Sunni Islam's foremost authority has recently come under fire amidst speculation that the US is meddling in its affairs. Gihan Shahine follows the debate Al-Azhar has been bogged down in a heated controversy over the past few weeks, after its Grand Imam Sheikh Mohamed Sayed Tantawi, retracted a fatwa by senior Al-Azhar cleric Sheikh Nabawi Mohamed El-Esh which urged Muslim and Arab states to boycott the Iraqi Governing Council (IGC). El-Esh, who was allegedly dismissed after facing an internal disciplinary hearing, arrived at his edict on the grounds that the IGC was "selected by the occupation forces and thus has no religious legitimacy". Tantawi, however, countered that, "no Egyptian cleric has the right to pass verdicts on the affairs of another country." "The fatwa only represented the personal opinion of El-Esh," Tantawi assured reporters on 28 August. "Iraqi scholars have to pronounce their opinions on this matter as they are more familiar with their own affairs." Tantawi then urged the US administration "to place the authority in the hands of the Iraqis, and divide it equally among the different Iraqi sects". The Grand Imam also called upon the US to make it clear to the Iraqis that "the US is not after Iraqi oil, land or money, but has come to liberate the Iraqi people." Tantawi's statement immediately provoked public ire. The following day, on 29 August, crowds of worshippers gathered in front of Al- Azhar Mosque to chant anti-IGC slogans and condemn the US occupation of Iraq. More importantly, perhaps, Tantawi's controversial stance has brought Al-Azhar's independence into question. The Grand Imam abjured the edict, which bore the official seal of Al- Azhar, a full 10 days after it was issued, and his rejection of the fatwa followed a meeting with US Ambassador David Welch. Reporting on an "internal Al-Azhar crisis", the London-based Al-Hayat claimed that, although Welch's visit to Al-Azhar had been previously scheduled, the US ambassador had used it to question the fatwa, which he saw as "harming the interests of the Iraqi people, who are in dire need for support". According to Al-Hayat, Welch also argued that the IGC is "a legitimate body that should be lent support". Similar speculation fronted the Nasserist Al- Arabi newspaper, which accused Welch of asking Tantawi to annul the Al-Azhar fatwa committee, where the latest edict was born. Other press reports also speculated about "US plans to designate Al-Azhar as a terrorist organisation", and "US attempts to alter Al-Azhar's religious education". Theories such as these were also lent support by a prior Tantawi stance on another recent Iraq- related fatwa issued by Al-Azhar scholars. Issued with the Grand Imam's approval by Al- Azhar's Islamic Research Academy right before the US-led war on Iraq, that fatwa urged Muslims worldwide to declare jihad against the invasion. Tantawi did not sign the edict, however, and Minister of Information Safwat El-Sherif was quick to refute news that the Grand Imam of Al-Azhar had called for jihad. At the time, Sheikh El-Sayed Abul-Wafa Aggour told Al-Ahram Weekly that, "the Grand Imam and [our] office received official visits from the British and US embassies to express alarm over the statement." Both Welch and Tantawi deny any US interference in Al-Azhar's affairs. Following a meeting with Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmed Maher, Ambassador Welch told reporters that he noticed "some erroneous press coverage" regarding his recent meeting with the Grand Imam of Al-Azhar. "We did discuss the situation in Iraq, but this was not the purpose of the meeting," Welch maintained. "I have high respect for the Sheikh of Al-Azhar and for Al-Azhar's institutions. The decisions Al-Azhar makes, with respect to religious observances, principles, and study are entirely Al-Azhar's to make; they are not my business." Philip Frayne, the press attaché of the US Embassy in Cairo, similarly refuted claims that any officials from the US Embassy had visited Al- Azhar, or requested anything from its Grand Imam, during the war on Iraq, and following the issuance of the jihad edict. "The idea that we try, in any way, to interfere in Al Azhar's affairs is false, despite what some people claim," Frayne told the Weekly. "We respect Al-Azhar and are not considering designating it as a terrorist organisation. America is proud of its protection of freedom of expression and freedom of worship." Tantawi would not answer questions on the issue. "I have only one word to say," a despondent Tantawi told the Weekly in a tense voice as he was hurriedly leaving his office. "The US has never meddled in the internal business of Al- Azhar." Aggour conceded that even if the US attempted to interfere in Al-Azhar's work, "what matters is that [we] do not yield to any external pressures. We please no one but God," he told the Weekly. Not everybody is convinced, however. "It is clear that Tantawi changes his statements whenever he receives a visit from the US ambassador, and then finds a scapegoat to lay the blame on," maintained Ambassador Hussein Ahmed Amin, a veteran diplomat and the author of many works on Islam and Islamism. Tantawi's attitude, lamented Amin, is "tarnishing the image" of the world's Mecca of Sunni Muslim scholars and "undermining Al-Azhar's credibility in the Arab and Islamic world". Amin sees the entire process as part of "the US war on Islam involving the humiliation of its symbols, and a cultural invasion of the minds of Muslim youths". While the recurring visits by the US ambassador to Al-Azhar have always been regarded with suspicion and seen as a proof that the US is attempting to pressure the venerable institution, Frayne argued that it is Welch's "duty as an ambassador to meet with Egyptian political, business, social and religious leaders, to exchange views on a great diversity of topics". Abdel-Moneim Abul-Futuh, a leading member of the outlawed Muslim Brotherhood and deputy secretary-general of the Arab Doctor's Federation, said it was "normal that the US would deny putting pressure on Al-Azhar". He said the US, however, had "already lost its credibility when it lied to the entire world about the alleged Iraqi weapons of mass destruction. Why believe US claims now?" scoffed Abul-Futuh. He said it was "well-known that the US is forcing similar changes in Saudi Arabia", and that "the US's interference in Al-Azhar's religious affairs and educational plans is no conspiracy theory." While Welch firmly insisted that the US "does not interfere in Al-Azhar's religious education," Frayne did mention that, "President Bush, like other leaders in the region, has expressed his concern that some people teach children to hate rather than tolerate differences, and that such teachings can lead people to extremist views that harm everybody." Frayne told the Weekly that, "if other governments don't want our help in this regard, we won't interfere. The idea that we are somehow going to unilaterally try to impose change is simply wrong. Anything we do in the educational field in Egypt or other countries is fully discussed and agreed with the host government." Meanwhile, the claim that the US is targeting Islam as its "foremost enemy" since the fall of Communism is still prevalent in the Arab and Islamic world. "When the West waged war on Christianity in the 18th century, they claimed they were only fighting church malpractice," argued Amin. "Today, the Americans are adopting the same scenario by fighting Islam in the name of a war on terror." Abul-Futuh said the US "targets Islam, not as a religion, but as a catalyst for resistance and struggle". In that context, he added, the US would brand legitimate resistance to occupation as terrorism. "The US's extremist right-wing ruling clique looks down on other nations, viewing them as slaves that should only serve American interests," elaborated Abul-Futuh. "Islam is perceived as the strongest obstacle to US plans to enslave people, because it promotes ethics of national unity and resistance." According to Abul-Futuh, the US wants to confine Islam's influence -- symbolised by Al- Azhar -- to strictly religious matters, like prayers and inheritance. "Politics, however, are part and parcel of the Islamic doctrine and any attempt to adapt religion to serve US interests will only breed more extremism in the Arab world," Abul- Futuh insisted. Amin, meanwhile, envisioned a different US scenario. "Islam is a democratic religion which gives way to different schools of thought -- from militant to liberal to intellectual Islamism." That diversity of Islamic trends has made it difficult for the US to "target Islam as a perceived danger to its interests". As a result, Amin theorised, "the US is trying to establish a papacy in Islam where the Grand Imam of Al-Azhar would have the upper hand over the whole Islamic world. In that respect, the US will definitely make sure that Imam serves its [the US's] interest."
