Dr. Milad Hanna (77), a much respected Coptic thinker and politician in Egypt who was awarded the UNESCO Simon Bolivar prize for his efforts in intercultural dialogue, was severely attacked by some Coptic activists in the Copts Daily Digest after his visit with Dr. Kamal Abul-Magd to Washington DC, USA. But for others the attack, initiated by Michael Meunier and involving unsubstantiated claims, went too far. Dr. Milad Hanna initially showed no interest in responding to Meunier’s allegations: "Who is Meunier? Responding to him would make him feel important. When a dog bites man should then man bite the dog? My goodness, no!" Yet, Dr. Hanna made some comments to the RNSAW which have been incorporated in the text.
Dr. Milad Hanna, who has been a Coptic leader for some forty years, makes his point of origin very clear. "I believe what is good for Egypt is good for the Copts." Dr. Hanna believes advocacy for Egypt serves the Copts and working for the Coptic community can only yield results if this is done through serving Egypt as a country.
The discussions in Washington focussed on improving the image of Islam. Dr. Hanna told Hafez Al-Marazy on Gezira station, watched by tens of thousands of Egyptians in Egypt, how he thinks Islam can improve its image. "I told Gezira that if President Mubarak would appoint one or two Coptic governors that would have a very positive impact on the image of Islam in the West."
Michael Meunier gives a very different picture of Hanna, creating rumors and distorting information in different ways, which Hanna describes as Meunier’s "dirty game."
Meunier’s own writings explain why Dr. Hanna uses such strong formulations about Meunier. The attack on Hanna started with an article of Michael Meunier on January 27. Meunier first writes about an agreement between Egypt and Saudi Arabia to "invest an initial one million dollars to arrange from Muslim and Christian leaders to come to the U.S. and speak on tolerance in Islam."
A few days later Dr. Milad Hanna and Dr. Ahmed Kamal Abul-Magd were invited by the Egyptian Embassy and the Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding at Georgetown University in Washington, USA, to participate in a forum to improve the image of Islam in the West. Meunier adds that his "trusted friend said that Dr. Hanna is reportedly paid $200,000.00 just to come to the U.S. for this lecture." Dr. Hanna told the RNSAW this was an absolute lie.
Making such unsubstantiated claims with the help of always unnamed "trusted friends" or "reliable sources" is typically Meunier’s style. How do we know that his source is trusted? Just because Meunier says so? He then follows this with mention of an outrageous sum of money for this lecture. Meunier is careful enough to add the word "reportedly" to avoid a legal case against him but the amount is mentioned on purpose to give his readers the impression that this prominent Copt is willing to do anything for money and thus, as a consequence, is not to be trusted.
Arab governments, according to Meunier, are only concerned about their image in the West but not their "own practices that have giving Islam the bad image it has." Saudi Arabia is told "to stop supporting plots of bloody and savage attacks by Islamic extremist in the name of Islam to terrorize the Christian minority in Islamic and non Islamic countries, such as Lebanon, Nigeria and Egypt."
It is known Saudi Arabia supports programs to strengthen Islam in other societies but this is not the same as offering support for attacks on Christians by Islamic extremists. At any rate, there have been no major attacks on Christians in Egypt by Islamic extremists since 1997. The killings in Al-Kosheh were mob-related and not due to extremists but this is a distinction the US Copts Association does not seem to make.
Then Egypt is attacked for the law requiring President Mubarak to personally sign every single permit to build a church in Egypt and the alleged "practice of excluding Christians from high ranked posts and positions of authority in Egypt." Milad Hanna makes the same complaints but the difference between him and Meunier is that Meunier focusses only on the negative elements and omits positive developments. True, Christians in Egypt complain about the procedures for church building, but on the other hand they say that it has become easier to obtain permits for the restoration of churches and even the building of new churches. That the government sometimes donates land for the purpose of church building (such as in Al-Ubur City) is an element Meunier prefers to forget. Meunier uses a way of simplification that distorts.
Meunier also exaggerates when he states that "Islamic terrorists killed hundreds of Christians." When? He cannot back this number up with all incidents combined, which were certainly all terrible, in the past twenty years. Of course Christians, just as all Egyptians, need protection but Meunier just assumes that in each attack the government deliberately withheld protection, or deliberately provided protection much too late, or made little or no efforts to find the perpetrators. This also is typically Meunier, providing the most negative interpretation possible without being able to back this up with substantial evidence.
The next point in Meunier’s text is "Stopping the anti Christian slogans and preaching in the Egyptian media by top Muslim clerics, especially the state controlled TV and newspapers." It is easy to make such a statement to a public that has no access to Egyptian media. What are these "anti Christian slogans" Meunier refers to? Is he able to provide a list of such slogans with their sources? The answer is no. Yes, there are many articles about Islam in the Egyptian media but is this strange in a society that is approximately 94% Muslim?
Meunier exaggerates when he writes about 12 million Copts (on a population of approx. 75 million this would be 16%). Pope Shenouda certainly has a good estimate of the number of Copts in Egypt but he did not supply Meunier with that number. Bishop Yo’annis, the secretary of the Pope, recently said in a meeting with a delegation of the Dutch organization World Servants that the Pope has asked all bishops to provide him with figures from their dioceses. The number is, however, not released in public. Pope Shenouda knows the number is much smaller than Meunier wants us to believe. Dr. Milad Hanna knows about a survey I carried out in 1985, asking bishops for the estimates of Orthodox Christians in their dioceses. The numbers collected translated in around eight percent of the total population. A percentage based on a calculation of figures obtained from the bishops themselves. Other research shows the figure may even be less (See the comments on the Egypt Country Report on Human Rights Practices - 2000, RNSAW, 2001, week 08A, supplement)
The next step is calling Dr. Milad Hanna "a government mouthpiece who does not experience this kind of harassments, just like the other so called Coptic leaders in Egypt who are abusing the struggle people face daily to further their own interests."
This is again standard practice. Any person providing information not in line with the beliefs of Michael Meunier and his supporters is called a government mouthpiece or agent who is used to "shape the Copts into a negative and subdued society." But the effort of discrediting others is not finished without a warning: "We are not going to allow you to come to the U.S and feed the world the type of lies you have feed your own people inside Egypt for decades."
And thus this letter of Michael Meunier to the readers of the Copts Daily Digest follows the standard pattern: Insinuating someone is financially benefiting by presenting an opinion different from that of the US Copts Association. Information is simplified, taken out of context and then provided with the most negative interpretation possible. Exaggerations and generalizations are used whenever it suits him. Sources are generally not given.
It is also not uncommon that when Meunier attacks someone in the Digest others follow. Meunier suggested that Milad Hanna might have been richly rewarded for his lecture. Wahid Boctor, the producer and founder of the Arab American Television in the US in 1980, followed his article with another on January 28 with the accusation that another Copt, Counselor Hanna Nashed Hanna, the highest-ranking Coptic judge in Egypt, was hired to rule against him after the Egyptian Ministry of Information had broken exclusive agreement to re-broadcast the Egyptian Satellite Channel to the US. He blamed Saudi Arabia for being behind this.
The impression is given that leading Copts let their own interests prevail over that of their Coptic community.
Mounir Bishai, President of the Christian Copts of California, wrote an article on January 29 with the offensive title "Coptic boy, go home!" because, according to him, Hanna had allowed himself to be used because he spoke only on the tolerance of Islam, without addressing issues of importance of the Copts, and in doing so hurt the cause of the Copts.
Days later Bishai wrote that the Egyptian authorities want to give the world the impression that "everything is nice and dandy between the Muslims and a Christians in Egypt, and here are these two people to prove it.
This is falsification of the truth. Under Islam, Christians of Egypt are suffering daily. From the restrictions on building churches, to discriminations in hiring and promotions, to force conversions, etc.
We don’t even believe that the Christian man came to speak in the US of his own accord. He probably has been shown the carrot and the stick, a reward if he participates, and a punishment, if he dares to refuse.
This is an added element to the oppression that the Copts of Egypt go through. They are not only being oppressed, but they are not allowed to talk about it. More seriously, they are forced to talk about the tolerance, they allegedly enjoy."
Other writers even invoke religious arguments. One person claims Hanna "is selling his eternal life and his own people for a handful of dust (may not be even equal to the 30 pieces of silver our Lord Jesus was betrayed with!)." Someone else called Hanna a hypocrite and a liar who offers his conscience for sale. And again someone else asked for action because Muslims would otherwise walk over you.
Meunier reported on January 30 about the meeting of Dr. Milad Hanna and Dr. Ahmed Kamal Abul-Magd with members of congress and staffers from powerful congressional committees. "Dr. Hanna spoke of how the co-existence between the Copts and Muslim is a model." Congressman Darrel Issa "questioned the sincerity of Arabic regimes when it comes to their promises of democracy, respect of human rights and religious freedom." Hanna and Abul-Magd "attempted to blame culture and tribal issues in Egypt." Meunier found their response unclear: "they both danced around attempting to avoid having to criticize the Egyptian regime."
The third and last question came from Michael Meunier himself and was focussed on permits for church building, the killing of Christians in Al-Kosheh (January 2000) and the influence of Islamists on Egyptian media.
Meunier said that government officials destroyed last year two churches without being reprimanded or questioned. The reference is of course to the distorted information Meunier provided about two churches in the diocese of Bishop Marcos of Shubra Al-Kheima [RNSAW, 2001, week 08, art. 19, week 22A, art. 9-18, week 50A, art. 4-8].
Meunier also says the police in Al-Kosheh watched while Christians were killed and the killers remained unpunished [see for a critique on his presentation RNSAW, 2001, week 08A Art.9]. He then used an article about the word kafir [unbeliever] in Al-Musawwar as ’an example’ that the Egyptian media opened their doors for fanatic Islamic clerics [his distortions were discussed in RNSAW, 2001, week 47A, art. 13-16]. He finally ’quotes’ Milad Hanna who, according to Meunier, told CNN in April 2000 that "Copts are excluded from middle and upper management and replaced by Islamic fanatics."
Hanna, who frequently gives interviews to important media, does not remember this quote but says that is not relevant because "Michael Meunier makes the quotations he wants."
Dr. Hanna, according to Meunier’s report, responded that there are legitimate concerns for the Copts in Egypt and that the time to address them must come, including the issue of obtaining permits for church building but, despite this, relations between Copts and Muslims, who face the current challenges of Egypt together, are good. Hanna attributed the latest violence in Al-Kosheh to a fundamentalist form of Islam, Wahabism, which Egypt has not known before. Dr. Abul-Magd suggested they should organize conferences on interfaith dialogue in Egypt. "He admitted that the majority of Muslims are ignorant about Christianity and that is a source of misunderstanding." He then spoke about friendship between Copts and Muslims.
Meunier then adds defiantly "We are not going to quiet, or if I may borrow President Bush’s word here, "we will not tire, we will not falter and we will not waver" until we get all of our rights. We will be in your face everywhere you go and we will not let you escape without holding you responsible for the abuse the Copts face in Egypt."
Irene Zaki, Communications Director of the Coptic Information Center of the U.S. Copts Association, reported on February 6 in a very different tone about the visit of Dr. Hanna and Dr. Abul-Magd. No big words, more balanced but not without criticism. She described the presentations as "mostly a show of how a Muslim and a Christian can actually disagree slightly and still be friends." Dr. Milad said, "that there is no way the handling of Al-Kosheh was justifiable as Abul-Magd attempted to say."
They both agreed that the increased degree of religiosity is a problem. "Dr. Hanna pointed out that the current religious skirmishes was due to overpopulation, the cultural change of putting religion before country, and at least in part because of certain political regimes. Dr. Abul-Magd closed by saying "we know we have problems, we are working on them, time is of the essence and the approach is of the essence."
It is obvious from the responses of the contributors to the Digest that Dr. Hanna’s acceptance of the invitation had been troubling for many Coptic activists in the West. He is not only one of Egypt’s most prominent Copts but some contributors to the Digest reminded others that he had also suffered in the days of Sadat when Islamists allegedly ousted him from the board of the Syndicate of Engineers in the 1970s and that he was imprisoned in September 1981, only to be released months later after President Mubarak had taken over. Such a background gives more weight to his statements in the US and is troubling for these Coptic activists.
One Coptic writer, in particular, had difficulties with how Coptic activists accused Dr. Milad Hanna of being a traitor, "someone who sold his soul, someone who is getting paid by the Muslims, and finally a man working for the Saudis. While I respect everyone’s right to express their opinion of a man, I question people’s right to accuse a man in a public forum of these crimes without sighting [citing] credible evidence.
I wonder how many of the respectful writers providing us with their reverent opinions have read a single book by Dr. Hanna or have heard him speak once. Dr. Hanna is not a traitor. He did not "sell his soul", and he definitely does not work for the Saudis-for the record, in his book "Sasa wa rohban wara’ al kodban" he explicitly draws a distinction between Egyptian’s Islam and Saudi’s Badawi Wahabi Islam, sighting the latter as a regressive, and immature form of Islam, and the cause behind all Muslim fanaticism. He fought, and continues to fight, to abolish the Hamayonian decree [the Hamayouni Law], just as many of us do.
Undoubtfully, he chooses to dialogue differently with the Muslims. He is not at all religious. You may call him a politician, a socialist, a communist, a technocrat, a secular. I do not care. I do not agree with his approach. But, that his approach is different than yours does not justify your accusations, unless grounded.
This posting is not about defending Dr. Hanna. It is about asking everyone to not throw accusations at other members of the Coptic community, or any community that is, without a solid understanding of the person’s background, history, and beliefs."
The maintainer of the Digest, Michael Meunier, did not respond to this letter.
