Radical Deja Vu: A Return of the 90s
Jordan’s stability is a curse and a blessing. The curse is that Jordan doesn't get enough attention. It gets dismissed as quiet and overshadowed by wider regional disruption. When it does get the attention, the coverage is lacking in expertise and generally a copy-paste template of previous Jordan stories with a brief update. The recent case of 16 individuals arrested for making drones and explosives (including missiles) was covered by multiple media outlets- but none were thorough and none uncovered the wider context. Even Jordanian ‘experts’ and experts on the area barely covered a story which is a signpost of much larger activities. The case of the 16 is not a Jordan problem but a Muslim Brotherhood problem. In the last two years, since the start of the war on Gaza, the group has dramatically shifted and taken a radical approach. This is seen in public rhetoric by the group on armed resistance and denunciation of key regional states.. Through various international front organizations, the Brotherhood has been undermining modern states in MENA by radicalizing youth and calling for the violent overthrow of regimes, specifically, the Jordanian state. Much of the coverage of this event dismissed it as a state vs opposition crackdown, or a suppression of Gaza protests, or (the worst take) a ‘cozying up’ to the Trump administration. The reality is much bigger, much more regional, and much more frightening. International mobilization is needed before it is too late and we re-start a cycle like the one we had in the 1990s.
Three Things You Should Know:
The International Organization of Supporters of the Prophet (Based in Istanbul):
This organization was allegedly formed to gather support for the Prophet Muhammad and defend against anti-Islamic rhetoric and debates. Headed by Mohammed Al Sughayer (an Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood member) the group consists of 50 members who are also International Muslim Brotherhood members. The previous General Secretary of the MB in Jordan, Hammam Al Said, is the representative of this group in Amman. The group’s messaging escalated sharply over the last two years. In 2022, they began their own publication called Supporters of the Prophet or Ansar Al Nabi (Ansar for short). This monthly publication had multiple sections such as the life and legacy of the Prophet, Islam’s role in modern politics, regional and international affairs, and writings of historic, well-known theologians (and also of those currently under arrest). After October 7th, the language and narrative of the magazine changed so drastically, that now there is almost no mention of anything other than Jihad and undermining the modern states of the Middle East, particularly Jordan, Egypt and UAE. For example, in their March 2025 issue they featured two legacy articles by prominent deceased Jordanians both of which described the late Kings Abdullah and Hussein both as traitors to the Palestinian cause. It claims they abandoned the Palestinians by disarming popular resistance and outlawing of weapons in the hands of the people. In 2024, they ran a full section on Maher Al Jazi, who carried out the attack which resulted in the death of three Israelis on the border. The piece glorified “rogue” actions like his and called for similar attacks but at a larger scale. Finally they regularly repeat their narrative calling for the overthrow of regimes that are “complicit” (meaning with Israel and against the Palestinians) They identify the three complicit regimes as Egypt, Jordan and the UAE. In an interview a week ago, one of their board members gave a lengthy interview to a Lebanese podcaster based in Turkey (and yes I have highlighted him in my battle of narratives a few weeks ago) the interview was this Sheikh's edict on which regimes it would be halal to overthrow. He repeated it would be Jordan, Egypt and the UAE.
International Union of Muslim Scholars - IUMS (Doha - with a registered office in Dublin): The International Union of Muslim Scholars was founded in 2005 by the former head of Al Azhar University, Yusif Al Qardawi. The Union drew a lot of criticism by different religious scholars at its conception, it was viewed as political rather than religious. On April 7th this year, the Union issued a religious edict calling for general mobilization. Specifically, it called all Muslims to participate in carrying out the duty of jihad whether it is through donations, or military intervention. It also deemed any peace treaties with Israel as haram and called on states to cancel such treaties. The Union and the Organization to Support the Prophet are intertwined and many members have seats in both councils. It is also connected to the more radical MB wing - “Tayyar Al Taghyeer” or ‘Current of Change’. Tayyar Al Taghyeer has its own podcast called Ma’ Muntasir (‘With Muntasir’ - Muntasir is the name of the host who was the former spokesperson for Egyptian MB). In a recent episode, two members of the Ansar AL Nabi spoke about the future of jihad. Tayyar Al Taghyeer issued a statement the 16 suspects arrested by Jordan saying it follows the edict issued by the IUMS. The IUMS has since then tried to walk back its edict. However, on April 26 they began a new campaign supporting Gaza - short videos of different theologians recording a video message urging support to the people of Gaza. While many of their calls to support Gaza are legitimate, certain calls for support to Gaza are a direct enticement for popular mobilization (even armed). Examining the publications they have on their website, several discuss jihad.
3. Al Hiwar (London) - The Melting Pot : Al Hiwar is a London based channel founded by Muslim Brotherhood Azzam Al Tamimi. Al Hiwar has recently taken it upon itself to dedicate all its media and efforts to targeting Jordan and the Jordanian state. It has hosted many “talk shows” and interviews mobilizing support for armed resistance and undermining the legitimacy of the Jordanian state. It has also hosted many of the above-mentioned members in different episodes. One of their most recent lengthy interviews was with the former Secretary-General of the Jordanian MB Zaki Bin Irshaid. Bin Irshaid focused a lot on the relationship between the Jordanian MB and Hamas, the relationship with Jordanian security services, and a desperate attempt to draw a clear line between MB and IAF. The narrative is clear, the regime is complicit and we must mobilize against it. Al Hiwar brings together the various messages, melting them together into the grand narrative. “The Conversation” it broadcasts is never debate but pure strategic communications.
My Take:
History has a habit of repeating itself—even in the world of jihad. So why should we care about this trio of ostensibly separate Muslim Brotherhood fronts? Two reasons: This is an international network that is becoming more radical and threatens the sovereignty of key states. The overlap in membership, the copying of messaging in podcasts and YouTube videos, and the connections and funding similarities all show coordination when it comes to armed resistance and attacks on Jordan, Egypt, and the UAE. Second, we’ve seen this before, especially in the mid-1990s.
As much as we like to think of Jordan as the unique center of the universe (and we are!) what is unfolding is the latest wave in a long, ideologically driven regional current - and it’s becoming more radical with help from state backers. I’ve been studying Islamic militant movements for over a decade, and while the world chases the new and shiny (ISIS, HTS, etc.) the real story is in the past. My work delves into the roots of jihadi thought from Khattabi in Morocco to Abdul Qadir, and more recent figures like Abu Qatada. For example, for me researching Ansar Al Nabi evoked strong memories of reading Al Anasr magazine that was published in London in 1990s. The language, the fatwas, the layout of the magazine, the style of the editorials, the narratives—even the calls to overthrow certain Arab regimes—are eerily the same. In 90s London ,these newspapers were directed at jihad in Algeria or Afghanistan and were not transnational but they grew into that role. These magazines produced some of the most influential theologians of jihad, whose legacies are still driving groups today such as Abu Musab Al Suri, Abu Qatada, and Abu Layth Al-Libi.
Fast-forward to now: Ansar newspapers, Maydan media, several YouTube channels and podcasts all carry that same old-school jihadist DNA. Nothing happens in a vacuum, and the recent “16” case in Jordan isn’t a homegrown anomaly; it’s proof of a wider radicalization within the Muslim Brotherhood’s international network. There is a radicalized shift in the Islamic Jamaa - all we have to do is to look at their rhetoric.
These groups are focusing on Jordan and Egypt, labeling our regimes “munafiqeen” and declaring jihad not only permitted but wajib (mandatory). They even tie broader Arab mobilization—especially in Syria—to their cause: “Thrones must be shaken” It’s startling to hear such rhetoric from Brotherhood fronts that usually pose as “moderate Islamic” opposition - unlike Al Qaeda or ISIS. Yet they evoke the spirit of Al‑Fajr, Al‑Ansar and the like.
When the courts handed down sentences to some of the 16, the government was displeased as pro‑MB voices howled online . They compared the Jordanian justice system to that of Israel. The refrain is always the same: a transnational call to arms, not a Jordan‑specific skirmish.
Two years ago, I warned about the rise of the “force narrative” and its threat to the modern state. I hoped those warnings would spark urgent debate (after all, every analyst wishes to spark urgent debate).. It may be too late. The case of the 16 could be the opening salvo of a new wave of jihad—but in 2025 the next Abu Qatadas and Abu Musabs aren’t hiding in the desert but podcasting in plain sight.
In countries like Syria, Lebanon and Iraq where non-state actors and armed groups state control, it is hard to disarm and reach political agreements. In countries like Jordan and Egypt, there is a threat of a possible emergence of armed groups within the state. The threat of the 16 wasn’t just the danger it posed to Jordanians, but its threat to Jordanian sovereignty by trying to normalize armed non-state actors.
Three fronts of the Muslim Brotherhood - all international and all with one narrative against the Jordan state. So, this was not a Jordanian crackdown on a political group, or anger about an election, or cozying up to President Trump. It was widely reported that Jordan was warning the Biden administration about the Muslim Brotherhood. This is Jordan once again taking its traditional role as a seer into emerging threats. Jordan has not mobilized against the Islamic Action Front, or Deema Tahboub, or Saleh Armouti. Jordan mobilized against what soon would be a new radical movement with one goal - armed mobilization.