No-brainer for the Brotherhood

It is no surprise that the Syrian Muslim Brotherhood have rejected an Iranian brokered deal to end the crisis in Syria

Recent reports have suggested that an Iranian brokered power-sharing agreement—that would have seen the Syrian Muslim Brotherhood enter government under President Bashar Al-Assad—has been roundly rejected. It should come as no surprise that Iran would wish Assad to remain in power, but it would have been a shock if the Muslim Brotherhood had considered such a deal.

A child holds a sign calling for President Assad to step down, at a rally in Homs

Observers of Middle East politics should not be too surprised by reports that the Iranian government offered to broker a power-sharing agreement between Syria’s government and the Muslim Brotherhood in December last year, in an attempt to end the conflict between the regime and anti-government demonstrators that has cost 5,000 lives to date, according to UN estimates.

If true, it suggests the acceptance on the part of the Iranian establishment that Bashar Al-Assad’s grip on power is doubtful in the long-term. A report issued last July by the respected International Crisis Group was titled “The Syrian Regime’s Slow-motion Suicide”, and it now seems that Tehran shares this assessment of the situation. Aside from non-state groups like Lebanon’s Hezbollah, Assad’s Syria is Iran’s only ally in the region, and this offer was likely a pragmatic attempt to salvage something from this relationship before the crisis leads to either outright civil war or the fall of Assad. Either way, Iran loses.

On the Syrian side, it is even less of a surprise that the offer was rejected. Reportedly, it would have given Syria’s Muslim Brotherhood a substantial role in the government, with its members heading most ministries on the condition that Bashar Al-Assad remained president. The Washington Times quoted Brotherhood deputy secretary-general (and member of the opposition Syrian National Council) Mohammed Tayfour Farouq as refusing the offer, claiming Tehran has supported Assad’s attempts to crush the uprisings, and called for the UN to intervene in Syria.

From a more pragmatic perspective, if the Brotherhood shares the opinion that Assad’s days are numbered, then it makes little sense to negotiate, and the recent successes of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood and Tunisia’s Ennadha suggest that the Brotherhood has a bright future in a post-Assad Syria. Brotherhood leaders are also probably aware that branches of the movement in other Arab states have been co-opted by ruling regimes in the past, accepting a stake in the system as a ‘loyal opposition’ or ministerial positions in a regime-dominated cabinet, only to find themselves sidelined, in government but not in power. It also likely reflects a lingering distaste for serving in an Assad-led government, given the crushing of the Brotherhood’s 1982 rising in the city of Hama by Bashar’s late father, Hafez, which left thousands dead. Overall, Syria’s Muslim Brotherhood had little to gain and much to lose.

The Majalla: The Leading Arab Magazine

THE MAJALLA offers an array of articles addressing the most important issues facing the Middle East and the world today. From political analysis of developing stories, to debates between world class intellectuals, and interviews of leading political figures, our magazine is dedicated to providing the public with informative analyses of the current events shaping the global order.

More Posts - Website - Twitter - Facebook