Muslim Brotherhood Gets a Pass in the EP: Double Standards Exposed Again

In Brussels, some debates never fully come to light. In early 2026, the European Parliament once again sidestepped the question of whether the Muslim Brotherhood should be included on the European Union’s list of terrorist organizations. The proposal, tabled by the Patriots for Europe group, was rejected on Thursday by a majority formed by the European People’s Party, the Socialists, and the radical left.

.The outcome has caused bewilderment even among observers long accustomed to the EU’s institutional caution. The refusal comes at a time when several member states, international allies, and intelligence services have spent years warning about the ideological and political influence of this Islamist network on European soil. In France, for instance, official reports have warned of the ability of Brotherhood-linked networks to influence areas of the state—from education to religious representation—while remaining formally within the bounds of the law.

The rejected initiative did not call for an automatic condemnation, but for the launch of a formal assessment process by the Council and the Commission. Nonetheless, the parliamentary majority argued that there was no sufficient legal basis at the EU level and that a move of this magnitude could have undesirable consequences for foreign policy or “internal social cohesion.”

The European People’s Party defended its position by stressing the need for strict legal criteria and conclusive evidence. On paper, this is a coherent stance—but one that is difficult to explain when compared with other recent counterterrorism decisions, such as the EU’s designation of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.

That contrast has fuelled the perception that the EU applies a double standard: decisive when the political cost is low, but extremely cautious when the debate touches sensitive issues such as political Islam within Europe itself.

Muslim Brotherhood: A strategy built on patience, not spectacle

Part of the problem lies in the very nature of the Muslim Brotherhood. Unlike traditional jihadist organizations, its activity is not primarily based on direct violence, but on a long-term strategy. Its goal is not open confrontation, but gradual, insidious influence and control.

Parliamentary investigations and expert analyses point to a recurring pattern of how the Islamist group operates across several European countries: the creation of ostensibly civic associations, control over religious centres, participation in consultative bodies, and the constant use of the language of rights and non-discrimination to shield the network from scrutiny.

This quieter but persistent approach complicates the political response. There are no attacks that shock public opinion, but there is a steady effort of cultural, educational, and social pressure that ultimately shapes institutions.

International pressure is growing

While the EU hesitates, other countries have chosen to act. In January 2026, the United States designated several national branches of the Brotherhood as terrorist organizations. Countries such as Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates took similar steps years ago. More recently, the French National Assembly adopted a resolution urging Brussels to move in the same direction.

For supporters of the rejected proposal, the message is clear: Europe’s establishment forces are caught between fear of internal political conflict and an increasingly narrow interpretation of its own capacity for democratic self-defence.

Patriots for Europe described the Parliament’s decision as “shameful.” For the European Parliament’s majority, by contrast, it remains a matter of legal prudence.

The debate over the Muslim Brotherhood is not an attack on religious freedom or on the millions of Muslims living in Europe. It is a discussion about political ideologies, power, and influence—and about how far European democracies are willing to go to defend themselves.