We proceed with our call for an open and candid debate on the Coptic issue, in an attempt to recognize the persisting hardships or grievances, and to come up with a national policy for attaining equality between all Egyptians.
Last week I looked at the habit of falsifying the Coptic issue, which still persists in deluding the public into believing that Copts are perfectly happy and have nothing to complain of. This week, I present the other approach, which recognizes the truth on Coptic realities, and attempts to awaken the national conscience. It is the key in the process of ridding ourselves of grievances among Copts, since these grievances can never be solved by pressure from outside the country. Neither can they be solved by a Coptic Christian uprising of the type that occurred in the first half of the twentieth century. The only effective means of eliminating such grievances is by addressing the Egyptian national conscience and through the brotherly love that binds Muslims and Copts.
I am no setter of dreams or promoter of illusions, but I have recently been inundated with letters and telephone calls from Muslims, as well as direct meetings with them, and they have all expressed their distress, concern, and sometimes amazement at the persistent discrimination between Egyptians. I am therefore definitely convinced that this fraternal love is our winning ticket in abolishing discrimination.
A priori, and in order to avoid any misunderstanding, I should point out that I have been very keen to notice and highlight any positive signals on the road towards eliminating discrimination. The recent efforts to reinstate Coptic history, culture, and civilization into the school curriculum along with TV coverage of these subjects, following about two decades of marginalization and exclusion are notable examples:
The Nile TV documentary on clerical vestments and baptismal garments, shown on Easter Sunday was one instance, and the beautiful program that has been shown on Egyptian TV several times on the visit of the Holy Family to Egypt, was another. It made me very happy when the people who had produced and worked on these programs said that their work had not been intended as a mere courtesy towards Copts, but as an attempt to shed light on parts of our history that had been obscured.
In March I received a declaration written at the time of the visit to Egypt of the U.S.
Commission on International Religious Freedom. It came from my dear friend Saad
Eddin Ibrahim, who is currently on trial, and I stress, innocent until proven guilty, for
receiving funds for his Ibn Khaldoun Center for Developmental Studies, from the
European Union, without government permission. On the Coptic issue, it says:
"...I am keen nevertheless to reiterate... my views on the current situation with Egyptian Copts.
First: The Copts are historically the origin of Egypt and one of its two major socio-demographic components since the Arab-Islamic conquest in the seventh century. They have since coexisted with Egypt’s Muslims and contributed to building its society, culture, and economy. This is especially true as regards building the modern state in the last two centuries.
Second: The Copts, however, have occasionally been subjected to ugly discrimination, in blatant violation of Egypt’s constitution and tradition of religious tolerance. These discriminatory practices have increased in the last two decades. They reached the ugliest and bloodiest stage in the village of Al-Kosheh (in Sohag, Upper Egypt). In January 2000, 20 Copts and one Muslim were killed, and tens of shops and houses were destroyed in three days of sectarian violence, before State Security Forces restored law and order. Some 100 persons were indicted and tried by a High State Security Court (HSSC) in the following 12 months. However, the verdicts and sentences passed were perceived by many in Egypt and-abroad as too lax. Only three (two Muslims and one Copt) were found guilty on minor charges (not murder) and were sentenced to three years imprisonment. Shock, anger, sadness, or dismay were typical reactions among- Copts and Muslims alike. Even Pope Shenouda, who is often very careful in making press statements, publicly expressed similar sentiment, and requested that the HSSC ruling be appealed. The State wisely responded and filed an appeal with the Higher Court of Cassation early in March.
Third: We can no longer ignore the growing number of incidents that often start as individual disputes between a Muslim and a Copt then escalate into collective sectarian riots resulting in the destruction of human lives and property. I have already articulated this principle in two public lectures in March 2000 (shortly after the Kosheh episode). Mutual verbal niceties of Coptic and Muslim officials should not cover up such a recurring pattern. Ibn Khaldoun Center for Developmental Studies (ICDS) has previously researched the problem and issued several policy recommendations to contain it. ICDS was not the only or even first in this alert. About twenty years earlier, a special fact-finding Parliamentary Commission (PC) was established to investigate a sectarian strife in the town of Khanka (Qalyubiya) in 1972. Dr. Gamal Al-Otaify, then Deputy Speaker of the Egyptian Parliament, chaired the PC, which issued its report containing ten recommendations. Following a spirited debate in December 1972, the Parliament approved the report. Unfortunately, neither the ten PC recommendations nor those of ICDS were heeded by the State. In my March 2000 lectures, I reminded the listeners that continuous disregard of such recommendations is bound to make things worse.
Fourth: The State Security Organization expressed its anger at me for those lectures, unleashed a character assassination campaign, detained me and 27 of my colleagues, then lodged several charges on which we are being tried. However, in fairness and objectivity I must note the improvements in state practices visa-vie the Copts:
1. Increased Coptic participation in public life, as evidenced by the 2000 elections in which three Copts won for the first time in 50 years. President Mubarak has continued to use his constitutional rights to appoint an additional number of Copts as MP’s.
2. The state returned Coptic endowments back to the Church after more than four decades of unlawful confiscation.
3. The state-controlled media is paying increased attention to Coptic news and views, including TV coverage of their festivals and religious rituals.
4. Increased attention by the Ministry of Education to recommendations made by ICDS to render Egypt’s education more sensitive to Coptic concerns, culture, and history. In March 2001, the Minister of Education Dr. H. K. Baha’ Eddin announced the launching of new curricula to promote common moral grounds between Islam and Christianity (Al-Ahram, 20 March 2001).
Finally, Egyptians are extremely sensitive to the appearance of foreign intervention in their affairs, especially as regards sectarian issues. This explains the expressed hostility toward CIRF by many opposition forces, as well as by Egypt’s yellow press. Many Egyptians are quick to note the hypocrisy and double standard in the American discourse on human rights and religious freedom. This is especially noted in the case of the Palestinians, whose rights and concerns were ignored by the US for the last 50 years. Egyptians know that they have many internal problems, but prefer to deal with them on their own, without external intervention.
This is what Dr. Saad Eddin Ibrahim wrote, and this is exactly what I meant by ’awakening the national conscience’. If our government still believes that ’the ball is not in its court’ and that there is no need for any change, perhaps the pulse of the Egyptian street and the Egyptian intellectuals can help ’awaken the government’s conscience’.
