At five in the afternoon, Cairo time (44).. Dismantling the Muslim Brotherhood.. France’s Decision Marks the Beginning of a New European Phase (9)

“Soft Jihad” at the Heart of the Republic: How the Brotherhood Turned Courtrooms, Media Platforms, and Digital Space into Instruments of Influence

If the Brotherhood’s “traditional” tools in France are clear—mosques, associations, schools, funding—then the most dangerous development, as this report documents, is the organization’s shift to a more perilous and advanced phase:

a phase of indirect warfare within the French public sphere, using new instruments that require neither bombs nor weapons, yet are capable of paralyzing the organization’s opponents and dismantling society’s immunity.

The report places this phase under a central heading:

The New Arenas of Jihad: Courtrooms, Digital Space, and Media Platforms.

Here we are faced with a modern version of “jihad” that does not rely on direct violence, but rather on manufacturing fear, imposing new “taboos” on public debate, and turning any resistance to fundamentalist discourse into an “ethical crime,” even a crime of “racism.”

 

1) From the War of Mosques to the War of Representation… From the Street to Public Opinion

The report explains that the Brotherhood’s penetration of French society is based on what it calls:

the war of terminology, or “discursive guerrilla warfare.”

In this war, the organization does not present itself to the public as a fundamentalist project seeking control, but rather as a “victim” in need of protection, positioning itself as the “legitimate representative” of Muslims in France.

The ultimate objective here is twofold:

 

 

To present fundamentalist Islam in the guise of a victim.

 

 

Then to use the very values of the Republic to justify this discourse:

(anti-racism, human rights, freedoms, equality).

 

 

This equation is the key to everything:

the Brotherhood transforms political and security debate into a moral trial of its opponents.

 

2) “Islamophobia”: The Bomb-Word That Paralyzes Debate

The report stresses that the term “hostility to Islam/Islamophobia” is one of the Brotherhood’s most dangerous tools in France, because it serves a single function:

neutralizing criticism.

According to the report, the result becomes as follows:

 

 

Any criticism of political Islam is presented as hostility toward Muslims.

 

 

Any confrontation with fundamentalism is presented as racism.

 

 

Any adherence to secularism is presented as oppression of minorities.

 

 

Any attempt to regulate symbols or behaviors is presented as persecution.

 

 

In this manner, the French state is transformed from a state governed by law into a “political adversary,” placed in a constant position of defense.

More dangerously, this term spreads easily because it is emotional, appeals to the public conscience, evokes the history of racism and colonialism, and forges automatic alliances with left-wing and human-rights currents.

 

3) Human Rights Organizations as a Façade… and the Brotherhood Behind the Curtain

The report documents how the organization has used entities that appear “civil,” but are in fact part of a network of influence.

It offers a direct example of this:

the Collective Against Islamophobia in France (CCIF), described as the “nerve center” of the battle on social networks.

The point here is not that the organization openly declares its affiliation with the Brotherhood, but that it performs a strategic function:

creating a general climate in which the Brotherhood becomes the gateway for speaking on behalf of Muslims.

In this context, French public opinion is caught in a major trap:

distinguishing between a Muslim who lives as an ordinary citizen and a political project seeking to change the rules of the game.

 

4) Jihad in the Digital Space: “Internet Police” Instead of Street Police

In the new phase, the Brotherhood no longer needs to control the streets, because the internet does the job.

According to the report, this digital jihad relies on:

 

 

Monitoring oppositional discourse.

 

 

Coordinated smear campaigns.

 

 

Mobilizing followers to exert pressure.

 

 

Portraying the opponent as racist or anti-Islam.

 

 

Seeking to bring down accounts and shut pages.

 

 

The idea is not to respond with argument, but to expel the opponent from the arena of debate.

This places us before a qualitative shift:

from a “war of ideas” to a “war of silencing.”

The report notes that this activity becomes effective when it exploits the vulnerabilities of social media platforms:

mass reporting, gray policies, sensitivity to hate speech, and so on.

 

5) Jihad in the Courts: Lawsuits as a Weapon of Intimidation

The report introduces an extremely dangerous concept: jihad in the courts.

Its meaning, simply put, is the use of the judiciary not merely to obtain a ruling, but to:

 

 

Exhaust the opponent financially.

 

 

Tarnish their reputation in the media.

 

 

Intimidate them.

 

 

Push them toward silence or withdrawal.

 

 

In other words:

even if the Brotherhood loses the case, it wins the battle.

The report explains that the ultimate target of this weapon is to paralyze:

 

 

Journalism.

 

 

Universities.

 

 

Media.

 

 

Political activity.

 

 

Research centers.

 

 

Because every critical voice becomes threatened by a ready-made accusation:

racism, insult, incitement, Islamophobia.

 

6) Media Under Pressure

The report points out that organizations close to the Brotherhood moved early to brand critics of Islam as racist, going so far as to resort to the courts.

Here the nature of the strategy becomes clear:

the goal is not merely to defend “religious feelings,” but to push French society into a forbidden zone:

 

 

Do not criticize.

 

 

Do not mock.

 

 

Do not debate.

 

 

Do not ask questions.

 

 

Do not distinguish between religion and political project.

 

 

That is, the organization seeks to create within France “new boundaries of speech,” besieging free thought under the banner of morality.

 

7) Why Is This Phase More Dangerous Than Funding and Mosques?

Because funding and mosques can be monitored:

 

 

There are laws.

 

 

Financial oversight.

 

 

Administrative reports.

 

 

Security procedures.

 

 

But the war waged through the courts, digital space, and media is far more difficult, because it operates in gray areas:

 

 

Freedom of expression.

 

 

The right to litigate.

 

 

Minority rights.

 

 

Protection of vulnerable groups.

 

 

Combating racism.

 

 

Here lies the major paradox documented by the report:

the Brotherhood uses the very values of the Republic in order to nullify the spirit of the Republic.

 

The Result of “Soft Jihad”: A Society Afraid to Name Things

The conclusion reached by the report is that French society may slip into a state of gradual paralysis:

 

 

The politician fears to discuss.

 

 

The journalist fears to investigate.

 

 

The researcher fears to write.

 

 

The citizen fears to ask.

 

 

Thus, the public sphere is emptied of its capacity for intellectual resistance, without the organization firing a single bullet.

This is precisely the meaning of deep penetration:

when the state is strong in arms, yet weak in public debate and in the controversy surrounding Brotherhood fundamentalism.

The most dangerous aspect of this trajectory is not merely that the organization grows numerically, but that it seeks to impose “new rules of speech” that make resisting it appear as a crime.

Tomorrow we continue:

The French state confronting infiltration: between late awakening and the constraints of the “open republic.”

Paris: five o’clock in the afternoon, Cairo time.