European Parliament Votes Overwhelmingly to Counter Muslim Brotherhood and ‘Islamist Entryism’

After the Trump administration sanctioned foreign Muslim Brotherhood organizations, the European Parliament has taken its own step against the transnational Islamist movement.

As European governments grapple with concerns about radical Islam and political influence networks, an overwhelming majority of lawmakers backed a resolution condemning the Muslim Brotherhood and its activities.

French European Parliament member Céline Imart, who sponsored the resolution, described the vote as “a historic victory because it is a European first. For the first time, Europe has voted on a text that tackles Islamist entryism and the Muslim Brotherhood.”

In a post on X, Imart said she had “broken a taboo that Europe has been dragging around like a chain: this victory signifies a major doctrinal shift in the institutions… We were able to transcend partisan divides on a major issue for our societies and our youth.”

Lorenzo Vidino, director of the Program on Extremism at George Washington University, told News Outlet that French and Austrian governments had been advocating such action “for almost a decade.” He said the vote reflected a broader and growing European consensus in favor of confronting the issue.

The resolution was spearheaded by the European People’s Party, or EPP, the European Parliament’s largest center-right political group. Vidino said the vote also exposed a political divide, with lawmakers on the right supporting the measure almost unanimously, while a substantial portion of the left opposed it, with some notable exceptions.

In her X post, Imart thanked “the negotiators from the other groups with whom I had the pleasure of working – excluding the socialists and the far left, who boycotted the text.”

Vidino argued that the Muslim Brotherhood is too often viewed through the lens of domestic political disputes. “The Brotherhood remains something that is seen through the political lenses of our own political debates, where it shouldn’t be… because it’s a challenge to our societies,” he said.

A European Parliament news release said Islamist entryism seeks to target “democratic institutions, the rule of law, equality between women and men and fundamental freedoms.” It also emphasized that protecting Muslim citizens from discrimination is “a democratic obligation,” while cautioning against recognizing organized Islamist networks as representative interlocutors.

The release said Europe must remain “free, open and faithful to its principles,” but “can ‘no longer fund, consult or legitimize networks that use its language, procedures and funding to weaken its values from within.’” At the same time, MEPs stressed that anti-discrimination measures should not be used to shield Islam from criticism or grant legitimacy to organized Islamist networks.

The resolution drew sharp criticism from ENAR, a pan-European anti-racism network. After its passage, ENAR issued a statement condemning what it called a racist and Islamophobic measure “on the need for an EU strategy to counter Islamist entryism and the influence of the Muslim Brotherhood network.” The organization said the resolution, proposed by the EPP, targeted ENAR and groups including FEMYSO through “sham allegations and falsehoods” intended to link them to the Muslim Brotherhood. “ENAR categorically rejects these claims,” the statement said.

ENAR added that the measure was “a stain on the European Parliament and marks a profoundly shameful day in Europe’s history.” The group said lawmakers who should defend democracy, equality and fundamental rights had instead provided institutional legitimacy to what it described as “a racist politics of suspicion” directed at Muslim communities, Muslim-led civil society organizations, groups fighting Islamophobia and advocates for Muslim rights.

Edmund Fitton-Brown, a senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, told News Outlet that the resolution marked the beginning of a European response to Islamist entryism. “It is admirably clearly worded,” he said, but added that turning it into binding legislation would be difficult.

Fitton-Brown, a former British ambassador to Yemen, further argued that Europe often treats “legal” and “non-violent” Islamism as separate from—and potentially useful in countering—violent Islamist terrorism. “It is not, it is a gateway to it, it creates the climate for it, and the two are pursuing the same goals, only via different tactics,” he said.

He also said Europe has failed to treat subversion as a serious threat, unlike during the Cold War, when governments recognized it and adopted measures to counter it. Fitton-Brown accused European countries of attempting to appease Islamist entryism through policies he characterized as hostile to Israel, as well as laws focused on blasphemy and anti-“Islamophobia” protections. In his view, those measures are intended to defend Muslim communities but instead primarily affect liberal Muslims seeking greater personal freedom outside the constraints of their communities.

Asked about the differences between Europe and the U.S. approach to the Brotherhood, Vidino said the European way is “a bit more nuanced” than that of the U.S., where the Trump administration has designated the Muslim Brotherhood and 4 of its branches as terrorist organizations. He says Europe sees the Muslim Brotherhood “mostly through the lenses of entryism, of subversion, of a group that destroys the fabrics of society… a matter of a threat to democracy, but a lot of the activities of the Brotherhood might be legal if taken individually.”

While noting that numerous security services across Europe have been warning about the Muslim Brotherhood for some time, Vidino says the resolution “sets the tone. It gives a political push,” suggesting agencies and governments “might feel more legitimized in seeing the Brotherhood in negative ways.”

“I’m a bit skeptical on whether this resolution would have a major tangible impact,” Vidino added. “Islamist groups are very good at camouflaging their activities.” While there is “no organization that calls itself Muslim Brotherhood in Europe,” he said if and when funding is pulled from an Islamist organization by the EU, “They will make a fuss… They fight back. They have an ability to also leverage what could be a crisis, but turn it to their advantage by playing the victim card and the Islamophobia card.”

As part of the resolution, the European Council was asked to assess whether entities or individuals linked to the Muslim Brotherhood should be added to the EU list of terrorist organizations. It called for full traceability of EU funding and a European Commission overview of EU funds awarded to people or entities suspected of links to the Muslim Brotherhood or political Islam. 

It also welcomed initiatives by member states to draw up national lists of hate preachers and calls for the establishment of such a list at EU level, while also calling for stronger scrutiny of foreign funding and transnational partnerships, particularly involving actors linked to Qatar or Turkey and greater use of Schengen tools and EU databases.

“This vote is a victory, but it is also a starting point,” Imart said. “The Commission and the Council must now take action, and I will make sure they do.”