jointly by Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart (R-FL) and Rep. Jared Moskowitz (D-FL), mirroring a rare bipartisan alignment in an otherwise polarized Congress. Diaz-Balart called the move “a step in the right direction” and praised the committee for reinforcing President Trump’s recent directive with a more expansive mandate. Moskowitz likewise lauded the committee’s decision, emphasizing that the Brotherhood has for decades been “tied to extremism and instability across the Middle East and around the world,” a view widely echoed by counterterrorism analysts.

Founded in Egypt in 1928 by Hassan al-Banna, the Muslim Brotherhood has long operated as a sprawling ideological network active in more than 70 countries. Its stated aim—establishing societies governed by Sharia law—has inspired or directly shaped a constellation of extremist movements, with Hamas representing the most infamous and violent among them. As The Algemeiner report noted, Hamas draws its ideological lineage and even personnel from the Brotherhood, a connection that has increasingly animated calls in Washington to reassess America’s posture toward the organization at large.

Although different branches of the Brotherhood vary in tone and tactics, their shared ideological DNA and tight-knit international coordination — often through financial, charitable, and educational fronts — have made the movement exceedingly difficult to police. Governments in Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and Bahrain have already banned or designated the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist entity. The new U.S. legislation would align Washington more closely with its Middle Eastern allies who have long urged the United States to take a firmer stand.

The bill passed by the House Foreign Affairs Committee, HR 4397, was first introduced in July. Its companion bill in the Senate, S 2293, was introduced by Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX), with strong Republican support. Both measures aim to press the executive branch — particularly the State Department — to issue a formal, global designation covering all Brotherhood branches and affiliates.

In contrast, President Trump’s recent executive order is narrower in focus: it instructs Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent to determine whether certain individual chapters warrant designation. But as The Algemeiner reported, the legislation would go significantly further, mandating a comprehensive mapping of Brotherhood-linked entities worldwide and evaluating each for terrorist designation.

“This is not merely about isolated chapters,” one congressional source told The Algemeiner. “It is about acknowledging that the Brotherhood is a global ideological organism whose influence is inseparable from the extremist groups it inspires.”

The proposed legislation would expand the Anti-Terrorism Act of 1987, explicitly adding the Muslim Brotherhood to the statutory framework of designated terrorist organizations. If enacted, the law would block the organization and its affiliates from operating in the United States, impose sweeping visa bans on individuals linked directly or indirectly to Brotherhood networks, freeze assets belonging to Brotherhood-connected entities, and bar U.S. government funds from flowing to any organization with ties to the group.

Supporters of the bill argue that such measures are long overdue.

As one expert quoted in The Algemeiner report observed, “Counterterrorism efforts have historically targeted the symptoms of Islamist extremism — Hamas, al-Qaeda, ISIS — while leaving the ideological mother ship largely untouched. This legislation attempts to address the root, not merely the branches.”

Several counterterrorism scholars contacted by The Algemeiner pointed out that the Brotherhood’s ideology has served as a doctrinal scaffold for jihadist movements across the Middle East. While the Brotherhood often presents itself as a socio-religious movement promoting education and charity, critics argue that these efforts function as soft-power vehicles for cultivating Islamist political consciousness.

The Brotherhood’s core texts, particularly the writings of Sayyid Qutb, have been cited as foundational by groups like al-Qaeda and ISIS. Hamas, founded in 1987 as the Brotherhood’s Palestinian branch, openly acknowledges the Brotherhood as its parent organization in its charter. For policymakers, this alignment is not incidental but structural, making the case for sweeping designation more compelling.

One of the most startling revelations cited by lawmakers and reported by The Algemeiner involves the findings of a major study by the Institute for the Study of Global Antisemitism and Policy (ISGAP). The 200-page report asserts that Qatar — one of the principal patrons of the Muslim Brotherhood — has funneled roughly $20 billion into American universities and think tanks over five decades.

According to ISGAP’s research, this funding represents a deliberate ideological campaign aligned with the Brotherhood’s long-term strategy known as “civilization jihad”, a methodical effort to influence public discourse, intellectual frameworks, and policymaking in Western societies. The report alleges that these funds have been used to embed Brotherhood-linked curricula, activist networks, and ideological infrastructure in American educational institutions.

As The Algemeiner report highlighted, members of Congress have seized upon these findings as evidence that the Brotherhood’s presence in the West is not merely rhetorical but institutional and deeply entrenched.

Despite ideological rifts on Middle East policy more broadly, several House Democrats backed the bill, signaling a nuanced shift in the Democratic caucus. While the progressive wing remains skeptical of broad designations, centrist and national-security-minded Democrats have been increasingly willing to acknowledge the Brotherhood’s destabilizing role.

Lawmakers told The Algemeiner that the committee’s bipartisan vote reflects growing alarm at the resurgence of Islamist ideologies amid global instability, including the war in Gaza and Iran’s escalating assertiveness across the region.

However, even supporters concede that the bill faces a complex path ahead. Opponents argue that a blanket designation risks sweeping up nonviolent civic or political groups under the Brotherhood’s enormous global umbrella, thereby entangling U.S. diplomacy in new tensions with countries where Brotherhood-derived parties remain influential.

With the committee vote completed, the bill will now advance to the full House for debate. If passed, it will move to the Senate — where Ted Cruz’s counterpart bill awaits committee action.

Should the legislation clear both chambers and reach the president’s desk, Washington would adopt one of the most sweeping counterterrorism designations in modern history, dramatically reshaping the legal and diplomatic landscape surrounding a movement long treated with ambivalence by Western governments.

Yet, momentum is on the side of those seeking decisive action. After years of equivocation, U.S. lawmakers appear prepared to address the Brotherhood as not merely a political movement but an ideological vanguard for extremism.

In the words of one senior congressional aide, speaking to The Algemeiner, “This is Washington’s clearest acknowledgment yet that the Muslim Brotherhood is not a misunderstood religious organization — it is the intellectual fountainhead of global Islamist radicalism. Treating it as anything less than that has put American security at needless risk.”