By yourNEWS Media Newsroom
BRUSSELS — The European Parliament voted 381-167 Thursday to support a coordinated campaign against Islamist political networks operating across Europe, calling for possible terrorist designations of Muslim Brotherhood-linked organizations and greater scrutiny of European Union funding distributed to religious and civil society groups.
The resolution, adopted Oct. 8 with 15 abstentions, directs renewed attention toward organizations suspected of using religious associations, educational programs and other institutions to advance political Islamist objectives within European democracies.
Lawmakers urged the Council of the European Union to evaluate whether individuals and organizations connected to the Muslim Brotherhood meet the legal requirements for placement on the EU terrorist list. They also called for stronger safeguards to prevent European taxpayers’ money from reaching organizations associated with extremist activities.
The vote does not immediately classify the Muslim Brotherhood or any affiliated organization as a terrorist entity. Such designations require separate legal procedures, including examination of relevant evidence and decisions by the Council.
Nevertheless, the parliamentary action marks a significant development in European efforts to address allegations that political Islamist movements have established networks capable of influencing government institutions, public policy and civil society.
The European Parliament’s legislative record identifies the measure as a resolution concerning the need for an EU strategy against Islamist entryism and the influence of the Muslim Brotherhood network.
The resolution calls for a coordinated European approach to identifying the activities of organizations suspected of seeking political influence through religious and social institutions.
In this context, lawmakers use the term “Islamist entryism” to describe efforts by political Islamist networks to establish relationships within established institutions, influence decision-making and obtain public recognition or funding.
The strategy proposed by Parliament would involve closer cooperation among EU member states, greater transparency concerning organizational financing and additional scrutiny of groups alleged to have connections with the Brotherhood.
Lawmakers also urged officials to examine whether existing funding procedures adequately prevent public money from reaching organizations that promote extremism or undermine democratic principles.
The initiative was led by the center-right European People’s Party, the largest political group in the Parliament, with support from other conservative and centrist lawmakers.
French European Parliament member Céline Imart played a leading role in advancing the proposal.
Imart argued that European institutions must distinguish between the religious practice of Islam and political movements seeking to advance Islamist ideology through public institutions.
“We need to make sure Europe doesn’t fund Islamists. Islam as a faith and political Islam as an ideology must not be conflated. We must protect both democracy and religious freedom,” Imart said in remarks accompanying her campaign for the resolution.
Her position reflects the distinction supporters of the legislation have sought to establish between protecting religious liberty and restricting organizations accused of advancing extremist political objectives.
The European People’s Party has emphasized that its initiative is intended to address political networks and financial relationships rather than the religious beliefs of ordinary Muslims.
In its statement outlining the proposal, the political group called for greater transparency surrounding organizations receiving European funding and stronger procedures to identify potentially improper financial relationships.
“Where rules allow, the Council should list individuals and organisations linked to the Muslim Brotherhood as terrorist entities. European money must not fund groups that threaten our rights and freedoms,” Imart said.
The group’s position places particular emphasis on the responsibility of European institutions to identify the ultimate recipients of public grants and subsidies.
That includes determining whether organizations receiving funds maintain financial or organizational connections with entities accused of promoting political extremism.
Tomáš Zdechovský, the European People’s Party’s spokesman for budgetary control, called for more extensive oversight of grants and other financial assistance.
He said European institutions should know which organizations receive funding, the amounts involved and whether the money reaches its intended beneficiaries.
The proposal would require closer examination of how funds move through organizations and whether intermediary groups are used to conceal their final destination.
Such scrutiny could involve associations receiving money for educational initiatives, youth programs, community activities or other publicly supported projects.
Supporters contend that existing financial oversight procedures may be insufficient to identify organizations that operate through multiple affiliated entities.
The parliamentary resolution also urges EU governments to share information relevant to possible terrorist designations.
Under the European Union’s existing framework, inclusion on the terrorist list requires an assessment based on applicable legal criteria and supporting information.
The Council is responsible for deciding whether an individual or organization should be listed.
A parliamentary resolution cannot independently freeze assets, impose terrorism-related sanctions or create a binding designation.
The Council would first need to determine whether the evidence concerning particular organizations satisfies EU requirements.
That process is intended to distinguish political concerns about an organization’s ideology from the legal findings necessary to impose terrorist sanctions.
If an entity were formally designated, EU restrictions could include asset freezes and prohibitions on making funds or other economic resources available to it.
The Oct. 8 vote establishes Parliament’s position in favor of examining possible designations but leaves those decisions to the appropriate EU institutions.
The European Conservatives and Reformists Group, which also supported the measure, welcomed the outcome.
“A massive victory for our hard work!” the group declared following the vote.
The ECR described its objective as “no funding, no collaboration and no more Muslim Brotherhood entryism in European institutions and Member States.”
The group’s response highlighted the financial and institutional restrictions sought by supporters of the resolution.
The European Jewish Congress also expressed support, describing the vote as an important step toward confronting extremist networks and examining their sources of financing.
In its reaction to the parliamentary decision, the organization urged the Council to act on Parliament’s position.
The Congress has previously raised concerns about antisemitism, extremist ideology and the activities of organizations it considers threats to Jewish communities in Europe.
Thursday’s resolution was supported by lawmakers from several political groups, including the European People’s Party, European Conservatives and Reformists, Renew Europe and other right-leaning parties.
Socialist and Green lawmakers were among those opposing the measure.
The disagreement reflected competing views about how European governments should address political Islamism while protecting freedom of religion, association and expression.
Some Muslim civil society organizations also criticized the resolution.
The Forum of European Muslim Youth and Student Organisations, known as FEMYSO, joined other groups in a statement opposing the parliamentary action.
The organizations argued that the measure improperly associates Muslim civil society activities with extremism and could restrict legitimate participation in European institutions.
They also disputed allegations linking particular organizations to the Muslim Brotherhood.
Their objections underscore the importance of evaluating specific evidence before determining whether an organization has engaged in conduct warranting sanctions or exclusion from public funding.
Parliament’s resolution does not establish criminal wrongdoing by every organization discussed during the debate.
Its provisions instead call for further examination of financial relationships, institutional activities and potential links to extremist networks.
The debate follows increased scrutiny of the Muslim Brotherhood in several European countries.
Founded in Egypt in 1928 by Hassan al-Banna, the Brotherhood developed into a transnational movement combining religious, social and political activities.
Its history includes charitable and educational initiatives, political organizing and movements operating under different national circumstances.
The Brotherhood’s organizational structure and the relationship between its various branches have long been subjects of debate among governments and researchers.
Some countries have designated the movement or particular branches as terrorist organizations, while others distinguish between individual entities based on their activities.
European officials have increasingly examined whether organizations associated with the movement are attempting to influence public institutions through religious and civic organizations.
France has been particularly active in investigating the issue.
In May 2025, a French government investigation raised concerns about alleged Muslim Brotherhood influence through religious associations, schools and community organizations.
The French investigation and its findings prompted renewed debate over the movement’s activities and the ability of public authorities to identify connections between affiliated groups.
The report examined what French officials characterized as efforts to build influence through institutions serving Muslim communities.
The allegations focused on political and organizational activity rather than ordinary Islamic religious practice.
French officials have argued that certain networks may use religious and social organizations to advance political objectives inconsistent with the country’s constitutional principles.
Those findings contributed to parliamentary discussions about whether stronger measures should be pursued at the European level.
On Jan. 22, 2026, France’s National Assembly adopted a resolution calling for consideration of the Muslim Brotherhood’s inclusion on the EU terrorist list.
The measure urged European officials to review available evidence and examine possible legal action.
As reporting on the French parliamentary initiative explained, the national resolution increased pressure for a coordinated European response rather than separate measures implemented by individual countries.
France’s action did not itself create an EU-wide designation.
However, it provided additional political momentum for lawmakers seeking a common position among member states.
The European Parliament’s October vote advances that effort by formally urging the Council to review whether designated individuals or organizations satisfy existing legal requirements.
The proposal also calls for greater attention to alleged front organizations, financial networks and youth associations that may provide avenues for political influence.
European officials would need to distinguish documented organizational relationships from claims based solely on political, cultural or religious associations.
The resolution comes amid related actions taken by the United States earlier this year.
President Donald Trump’s administration designated three Muslim Brotherhood chapters under U.S. terrorism-related sanctions authorities in January 2026.
Those decisions followed a November 2025 presidential directive ordering a review of the movement’s branches and their activities.
The State Department designated the Lebanese Muslim Brotherhood as both a Foreign Terrorist Organization and a Specially Designated Global Terrorist.
The Treasury Department separately designated the Egyptian and Jordanian Muslim Brotherhood chapters as Specially Designated Global Terrorists.
American officials cited alleged support for Hamas in explaining the decisions.
Hamas, the Palestinian armed movement that controls parts of the Gaza Strip, has historical connections to the Muslim Brotherhood and is designated as a terrorist organization by the United States and the European Union.
The U.S. designations focused on particular Brotherhood chapters rather than automatically applying to every organization or individual associated with the broader movement.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio described the January actions as the beginning of a wider effort to address what the administration considers threats associated with certain Brotherhood networks.
“These designations reflect the opening actions of an ongoing, sustained effort to thwart Muslim Brotherhood chapters’ violence and destabilization wherever it occurs,” Rubio said.
The European Parliament’s resolution now creates additional political pressure for EU institutions to consider comparable measures within their own legal framework.
However, European decisions would require independent assessment under EU law rather than automatically adopting American designations.
The Council would need to evaluate information submitted by member states and determine whether specific organizations or individuals meet the conditions for inclusion on the terrorist list.
The European Commission would separately be responsible for reviewing questions concerning the administration and oversight of EU funding programs.
Supporters of Thursday’s resolution argue that those two efforts should proceed together.
They contend that examining potential terrorism-related connections without reviewing public financing could leave suspected organizations eligible for European assistance.
The resolution therefore seeks stronger mechanisms for identifying financial relationships and preventing grants from reaching entities that fail to meet applicable legal requirements.
Any restrictions would need to operate within existing EU rules governing public expenditure, fundamental rights and due process.
Those requirements are particularly significant because allegations of association with the Muslim Brotherhood do not necessarily establish participation in terrorism.
The legal consequences of a terrorist designation are substantially greater than those of a political resolution expressing concern about an organization’s activities.
European institutions must therefore assess evidence concerning each proposed listing rather than relying exclusively on general allegations about a broader movement.
The distinction also applies to the review of public funding.
Questions about whether an organization has complied with grant requirements must be evaluated according to the relevant financial rules and documented conduct.
The parliamentary vote does not establish that all organizations accused of Brotherhood connections have improperly obtained EU funds.
It calls for investigation and greater transparency to determine whether financial safeguards are adequate.
For the European People’s Party and its allies, the immediate objective is to move the issue from parliamentary debate into institutional review.
The Council must determine whether to pursue terrorist designations, while the Commission faces calls to examine financial assistance and strengthen oversight.
Individual member states may also consider national measures or provide evidence to support EU-level decisions.
The resolution does not establish a deadline for completing those assessments.
Nor does it require the Council to designate any particular organization.
Its significance lies in Parliament’s formal support for closer investigation, potential sanctions and restrictions on public funding where legal requirements are satisfied.
The debate is expected to continue as European governments assess the activities of Muslim Brotherhood-associated networks and consider the implications for religious freedom, civil society participation and counterterrorism policy.
Thursday’s 381-167 vote establishes a parliamentary majority in favor of stronger scrutiny and possible EU terrorist listings.
Whether those recommendations result in formal designations, funding restrictions or new enforcement measures will depend on subsequent action by the Council, Commission and member states.
For now, the European Parliament has formally called for a coordinated response to alleged Islamist political influence, placing the activities and financing of Muslim Brotherhood-linked organizations under renewed examination across the European Union.
Original article
Comments