Although they appear at first glance as opposites—on one side the Sunni Muslim Brotherhood, on the other the Shiite regime in Tehran—the two movements share far more than what divides them. Amid escalating geopolitical tensions, the ideological proximity between these two Islamist actors is once again coming under scrutiny. Despite theological differences, they are united by a shared authoritarian vision of governance, the rejection of Western political models, and a common understanding of religion as a tool for power and control.
The “Islamic State” as a Political Objective
Founded in Egypt in 1928 by Hassan al-Banna, the Muslim Brotherhood sought to reestablish Islam as a comprehensive societal order. Similarly, post-revolutionary Iran under Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini launched its own project of religious governance: the velayat-e faqih, or guardianship of the Islamic jurist. Both movements categorically reject the separation of religion and state and advocate for a theocratic system that views democratic institutions merely as tactical instruments.
Their ideological vision is not about participation in pluralistic systems, but about establishing a totalitarian order with religious foundations—marked by censorship, gender segregation, and the criminalization of dissent. In both cases, Islamism is not understood as a spiritual conviction but as an ideological means to political dominance.
Shared Enemies: The West and Israel
Both movements perceive Western democracies as morally decadent and fundamentally hostile to Islam. Their propaganda systematically targets liberalism, secularism, and the rule-of-law-based state. The most striking commonality is their shared enmity toward Israel: While the Iranian regime has spent decades fueling anti-Semitic rhetoric and arming Hezbollah in its war against the Jewish state, the Muslim Brotherhood—including its Palestinian offshoot Hamas—also promotes armed struggle against Israel as a religious duty.
This ideological convergence has also translated into pragmatic cooperation. Hamas has repeatedly received financial, logistical, and military support from Tehran—despite the sectarian Sunni-Shiite divide. Their shared cause remains resistance to Western influence and the rejection of Israel’s presence in the Middle East.
Strategic Double-Dealing
Both the Muslim Brotherhood and the Iranian regime deploy a dual strategy: outwardly projecting moderation, openness to dialogue, and a commitment to stability—particularly toward Europe—while pursuing authoritarian agendas at home, silencing critics, and undermining pluralistic structures.
In Egypt, the Brotherhood exploited the political openings following the 2011 revolution to elect Mohamed Morsi as president. Once in power, his government moved quickly to rewrite the constitution, weaken the judiciary, and suppress opposition media. A similar trajectory unfolded in Iran in 1979, where early promises of freedom rapidly gave way to a theocratic dictatorship.
Ideological Common Ground
Despite religious differences, several ideological overlaps stand out:
- Islam as a Total Order: Both movements interpret Islam not primarily as a faith, but as a comprehensive societal blueprint—political, legal, and moral.
- Missionary Absolutism: Whether Sunni or Shiite, both claim to represent the “true Islam,” and from this claim derive a mandate to “reform” other Muslims and entire societies.
- Conspiratorial Thinking: Both worldviews are steeped in the belief of a constant global conspiracy against Islam—led by Zionists, Western governments, or internal Muslim enemies.
- Clerical Rule: While the Brotherhood doesn’t explicitly advocate for a clerical regime like Iran’s, it does promote rule by “pious leaders” and Islamic scholars who claim divine legitimacy.
Shared Destabilizing Impact
This ideological alignment has real-world consequences. Both movements work to weaken state institutions and polarize pluralistic societies—whether through parallel structures, ideological indoctrination, or the mobilization of youth. In countries such as Egypt, Lebanon, and Syria, Brotherhood-linked networks and Iranian proxy actors have disrupted political order and advanced authoritarian religious agendas.
Similar dynamics are increasingly visible in Europe, where both Tehran-backed and Brotherhood-affiliated organizations operate within mosques, cultural centers, and religious institutions—often echoing similar narratives about victimhood, Islamophobia, and Western hypocrisy.
Conclusion: Ideological Rivals, Strategic Accomplices
Though they represent different sectarian traditions, the Muslim Brotherhood and Iran’s clerical regime share an authoritarian form of Islamism that rejects pluralism, justifies violence, and instrumentalizes religion to establish political power. Their alignment is not a traditional alliance but rather an ideological complicity—dangerous, adaptable, and difficult to dismantle.
