When the first Egyptian Constitution was being prepared by al-Wafd party in 1923, the people drafting the document, which included some of the greatest minds of the age, wanted to incorporate an article designating a certain quota of parliamentary seats to the Copts. Many, however, were opposed to this quota, arguing that the Copts were not a minority that needed protecting, but rather Egyptian citizens just as any other. Most of those who opposed the quota system were, in fact, Copts.
The recent massacre at Nag‘ Hammādī, reminded the author of this issue and led him to two questions: Why did the Copts refuse any quota drawn along sectarian lines 90 years ago, and why were they slaughtered on Christmas Eve at the doors of a church?
Firstly, it can be seen throughout Egypt's history that sectarian tensions are at their greatest when the country is struggling as a whole. Currently poverty, suppression and injustice are widespread, and this leads Egyptians to sectarianism, just as it leads them to violence, crime, and sexual harassment.
Secondly, when the Copts rejected a quota in 1923, it was during a period of a tolerant, reformist reading of Islam led by the then Muhammad ‘Abduh, which liberated the national conscience from intolerance. Since the end of the 70s, however, Egypt has engaged in a new understanding of Islam; the extreme
salafī ideology that Egyptian jurists have called "the law of the Bedouin." The most dangerous aspect of
salafī ideology is that it totally undermines the concept of citizenship. In their eyes, the Copts are not citizens but
dhimmīs (protected non-Muslims) - a defeated and subordinate minority in a country conquered by Muslims. On tens of satellite stations and internet sites, one can find material professing hatred and contempt for the Copts, and even some who call for boycotting and not dealing with them.
With the spread of such anti-Coptic sentiment, it's normal that Copts feel like attacks against them are natural and inevitable.
The extremism of some Muslims has been mirrored by some Copts, who now use hate and intolerance in their rhetoric. There is no more famous case of this than Zakaria Butrus, who has slandered Islam and insulted Muslims, whilst the church stands idly by. The church, too, is guilty of becoming too politicized. Out of a fear of the Muslim Brotherhood rising to power, Pope Shenouda announced his support for Jamāl Mubārak, and this, along with their unusual support for the government, leads to them giving the impression of being in cooperation with the regime against the rest of Egyptians Add to this the actions of the expatriate Copts, who have apparently learned nothing from history and who insist on seeking foreign intervention, and whose demands encourage sectarianism. For expatriate Copts, a solution to Copts' problems is more important than a solution to national problems, as if they say to the regime "Give us what we want and then do what you want to the rest of the Egyptians, the matter doesn't affect us".
"The incident of Naj‘ Hammādī can only be seen in one light: Egyptian citizens were killed on a religious holiday as they were finishing their prayers. The innocent lives that were lost were Egyptians, like you and me. They lived with us, fought beside us, and defended the nation with their blood. They are Egyptians who speak, think and dream like us. They are us. What killed them wasn't the one who opened fire on them. What killed them was a corrupt and despotic regime that subjugates Egyptians, plunders their wealth and drives them to despair, extremism and violence."
العربية