• Research
  • Emissary
  • About
  • Experts
Carnegie Global logoCarnegie lettermark logo
DemocracyIran
  • Donate
Salafis and Sufis in Egypt

Source: Getty

Paper

Salafis and Sufis in Egypt

The spectrum of political Islam in Egypt now includes the Muslim Brotherhood, several conservative Salafi parties, and two Sufi political parties. Although these groups share a common foundation in Islam, there the similarity ends.

Link Copied
By Jonathan Brown
Published on Dec 20, 2011

Additional Links

Full Text
Program mobile hero image

Program

Middle East

The Middle East Program in Washington combines in-depth regional knowledge with incisive comparative analysis to provide deeply informed recommendations. With expertise in the Gulf, North Africa, Iran, and Israel/Palestine, we examine crosscutting themes of political, economic, and social change in both English and Arabic.

Learn More

As expected, Egypt’s first parliamentary election after the overthrow of longtime leader Hosni Mubarak confirmed the popularity and organizational strength of the Muslim Brotherhood and Freedom and Justice Party, which won 77 of the 156 parliamentary seats contested in the first electoral round. Surprisingly, it also revealed the unexpected strength of the Salafi alliance, dominated by the al-Nour party, which secured 33 seats. Much to the discomfort of secular Egyptians and Western governments, Islamist parties now dominate the Egyptian political scene.

The spectrum of political Islam in Egypt is no longer limited to the Muslim Brotherhood and the parties that derived from it, such as the Brotherhood’s official Freedom and Justice Party and the Wasat Party, a Brotherhood splinter group. Instead, it now includes several conservative Salafi parties, of which al-Nour is by far the most prominent, and two Sufi political parties, Tahrir Al-Misri and Sawt Al-Hurriyya, both of which fared badly in the first round of elections.

Although these groups share a common foundation in Islam, there the similarity ends. These Islamically motivated organizations have different approaches and beliefs and are taking distinctly divergent positions. Despite internal tensions, the Salafi parties united for the elections in a parliamentary alliance. They have also been engaged in a tense association with the Muslim Brotherhood, as the two Islamist camps seek to pool common resources while pursuing their own agendas. Meanwhile, Sufi parties and Sufi state institutions have positioned themselves alongside both secular parties and the surviving organs of the Egyptian political establishment.

Anxiety over Islamist victories and the emergence of the Salafis is clear in Egypt and in the United States. Most recently, Egypt’s ruling Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (SCAF) announced on December 7 that the parliamentary elections do not reflect popular opinion and that the new parliament will not oversee the drafting of the new constitution—although the SCAF subsequently backtracked and, at present, the situation is unclear. U.S. lawmakers have warned that they will not fund a government run by a "terrorist organization."

Such responses suggest an effort to marginalize Egypt’s new Islamist leaders. This approach will most likely prove unwise, as the democratic process, political involvement, and electoral accountability will continue to moderate Salafi views and policies over the long term. Overturning their electoral gains will reverse this trend and further empower these groups by placing them back in the seat of opposition.

About the Author

Jonathan Brown

Jonathan Brown

Additional Links

Full Text
North AfricaEgyptPolitical Reform

Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.

More Work from Carnegie Endowment for International Peace

  • Commentary
    Diwan
    Who Is Cutting Cairo’s Trees?

    In Egypt’s dense cities, the disappearance of foliage has health implications and punishes daily commuters.

      • Angie Omar

      Angie Omar

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    Leaving Russian-Speakers Without Representation Is a Risk for Latvia

    If the Russian-speaking community in Latvia cannot articulate their interests without being seen as disloyal, they could end up embracing a pro-Kremlin agenda.

      Sergejs Potapkins

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    Putin Has Been a Hindrance, Not a Help, to United Russia’s Election Campaign

    Russia’s ruling party would have benefited from Putin appearing as its distant patron, but as an active frontman imposing his views on the public, he has done nothing but harm both the party’s election campaign and the ruling system overall.

      Andrey Pertsev

  • Commentary
    Diwan
    On AI, Cairo Plays China and the U.S. Off Against Each Other

    Huawei pushed hard to enter the Egyptian data centers market, until the Americans made a better offer.

      • Angie Omar

      Angie Omar

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    Ten Years After Karimov’s Death, How Much Has Uzbekistan Really Changed?

    In the tenth year of his presidency, President Mirziyoyev’s system is becoming even more personalized than that of his predecessor Karimov.

      Galiya Ibragimova

Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Carnegie global logo, stacked
1779 Massachusetts Avenue NWWashington, DC, 20036-2103Phone: 202 483 7600
  • Research
  • Emissary
  • About
  • Experts
  • Donate
  • Programs
  • Events
  • Blogs
  • Podcasts
  • Contact
  • Annual Reports
  • Careers
  • Privacy
  • For Media
  • Government Resources
Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
© 2026 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. All rights reserved.