When the state pulls the emergency brake, the Church of Sweden continues the dialogue. In an interview with Samnytt, political scientist and Islam researcher Magnus Norell says that the church’s cooperation with Islamic Relief cannot be explained solely by credulity and naivety, but by a conscious ideological choice that contributes to normalizing political Islam in Sweden.

Magnus Norell is a political scientist, author, and one of Sweden’s most prominent researchers and analysts of Islamism, political Islam, and violent extremism.

For decades, he has studied Islamist movements in the Middle East and Europe, with a particular focus on the Muslim Brotherhood, jihadist environments, and how ideological networks operate within civil society and institutions in the West.

READ ALSO: The Church of Sweden continues cooperation with Islamic Relief

Norell has been affiliated with several research environments and has repeatedly served as an expert for authorities, media, and international actors on matters related to radicalization, security, and ideological influence.

Samnytt contacts Magnus Norell in connection with the Church of Sweden continuing its cooperation with Islamic Relief. A collaboration that now faces sharp criticism from Norell among others.

– This can’t be explained by ignorance. They know what they’re doing, he tells Samnytt.

READ ALSO: Ideology before facts – Sameh Egyptson and the reckoning with Swedish Islamic research

When Sida in early 2026 stopped all further support to Islamic Relief Sweden, the authority cited an in-depth review and the precautionary principle. According to Sida, it could not rule out links to extremist or anti-democratic environments, with the Muslim Brotherhood as the central point of reference.

This is an Islamist, homophobic, and anti-Semitic movement. A movement that wishes Jews in Sweden would disappear or be killed. They strive for a parallel society, what they themselves call the Muslim civil society, and they see themselves as representatives of Islam.

Magnus Norell on the Muslim Brotherhood

Meanwhile, the Church of Sweden chooses to stick to its line. Cooperation and interfaith dialogue continue in joint forums where Islamic Relief is included, despite the fact that the state has withdrawn.

READ ALSO: The societal shift no one voted for – the concrete trace of Islamization in Sweden

Asked how the Church of Sweden views the fact that the state agency Sida in January 2026 chose not to renew support for Islamic Relief due to suspected links to anti-democratic activities, the church responds on its website:

“We are following the matter. Generally, it can be said that the Church of Sweden is concerned about the uncertainty many organizations feel about their funding at present. Sida refers to the precautionary principle in its assessment. It is important to have clear information from Sida on how this precautionary principle is applied in official practice in order to maintain trust and ensure legal certainty and predictability.”

After repeated inquiries from Samnytt, the Church of Sweden replies by e-mail that they “refer to the updated information on the Church of Sweden’s website, which contains what we have to say at present,” i.e. the text above.

The State brakes – the church continues

Sida’s decision is based on a comprehensive risk assessment, including opinions from the Center against Violent Extremism. The authority has been clear that it does not point to Islamic Relief’s humanitarian work as violent, but also cannot ignore personnel and ideological ties in surrounding networks.

READ ALSO: Save the Children has hired a pointed-out Islamist: “That’s your view”

I do not think it is just about naivety. It takes intellectual effort to be that naive.

Magnus Norell

Islamic Relief has denied links to extremism and the Muslim Brotherhood, but at the same time confirms that the organization is no longer one of Sida’s partner organizations.

READ ALSO: The giant mosque in Skärholmen: Secret financing, Islamist links – and concern among residents

For Magnus Norell, the contrast between the state’s and the church’s actions is striking.

– It is remarkable that a church institution does a milder risk assessment than the state’s aid agency on issues related to political Islam, he says.

According to Norell, the Church of Sweden’s attitude is not only the result of naivety but of ideological conviction. The principle of dialogue is given precedence over security and democratic concerns.

– I do not think it’s just about naivety. It takes intellectual effort to be that naive. This is a conscious choice, he says.

READ ALSO: The Church of Sweden removes crosses and aims for “religious neutrality”

Norell describes how the idea of dialogue with everyone has become paramount, even when the other party has a clear political and ideological agenda.

– There is an idea that if we just talk, have coffee, and meet, it will be fine, Norell says and continues:

– Basically that is not a bad approach, it works with people who share a common idea of how society should be governed. But the Muslim Brotherhood does not – and this is really nothing new.

Legitimizing political Islam

Norell claims that the Church of Sweden, through continued cooperation, in practice helps legitimize political Islam in Sweden.

– Of course this legitimizes political Islam in this way. Big time, he says.

READ ALSO: Shocking figures: 4200% increase of mosques in Sweden – in less than 25 years

He describes the Muslim Brotherhood’s strategy in Europe as long-term and institutional, with the goal of creating parallel Islamist societal structures. Instead of violence, civil society, umbrella organizations, and dialogue forums are now used to build influence and acceptance.

– They do not need to use violence in Sweden. They get what they want anyway: legitimacy, access, and influence. For them, it’s enough to have a seat at the table, he says.

“Trusting denials is not enough”

The Church of Sweden refers, just as other actors – such as the EU, UN, Agency for Support to Faith Communities, and the Foreign Ministry – to the fact that Islamic Relief itself denies connections to the Muslim Brotherhood. An argument Norell completely rejects.

READ ALSO: Police: The Islamization of Sweden has been ongoing for 30 years

– When they say they do not belong to the Muslim Brotherhood they mean there is no formal membership. But there are no memberships. It’s a way to slip away, he says and continues:

– To simply accept the organization’s denials doesn’t hold at any level.

How would you briefly describe the Muslim Brotherhood?

– This is an Islamist, homophobic, and anti-Semitic movement. A movement that wishes Jews in Sweden to disappear or be killed. They strive for a parallel society – what they themselves call the Muslim civil society – and see themselves as representatives of Islam.

Islamophobia is a word created by fascists, used by cowards, to manipulate morons.

Magnus Norell quoting Christopher Hitchens

The Muslim Brotherhood is banned or designated as a terrorist organization in several Middle Eastern countries, including Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates. In the EU, there is no common terrorist listing, which is often used as an argument for why cooperation in Europe is safe. According to Norell, this is a too narrow perspective.

– That a movement is not listed as terrorist in the EU does not mean it lacks an anti-democratic agenda. In Europe, the Brotherhood works politically and institutionally, not militarily, he says.

READ ALSO: Priest wants to buy Växjö church – but the Church of Sweden wants it to become a mosque

Double standards

Norell also points to what he describes as clear double standards within the Church of Sweden. We ask him:

The Church of Sweden is very clear in distancing itself from Christian fundamentalism and what is often described as the Christian right in the USA, but here they do not distance themselves?

– Yes, it’s a great hypocrisy. And when you talk about the Muslim Brotherhood and that kind of Muslim activity overall, politically it is more right-wing than left. It is conservative in a way that can be compared quite well with some of these so-called Christian right specters. They have a lot in common, he adds:

– Not least regarding homophobia and views on women.

READ ALSO: “We already live as dhimmis” – Mona Walter on Islamism’s silent war against Sweden

He says this can ultimately only be explained ideologically and that there is an idea that Muslims are victims and therefore “we must help these poor people.”

– It’s very condescending, I would say. He continues:

– And you see what you want to see and ignore what you don’t want to see. You’ve decided that this is the right path, and then you turn a blind eye to everything that speaks against it.

Critics of this cooperation between the Church of Sweden and the Muslim Brotherhood are sometimes called Islamophobes. How do you comment on that?

– I do not use that expression, because it is used to silence a discussion about Islam. My short answer, which you may quote, is from Christopher Hitchens, who I believe describes my view quite exactly:

– Islamophobia is a word created by fascists, and used by cowards, to manipulate morons.

In Swedish translation, the quote is: “Islamofobi är ett ord skapat av fascister, använt av fegisar, för att manipulera idioter”.

READ ALSO: READ ALSO: 1,400 Jews murdered by Hamas – Malmö mobilizes against… Islamophobia

Christopher Hitchens was a British-American journalist and author, known for his sharp and often polemical criticism of religion, totalitarian ideologies, and political dogmatism. He wrote for, among others, The Atlantic and Vanity Fair and consistently defended freedom of speech, secularism, and intellectual honesty—even when it was controversial.

READ ALSO: INTERVIEW: Mona Walter’s warning to Sweden

The line that was never drawn

When Sida ends its cooperation with Islamic Relief citing security assessments and the precautionary principle, while the Church of Sweden chooses to continue dialogue and cooperation in joint contexts, the state and church actors make different assessments of the risks associated with continued cooperation.

The difference in attitude raises questions about responsibility and boundaries in relation to organizations linked to Islamist and terror-designated environments.

For Magnus Norell, the conclusion is clear.

– The Church of Sweden should end all cooperation.