The Trump administration’s decision to initiate the designation of key Muslim Brotherhood chapters as Foreign Terrorist Organizations is a necessary and long-overdue act of strategic clarity. It marks an emphatic rejection of the illusion that political Islam can be a reliable partner to U.S. interests.
However, as this policy reshapes the Maghreb, Washington must be vigilant: eliminating the ideological threat is only half the battle. The other half is ensuring that the vacuum left by Islamism is not filled by the volatile, anti-democratic forces of autocratic chaos, a lesson particularly relevant in the failures of Tunisia and Algeria.
It marks an emphatic rejection of the illusion that political Islam can be a reliable partner to U.S. interests.
The primary danger of Islamism across North Africa is its systemic corrosion of the state, prioritizing ideological enforcement over national viability. This corrosion was tragically on display in Tunisia.
While the demise of Ennahda (the Islamic democratic political party in Tunisia) was inevitable and necessary, the country’s subsequent collapse into unpredictable authoritarianism under President Kais Saied represents a profound strategic failure for the region. Saied’s consolidation of power, the suppression of dissent, and the dismantling of institutional checks are not a stable solution; they are a rejection of the democratic principles that anchor the U.S. worldview.
Saied has replaced Islamist paralysis with autocratic chaos. The U.S. designation must not be construed as a validation of Saied’s “self-coup,” but rather as a reason to pivot away from Tunisia’s entire failed political model. Unpredictable, anti-democratic populists who align with hostile powers like China and Russia, as Saied has done, are as unreliable as the Islamists they replace.
The new policy must signal that Washington supports the ideological quarantine of Islamism, but will not reward the descent into strongman rule.
This policy clarity is crucial when addressing the foundational instability of Algeria.
The Algerian regime remains the primary geopolitical obstacle to a secure North Africa. While Algeria’s military establishment ostensibly fights extremism, it simultaneously fosters a dangerous domestic fiction: the tolerance of the Movement of Society for Peace (MSP) as a controlled opposition. This co-optation provides a smokescreen for an ideologically compromised system. The danger of Islamism here is that it remains a potential Trojan horse, threatening to destabilize an already brittle, oil-dependent regime that prioritizes a costly arms race and hostility toward its neighbors.
The Algerian regime remains the primary geopolitical obstacle to a secure North Africa.
As comparative defense budgets show, Algeria’s staggering military expenditure, vastly exceeding its combined spending on health and education, confirms a fundamental institutional imbalance—a reliance on brute force over stability. This opaque, financially excessive, and strategically hostile regime is an unacceptable base for U.S. security cooperation, and the Brotherhood designation should be leveraged to apply maximum diplomatic pressure on Algiers to cease its regional obstructionism.
In stark contrast, the blueprint for a stable, Western-aligned North Africa is found exclusively in the Kingdom of Morocco.
Morocco’s institutional genius lies in its capacity to neutralize the Islamist threat without resorting to chaotic purges or anti-democratic backsliding. The existence of the Justice and Development Party (PJD) within the Moroccan political framework is a testament to the supreme, stabilizing authority of the Monarchy. The Monarchy’s consistent loyalty to the U.S., its embrace of the Abraham Accords, and its sophisticated defense modernization (prioritizing “Smart Power” over “Mass Deterrence,” unlike Algeria) prove that the nation is a strategic anchor.
The PJD’s submission to the King’s secular control demonstrates the correct model for containing the inherent dangers of Islamism: it must be politically subservient and ideologically contained to prevent institutional damage and strategic betrayal.
Finally, the ultimate danger of Islamism—pure, unending fragmentation—is exemplified in Libya. The involvement of the Justice and Construction Party (JCP) in the fractured western government guarantees that the cycle of civil chaos continues. The U.S. designation provides the final diplomatic justification to isolate such factions entirely, denying them the legitimacy needed to perpetuate conflict.
Finally, the ultimate danger of Islamism—pure, unending fragmentation—is exemplified in Libya.
The path forward for U.S. strategy in North Africa is clear:
It demands a deliberate, two-pronged policy: total ideological quarantine of the Islamist threat, using the FTO designation as the decisive tool, coupled with the diplomatic and economic rejection of all models of autocratic instability—from President Saied’s chaotic self-coup to Algeria’s entrenched strategic hostility.
These dangers are amplified by the unending state fragmentation and chaos of Libya, which remains an open gateway for regional security threats. The true security of the Maghreb rests on an uncompromising commitment to reliable, sovereign partnerships that can serve as a bulwark against this triple threat of ideological extremism, political instability, and regional chaos.
Published originally on November 30, 2025.
