RSSAll Entries Tagged With: "Mahdi Akef"

the 500 most influential muslims

John Esposito

Michael Thick

The publication you have in your hands is the first of what we hope will be anannual series that provides a window into the movers and shakers of the Muslimworld. We have strived to highlight people who are influential as Muslims, thatis, people whose influence is derived from their practice of Islam or from the factthat they are Muslim. We think that this gives valuable insight into the differentways that Muslims impact the world, and also shows the diversity of how peopleare living as Muslims today.Influence is a tricky concept. Its meaning derives from the Latin word influensmeaning to flow-in, pointing to an old astrological idea that unseen forces (like themoon) affect humanity. The figures on this list have the ability to affect humanitytoo. In a variety of different ways each person on this list has influence over thelives of a large number of people on the earth. The 50 most influential figuresare profiled. Their influence comes from a variety of sources; however they areunified by the fact that they each affect huge swathes of humanity.We have then broken up the 500 leaders into 15 categories—Scholarly, Political,Administrative, Lineage, Preachers, Ženy, Youth, Philanthropy, Development,Science and Technology, Arts and Culture, Media, Radicals, International IslamicNetworks, and Issues of the Day—to help you understand the different kinds ofways Islam and Muslims impact the world today.Two composite lists show how influence works in different ways: InternationalIslamic Networks shows people who are at the head of important transnationalnetworks of Muslims, and Issues of the Day highlights individuals whoseimportance is due to current issues affecting humanity.

Muslimského bratrstva ve snaze o právní existenci a duševní vývoj v Egyptě

Manar Hassan |


V důsledku ničivého zemětřesení, které se v říjnu třáslo přetíženým hlavním městem Egypta a jeho sousedních měst 1992, soukromým dobrovolným organizacím - ovládaným islamisty - se podařilo během několika hodin výrazně vést pomocné úsilí, opuštění úřadujícího režimu postiženého jeho byrokratickou neefektivností. Vlastní omezení vlády v poskytování typu rozhodujících operativních služeb v době chaosu je pouhým příkladem její klesající důvěryhodnosti mezi masami. navíc, její reakce na toto veřejné zmatení byla ještě přísnější - přijetí vyhlášky o zákazu přímých snah PVO o pomoc, a proto nutit veškerou pomoc uskutečňovat pouze prostřednictvím vlády. Stále se ale rýsují vládní překážky, režim se snažil uspokojit potřeby obětí v době, která vedla k nepokojům a představovala pouhou připomínku neustálého podráždění, kterému Egypťané čelili ve své nedávné historii. Proto, vyšlo najevo, že Mubarak'pokouší se zachránit jeho image, aby potvrdil jeho sevření moci, a měl velké eliptické síly v egyptské občanské společnosti., proto, byl rozhodujícím zdrojem, skrze který opoziční - převážně Muslimské bratrstvo - odvozují sílu lidového odvolání. Stát se jednou z největších a nejvlivnějších opozičních organizací, Muslimské bratrstvo prořezává přes odcizené sociální struktury, jako je moderní dělnická třída, chudí ve městě, mladý, a obnovit střední třídu, které tvoří podpůrnou základnu. Někteří z nejvýznamnějších členů Bratrstva se týkají nové střední třídy, a proto se spojují prostřednictvím al-niqabatal-mihaniyyah (Profesionální asociace). Jedním příkladem je Dr.. Ahmad el-Malt, který byl tehdejším zástupcem Nejvyššího průvodce bratrstvím a také prezidentem syndikátu lékařů před jeho smrtí

Iniciativa Muslimského bratrstva jako program reforem

Řekl Mahmoud Al-Qumni
V březnu 3, 2004, pan. Mahdi Akef, vůdce a průvodce Muslimského bratrstva zahájil Iniciativu bratrstva k účasti na očekávané demokratické reformě, představovat Bratrstvo jako politickou frakci, která se považuje za kompetentní účastnit se. Bratrstvo se představilo – přirozeně – v nejlepším možném světle, což má každý pravdu. A v květnu 8, 2004, Dr. Essam Aryan, svítidlo Bratrstva dobře známé díky svému vystoupení na místní egyptské satelitní stanici, Vysněná televize, uvedla, že tato iniciativa je komplexní, kompletní program pro brzké přeměnu Bratrstva na politickou stranu.
Demokracie, v jeho liberálním smyslu, znamená vládu lidí, legislativní zákony pro sebe podle svých podmínek. Neznamená to jen volby. Co je důležitější, a položit základy voleb, demokracie je pluralitní politický systém, který zaručuje občanům’ veřejné a soukromé svobody, zejména svoboda projevu a názoru. Zaručuje také jejich lidská práva, zejména svoboda vyznání. To jsou absolutní svobody, bez jakéhokoli omezení nebo monitorování. Demokratický systém umožňuje pokojnou změnu moci ve společnosti a je založen na dělbě moci. Soudní odvětví, zvláště, musí být zcela nezávislý. Demokracie přijímají ekonomiku volného trhu založenou na konkurenci, a to podporuje jednotlivé iniciativy. Demokracie jsou založeny na kanálech dialgoue a mírového porozumění mezi občany. Při řešení místních a mezinárodních konfliktů, co nejvíce se vyhýbají vojenským možnostem. Spolu s těmi, kdo věří v demokracii, konfrontuje mentalitu terorismu a násilného fundamentalistického dogmatismu. Demokracie se staví proti absolutistickým myšlenkám, které tvrdí, že vlastní absolutní pravdu, a hájit relativistické a pluralistické principy. Učiněním tohoto, poskytují všem náboženstvím právo být bezpečně aktivní, s výjimkou názorů, jejichž cílem je konfiskace svobod nebo násilné nebo násilné vnucení jiným stranám. Demokracie se tedy zabývají osvobozením náboženství od monopolu jedné interpretace nebo jedné sekty.
celkem, demokracie je skupina regulačních a právních opatření pro společnost, které lidstvo dosáhlo po dlouhé historii konfliktu, aby vylepšilo autority, kde náboženské osobnosti nemohou vnutit svou vůli. Náboženské orgány byly odpojeny od
státní orgány, zaručit neutralitu státu vůči všem náboženstvím. To umožňuje svobodu vyznání a přesvědčení, a svoboda vyznání pro všechny v naprosté svobodě a rovnosti. Tím se zabrání konfliktu ve jménu náboženství, což vede k bezpečnosti státu a jeho občanů.

V březnu 3, 2004, pan. Mahdi Akef, vůdce a průvodce Muslimského bratrstva zahájil Iniciativu bratrstva k účasti na očekávané demokratické reformě, představovat Bratrstvo jako politickou frakci, která se považuje za kompetentní účastnit se. Bratrstvo se představilo – přirozeně – v nejlepším možném světle, což má každý pravdu. A v květnu 8, 2004, Dr. Essam Aryan, svítidlo Bratrstva dobře známé díky svému vystoupení na místní egyptské satelitní stanici, Vysněná televize, uvedla, že tato iniciativa je komplexní, kompletní program pro brzké přeměnu Bratrstva na politickou stranu. demokracie, v jeho liberálním smyslu, znamená vládu lidí, legislativní zákony pro sebe podle svých podmínek. Neznamená to jen volby. Co je důležitější, a položit základy voleb, demokracie je pluralitní politický systém, který zaručuje občanům’ veřejné a soukromé svobody, zejména svoboda projevu a názoru. Zaručuje také jejich lidská práva, zejména svoboda vyznání. To jsou absolutní svobody, bez jakéhokoli omezení nebo monitorování. Demokratický systém umožňuje pokojnou změnu moci ve společnosti a je založen na dělbě moci. Soudní odvětví, zvláště, musí být zcela nezávislý. Demokracie přijímají ekonomiku volného trhu založenou na konkurenci, a to podporuje jednotlivé iniciativy. Demokracie jsou založeny na kanálech dialgoue a mírového porozumění mezi občany. Při řešení místních a mezinárodních konfliktů, co nejvíce se vyhýbají vojenským možnostem. Spolu s těmi, kdo věří v demokracii, konfrontuje mentalitu terorismu a násilného fundamentalistického dogmatismu. Demokracie se staví proti absolutistickým myšlenkám, které tvrdí, že vlastní absolutní pravdu, a hájit relativistické a pluralistické principy. Učiněním tohoto, poskytují všem náboženstvím právo být bezpečně aktivní, s výjimkou názorů, jejichž cílem je konfiskace svobod nebo násilné nebo násilné vnucení jiným stranám. Demokracie se tedy zabývají osvobozením náboženství od monopolu jedné interpretace nebo jedné sekty. Souhrnně, demokracie je skupina regulačních a právních opatření pro společnost, které lidstvo dosáhlo po dlouhé historii konfliktu, aby vylepšilo autority, kde náboženské osobnosti nemohou vnutit svou vůli. Náboženské autority byly osvobozeny od autorit státu, zaručit neutralitu státu vůči všem náboženstvím. To umožňuje svobodu vyznání a přesvědčení, a svoboda vyznání pro všechny v naprosté svobodě a rovnosti. Tím se zabrání konfliktu ve jménu náboženství, což vede k bezpečnosti státu a jeho občanů.

Mahmoud Ezzat in a comprehensive interview with Al Jazeera’s Ahmed Mansur

Mahmoud Ezzat

Dr. Mahmúd Ezzat, Secretary-General of the Muslim Brotherhood, in a comprehensive interview with Al Jazeera’s Ahmed Mansour ascertained that the Muslim Brotherhood’s elections for Chairman scheduled to be held in the upcoming period by members of the Guidance Bureau is open to everyone who wishes to submit his nomination papers as a candidate.

In his statement to the talk show Bila Hedood (Without Borders) on Al-Jazeera TV, Ezzat explained that nomination papers generally should not be used for the Muslim Brotherhood’s candidates but rather a complete list of the entire Brotherhood’s 100-member Shura Council is presented to elect the Brotherhood’s Chairman and Guidance Bureau. He denied that the Brotherhood’s General Guide to leadership of the General Shura Council does not allow him the freedom to work on his own in making his final decision. He also revealed that the Council has the authority to hold the Chairman accountable for any failure and if the need arises dismiss him at any time.

He stressed that the movement is ready to make the ultimate sacrifice in order to practice the principle of Shura (consultation) within the ranks of, pointing out that the Shura Council will elect the Chairman and a new Guidance Bureau in the upcoming year.

He commented on the Media coverage of what really happened behind the scenes at the Guidance Bureau, citing that the committee which consisted of leading figures such as Dr. Essam el-Erian and a number of the Guidance Bureau members responsible for printing the Chairman’s weekly statement objected to Mr. Mahdi Akef’s wish a trifle difference of opinion. Akef’s first term will end on January 13, 2010 however he has announced earlier; he will still make a decision whether he will remain in office for a second term as the group’s general guide.

He continued that the 81-year old Akef had informed members of the Guidance Bureau earlier that he intended to resign and will not serve for a second term. Members of the Bureau immediately responded urging him to remain in office.

In his weekly message, Mahdi Akef vaguely referred to his intentions of not running a second term and thanking the Muslim Brotherhood and members of the Guidance Bureau who shared with him the responsibility as if he intended it to be his farewell speech. On Sunday, October 17 the media claimed that the Chairman of the Brotherhood had announced his resignation; however the Chairman has repeatedly denied media allegations where he came to the office the next day and met with members. He later issued a statement disclosing the truth. Media allegations on the Guidance Bureau’s unwillingness to appoint Dr. Essam el-Erian are totally false.

Dr. Mahmoud Ezzat ascertained that the movement is pleased to provide an opportunity to members to share their opinions, stressing it is a manifestation of power matching with its existing large size and leading role, indicating that Chairman of the Muslim Brotherhood is very pleased to do so.

He stressed that all issues come back to the Guidance Office for the final decision where its resolutions are binding and satisfactory to all, regardless of the differences in opinion.

I do not underestimate what has happened already or I’d simply say there is no crisis, at the same time, we should not blow things out of its context, we are determined to apply the principle of Shura”, he added.

It was discussed earlier at the subsequent meeting of the Guidance Bureau that the group’s Shura Council has the sole right to elect membership of the Guidance Bureau to any member, he explained. Dr. Essam himself agreed that it was not suitable to appoint a new member in the Brotherhood’s Guidance Bureau since the election was near.

Ezzat stated that the episode was presented to the Shura Council on the recommendation of the guidance office amid frequent arrests and detentions waged by state security. We strive hard to involve the Shura Council to choose the next Chairman and members of the Guidance Office. It is expected the whole matter be resolved, Allah’s willing, before January 13.

It was decided at this meeting by the Chairman and members of the MB Guidance Bureau to send a letter to the Shura Council, stressing that the date for these elections will not be later than sixth months. It was assumed that the proceedings would be conducted prior to or during elections in which 5 new members were elected last year. It is the Shura Council’s decision and not the MB Guidance Bureau. Consequently, the general group’s Shura Council finally reached its unanimous decision of holding elections as soon as possible.

He stressed that the Muslim Brotherhood, with the enforcement of the Shura is organized by its internal regulations. Regulations which are adopted and advocated by laws of the Shura Council and are subject to change. The most recent amendment underway with one of its clauses is the duration of the term of a member of the Guidance Office provides that a member must not serve more than two consecutive terms.

Some members of the Guidance Office were accused of their adherence to stay in office for many years; Dr. Ezzat claimed that frequent arrests which did not exclude any one the Executive Bureau prompted us to modify another article in the internal Regulation that provides a member maintain his membership even if he was detained. The absence of the honorable working for the welfare of their country and the sublime mission led us to insist on them maintaining their membership. Engineer Khayrat Al-Shater will remain as second deputy chairman of the MB and Dr. Mohammed Ali Bishr a member of the MB Executive Bureau. It is expected Bishr will be released next month.

Dr. Mahmoud Ezzat completely denied rumors about internal conflicts within the opposition group with regards to leadership, stressing that the mechanisms, regulations and terms are paving the way to select the movement’s leaders. He also noted that Egypt’s geographical situation and considerable moral weight within the Muslim world justifies the need for the MB Chairman to be Egyptian.

The Guidance Office is currently exploring the general tendency of the Brotherhood’s 100-member Shura Council with regards to nominating a suitable candidate eligible to take charge as Chairman”, he said.

It is extremely difficult to predict who will be the next chairman, noting that 5 minutes ahead of appointing Mr. Akef as Chairman nobody knew, the ballots only decided who would be the new leader”, he said.

Dr. Mahmoud Ezzat attributed the Media’s apparent conflicting reports on their allegations towards remarks about the Brotherhood top leaders to the same inconsistencies of media reports on senior leaders that vary from newspaper to another.

Dr. Mahmoud Ezzat shed light with figures upon security raids that led to the arrest of some 2696 members of the group in 2007, 3674 v 2008 a 5022 v 2009. This resulted in the Shura Council’s inability to hold meetings and contest elections.

He also emphasized that the Muslim Brotherhood is extremely keen on maintaining Egypt’s national security and itsinterest in achieving peaceful reform in the society. “We are well aware that the meetings of the Guidance Office are surveilled by security although we intend only to practice democracy. In fact, we do not want to provoke the hostility and animosity of others”.

He also stressed the differences within the organization are not motivated by hatred or personal differences since the decent temperaments encouraged by the sublime teachings of Islam encourage us to tolerate difference of opinions. He added that history has proven that the Muslim Brotherhood movement has encountered much more difficult circumstances than the existing crisis.

The media has projected a negative image of the Muslim Brotherhood where they relied on SSI investigations for information. It is imperative that journalists get facts from the original sources if they are to have some sort of credibility. In fact the judiciary has invalidated all the accusations reported in state investigation, he said.

Dr. Mahmoud Ezzat was optimistic that the current political crisis will pass asserting that events will prove that the Muslim Brotherhood with all its noble manners, objectivity, and practicing of democracy will shine through with flying colours.

Published on Ikhwanweb

Dissenting Brothers

Founded in 1928, Muslimské bratrstvo (MB) has never experienced a leadership crisis as serious as that which erupted two weeks ago. As is now well-known, the problem originated with the refusal on the part of the MB’s Guidance Bureau (the organisation’s highest executive body) to accept Essam El-Erian as a member to replace Mohamed Hilal following the latter’s death four weeks ago. It was a clear act of defiance against Supreme Guide Mohamed Mahdi Akef who wanted to promote El-Erian and who maintained that the MB’s internal regulations gave him that right. In response to the refusal Akef has threatened to resign and designated most of his powers to his first deputy, Mohamed Habib.
Of course, the crisis goes much deeper than the question of El-Erian’s promotion. This is not the first time the supreme guide has encountered resistance. The problem is rooted in the way the MB handles its internal disputes and in its reading of the Egyptian political scene as it touches upon the organisation’s image and activities. Although in the course of the past two decades the MB has managed to deal clearly and firmly with internal opposition, disciplining and marginalising dissenters, it has signally failed to benefit from any intellectual and ideological diversity among its ranks. As a consequence, it has forfeited an important political asset which it desperately needs in its confrontations with adversaries.
The tensions in the upper echelons of the MB hierarchy are too sharp to be swept under the carpet in the usual way. The supreme guide has set himself against the will of the conservative wing of the leadership over the promotion of El-Erian, whom he believes deserves a chance to serve on the Guidance Bureau. But regardless of what actions he takes, including the threat to resign, there are unmistakable signs that he will be unable to reign in the conservatives. Since becoming head of the movement in January 2004 Akef has worked hard to maintain smooth relations between the different ideological trends within the MB. Almost always, nicméně, his efforts have come at the expense of the reformists or pragmatists, whether because of the relative weakness of their influence within the organisation compared to the conservatives or because he feared a rift that would render the organisation vulnerable to the regime’s political and security tactics.
That tensions have reached their current pitch is due to the brewing conflict over the succession to the office Akef now holds. In March Akef announced that he did not intend to nominate himself for a new term, which would begin on 13 January. His decision marked the first time in the group’s history that a supreme guide has voluntarily stepped down at the height of his career. All six of his predecessors died while still in office. Akef’s unprecedented and, apparently, unexpected decision, triggered an initially silent power struggle over who would fill his post. Interestingly, the struggle has not been between conservatives and reformists, but rather between hardliners and pragmatists inside the conservative camp.
The current situation is significant for several reasons. Rarely have internal differences bubbled over into public view. This time, nicméně, the main players have been vying ferociously for media attention.
Then there is Akef’s threat, subsequently denied, that he would resign. That Akef should have been driven to such a step reflects the magnitude of the pressures and anger he has faced during his nearly six-year long tenure. Having served as the keel between diverse trends, Akef’s threat must reflect his sense of failure at checking the conservativeshegemony over all the organisation’s bodies and decision-making mechanisms.
That Akef has delegated many of his powers to his first deputy is also unprecedented, as well as being in violation of the group’s internal regulations. Article 6 of the MB’s charter states that the supreme guide can leave his post under three conditionspoor performance of his duties, resignation or death. Since none of these conditions obtains Akef had no right to delegate his responsibilities to his first deputy.
The crisis has thrown into relief a major problem in the MB’s constitutional structure, the lack of an institutionalised arbitrating authority capable of settling disputes between the supreme guide and the Guidance Bureau. It has also demonstrated that many of the group’s internal taboos regarding reverence for, and uncritical obedience to, its leaders have cracked.
The MB leadership will undoubtedly attempt to resolve the crisis as quickly as possible, so that it does not spread through the movement’s rank and file. For this reason, the MB’s General Shura Council will hold elections for the next supreme guide within the next couple of weeks. Even so, it is doubtful that the new leader will enjoy the same level of prestige as his predecessors and will, as a consequence, be hampered in any attempts to maintain equilibrium inside the group. Neither the MB’s Secretary- General Mahmoud Ezzat, or First Deputy to the Supreme Guide Mohamed Habib, the two leading contenders for the post, have the historical legitimacy of Akef, the last of the MB’s founding generation.
But the election of the next supreme guide is not the only problem with which the MB must contend. No less important, or problematic, is the need to elect a new Guidance Bureau. The current bureau was elected in 1995, since which time some members have been added through promotion, as was the case with Mohamed Mursi who became chairman of the political committee in 2004, and others by means of the partial elections in 2008. Comprehensive elections to the bureau should have been held a year ago, following the election of the new MB Shura Council which is responsible for selecting the members of the Guidance Bureau and the supreme guide.
The MB is entering a very delicate phase in its history. Even if MB leaders manage to smooth over the current crisis, its effects will continue to reverberate beneath the surface and, undoubtedly, erupt once again.

Khalil Al-anani

Esam

Founded in 1928, Muslimské bratrstvo (MB) has never experienced a leadership crisis as serious as that which erupted two weeks ago. As is now well-known, the problem originated with the refusal on the part of the MB’s Guidance Bureau (the organisation’s highest executive body) to accept Essam El-Erian as a member to replace Mohamed Hilal following the latter’s death four weeks ago. It was a clear act of defiance against Supreme Guide Mohamed Mahdi Akef who wanted to promote El-Erian and who maintained that the MB’s internal regulations gave him that right. In response to the refusal Akef has threatened to resign and designated most of his powers to his first deputy, Mohamed Habib.

Of course, the crisis goes much deeper than the question of El-Erian’s promotion. This is not the first time the supreme guide has encountered resistance. The problem is rooted in the way the MB handles its internal disputes and in its reading of the Egyptian political scene as it touches upon the organisation’s image and activities. Although in the course of the past two decades the MB has managed to deal clearly and firmly with internal opposition, disciplining and marginalising dissenters, it has signally failed to benefit from any intellectual and ideological diversity among its ranks. As a consequence, it has forfeited an important political asset which it desperately needs in its confrontations with adversaries.

The tensions in the upper echelons of the MB hierarchy are too sharp to be swept under the carpet in the usual way. The supreme guide has set himself against the will of the conservative wing of the leadership over the promotion of El-Erian, whom he believes deserves a chance to serve on the Guidance Bureau. But regardless of what actions he takes, including the threat to resign, there are unmistakable signs that he will be unable to reign in the conservatives. Since becoming head of the movement in January 2004 Akef has worked hard to maintain smooth relations between the different ideological trends within the MB. Almost always, nicméně, his efforts have come at the expense of the reformists or pragmatists, whether because of the relative weakness of their influence within the organisation compared to the conservatives or because he feared a rift that would render the organisation vulnerable to the regime’s political and security tactics.

That tensions have reached their current pitch is due to the brewing conflict over the succession to the office Akef now holds. In March Akef announced that he did not intend to nominate himself for a new term, which would begin on 13 January. His decision marked the first time in the group’s history that a supreme guide has voluntarily stepped down at the height of his career. All six of his predecessors died while still in office. Akef’s unprecedented and, apparently, unexpected decision, triggered an initially silent power struggle over who would fill his post. Interestingly, the struggle has not been between conservatives and reformists, but rather between hardliners and pragmatists inside the conservative camp.

The current situation is significant for several reasons. Rarely have internal differences bubbled over into public view. This time, nicméně, the main players have been vying ferociously for media attention.

Then there is Akef’s threat, subsequently denied, that he would resign. That Akef should have been driven to such a step reflects the magnitude of the pressures and anger he has faced during his nearly six-year long tenure. Having served as the keel between diverse trends, Akef’s threat must reflect his sense of failure at checking the conservativeshegemony over all the organisation’s bodies and decision-making mechanisms.

That Akef has delegated many of his powers to his first deputy is also unprecedented, as well as being in violation of the group’s internal regulations. Article 6 of the MB’s charter states that the supreme guide can leave his post under three conditionspoor performance of his duties, resignation or death. Since none of these conditions obtains Akef had no right to delegate his responsibilities to his first deputy.

The crisis has thrown into relief a major problem in the MB’s constitutional structure, the lack of an institutionalised arbitrating authority capable of settling disputes between the supreme guide and the Guidance Bureau. It has also demonstrated that many of the group’s internal taboos regarding reverence for, and uncritical obedience to, its leaders have cracked.

The MB leadership will undoubtedly attempt to resolve the crisis as quickly as possible, so that it does not spread through the movement’s rank and file. For this reason, the MB’s General Shura Council will hold elections for the next supreme guide within the next couple of weeks. Even so, it is doubtful that the new leader will enjoy the same level of prestige as his predecessors and will, as a consequence, be hampered in any attempts to maintain equilibrium inside the group. Neither the MB’s Secretary- General Mahmoud Ezzat, or First Deputy to the Supreme Guide Mohamed Habib, the two leading contenders for the post, have the historical legitimacy of Akef, the last of the MB’s founding generation.

But the election of the next supreme guide is not the only problem with which the MB must contend. No less important, or problematic, is the need to elect a new Guidance Bureau. The current bureau was elected in 1995, since which time some members have been added through promotion, as was the case with Mohamed Mursi who became chairman of the political committee in 2004, and others by means of the partial elections in 2008. Comprehensive elections to the bureau should have been held a year ago, following the election of the new MB Shura Council which is responsible for selecting the members of the Guidance Bureau and the supreme guide.

The MB is entering a very delicate phase in its history. Even if MB leaders manage to smooth over the current crisis, its effects will continue to reverberate beneath the surface and, undoubtedly, erupt once again.

Published On Al-ahram Weekly