WATANI International
16 January 2011
Watani talks to Nabil Sharafeddin
Writer and journalist Nabil Sharafeddin, editor of al-Azma (The Crisis) website, warns that Egypt is facing a major threat given the ongoing escalation of violence against Copts. He believes that the Egyptian regime is to be held responsible for the current situation by opting to use tranquillisers rather than curing the sickness. Alexandria, he says, has become a place where salafis (believers in salafi thought, a trend that calls for going back to a fundamental, ultra-conservative version of Islam) freely propagate their detrimental ideas without anyone standing in their way. Watani talked to Mr Sharafeddin.
How does the Alexandria terrorist attack affect Coptic attitudes?
One can observe a worrying transformation regarding the way Copts express their anger. The incident signalled a turning point, not because of the huge number of victims, but because Copts have ceased to be ‘afraid’. It appeared as though they would no longer adhere to the Biblical teaching “Whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also”. Instead of Muslim and Coptic clerics exchanging niceties, we need to recognise how dangerous the situation is. Coptic anger has reached unprecedented levels. The fact that some pivotal issues remain unresolved augments frustration among Copts. I cannot find a single reason that prevents the passing of the unified law for building places of worship. The problem is that we lack the political will to take the step.
Why this lack of political will?
I honestly don’t know. I don’t know why the State has failed to solve these problems when it possesses the means to do so. If the unified law for building places of worship and the Coptic personal status law are to be promulgated, the sources that are generating the most tension will be contained. Equally important is the need to make the school curricula and the official media more adaptive to values of tolerance and citizenship.
There is a common argument that the ruling regime is refraining from moving forward in this direction because it fears reaction by Muslim extremists
The Egyptian regime is strong enough to put into action whatever agenda it wishes. It managed to amend the Constitution and fully exclude the Muslim Brotherhood from parliament. Therefore it seems that the regime is unwilling to resolve the Coptic issues for reasons that no one but God knows.
Do you think the regime is manipulating the Coptic question for political purposes?
Manipulating religion for political purposes is as old as the hills; it can even be traced to pharaonic times. It is a risky game, however. In the past, the Americans used Islamists in Afghanistan to combat the Soviets. Now they are paying the price. The same might be said about Israel and Hamas. The late President Anwar Sadat used Islamist Jamaat to fight the left. He paid for it with his life. Civilised nations should read history well. Unfortunately, we never do.
The ruling regime may be playing this losing card to divert attention from the urgency for political reform, but everybody knows the regime controls all the rules of the game.
How do you conceive Coptic action over the coming period?
The situation is really dangerous, we are fast moving from sectarian tension to sectarian violence. At the outset, the violence was random. But now, following the Alexandria attack, we are faced with a kind of organised violence. Even if the attack was engineered and carried out by foreign elements, the fact that it took place within a sectarian framework should not be overlooked. Feelings of injustice are growing among Copts. Officials are reluctant to admit this plain fact. I am really worried that Coptic anger could lead to a conflict between Muslims and Copts. We should recognise the magnitude of the crisis and search for a solution before it becomes intractable. I appreciate Pope Shenouda’s calls for young Copts to exert self-restraint. But I wish the regime would take the necessary measures to prevent the recurrence of such events. The question is whether it has the political will to move in this direction.
Copts have in the past been criticised for staging their protests inside their churches, on the ground that they were not protesting in front of the civic authorities of the State. With the Umraniya clashes, they started to express their anger in the street. How do you view this development?
It is a logical development that Copts should now be demonstrating in Downtown Cairo or blocking the ring road. More often than not, oppression triggers an angry outburst from subjugated groups. Again, the State should take quick measures to contain this situation. It should put a halt to the sectarian incitement being promoted incessantly by some satellite TV channels, and even by official media outlets. It is not acceptable under any circumstance that a journalist insults the Copts, the Church, and the Pope, as happened in the State-owned Al-Ahram daily—which is funded by Coptic and Muslim taxpayers. When Mohamed Emara, who occupies an official post at the Islamic Research Academy, agitates against the Christians, he should be held accountable, or at least dismissed.
Do you agree with the argument that there are extremists on both sides?
Perhaps there are extremists among Copts. But Coptic extremism is rather ideological. It never resorts to violence or the use of arms. Moreover, the majority attitude is responsible for the extremism of some segments of the minority. The US used positive discrimination to integrate the blacks into society. I hope we can one day adopt such a constructive approach.
The Copts of Alexandria hold the State responsible for transforming this once cosmopolitan city into a hotbed of extremism.
I am really saddened about the fate of Alexandria. Once upon a time the city stood out as an ideal of coexistence among people from different religions, cultures and nationalities. Now it has become a stronghold for salafis who spread false claims. For example, they say that Copts store weapons in their churches—and this further complicates the turbulent situation.
Some people argue that enlightened intellectuals have retreated, leaving society in the hands of extremists.
They were actually forced to retreat when the media platforms opened their doors to extremists.