If national unity is to be attained, a free and open dialogue must be held concerning the Muslim Brotherhood's position on Copts, argues Samir Morcos* The Coptic question, amongst several others, started to rise to the fore on the Egyptian political and intellectual arena in the 1970s. This was an epoch known for its sectarian frictions and tensions that occurred in the context of a religious Islamic renaissance that engulfed Egypt and the region. Instead of this renaissance reinforcing the national body's evolution towards citizenship and consolidating a national movement in which both Muslims and Copts participate, it led to an increased desire to assert the sense of "self" in confrontation with "the other". This promoted a climate of suspicion, mistrust and anxiety. Concurrent with these developments was the ascendancy of the Muslim Brotherhood in public life. This began with their alliance in the 1984 parliamentary elections with the Wafd Party -- historically the harbinger of "national unity". The Brotherhood's rise was consolidated and at the same time the role of Copts in the political arena receded. A prevalent perception amongst Copts was that the "Islamic political project" did not give much attention to the Coptic question. This found practical expression in the subsequent professional syndicate elections as well as parliamentary elections. Within this context one can underscore several problematic aspects that have become apparent in the Muslim Brotherhood's position towards the Copts. Foremost amongst those has been a textual and intellectual sectarianism, where texts are interpreted in a manner reinforcing the atmosphere of sectarian tension. A careful reading of the Muslim Brotherhood's position towards the Copts reveals an ambivalence and lack of constancy. The difference in religion leads to a discrepancy in the rights and duties contingent on both in this world, as well as the next, from the Muslim Brotherhood's point of view. Illustrations of this can be found in the book entitled Letters of the Martyred Imam Hassan El-Banna published by Al-Dawa in 1990, specifically in paragraph 15 of page 250, and the chapter entitled "The Message of Jihad" on page 280. The same instance of sectarianism can be gleaned in the chapter entitled "The Message of Teachings" in the section called "Work", pages 394 and 395, as well as in the section published under the title of "Sublimation" on pages 398 and 399. In "The Message of Teachings" Hassan El-Banna writes that "for the government to become reformed into a truly Islamic one... there is no harm in seeking (the expertise of) non-Muslims if needed, and not in positions of public responsibility." The same outlook is reflected in Imam Hassan El-Banna's Tuesday Discourses (page 467) that was recorded and prepared for publication by Ahmed Issa Ashour and issued by the Qur'an Library in 1985. One can also refer to issues of Al-Dawa magazine, specifically the article entitled, "An Instance of the Fatwa (religious edict) on the Building of Churches in the Lands of Islam", December 1980. When the Brotherhood began to participate in public life the sole statement that they made in reference to the Copts was: "To them is due what is theirs and to us what is ours; they are obliged just as we are obliged." The statement was made without clarifying the details, if any, that derive from it, nor was there any indication if it was just a general and sweeping statement. In addition to the textual and intellectual positions mentioned above, a religiosity or religious sanctity was also imbued upon on public life. By this, one means the transformation of public political and social activity to a religious one where competition becomes one between Islam and non-Islam, or Muslims and non-Muslims instead of than one that takes place between different currents and ideas that hold room for diversity. The slogan "Islam is the solution" converted what is an essentially secular domain into a religious one, rendering political and civil competition into one that challenges the "absolute". This reorganisation of public affairs on a religious basis implied that the Copts become a religious and sectarian group. The positing of the sacred and religious as an alternative to the political and the civil poses a problem however: that of defining the boundaries distinguishing the religious from the secular. Light also needs to be shed on the degree to which the Brotherhood believes in the principle of equality in temporal affairs -- in other words, citizenship -- and what this entails regarding the rights, duties and resources to be shared. Does equality here stop at a certain limit or is it absolute? One must again refer to important matters like the accession to public positions and the manner with which the Brotherhood would practically implement political rule. Within this context, one must in all fairness refer to the understanding expressed by some Brotherhood members that while Islam does not provide full equity to "the people of the Book" (Christians and Jews) it affords them protection, freedom of belief and practice, and compassion. This is in return for their payment of the jisya or fine. The repercussions of the fatwa issued by former Brotherhood Supreme Guide Mostafa Mashour in the 1990s (that Copts are to be absolved from military conscription) are still reverberating. To this may be added the text by the Imam Hassan El-Banna entitled "The Message of Peace in Islam" which refers to the jisya and dhimma (adherents of other religions under Islam) and which is currently posted on Islam Online. The principle of freedom of belief and ritual raises many questions as well. Some of these concern the practical implementation of Article 46 of the Egyptian constitution concerning the limits of freedom of belief and religious ritual. The rule that governs the building of churches in Islam, according to the December 1980 issue of Al-Dawa magazine prohibits building churches in the "newly-established" locations and lands that were "forcibly entered" (by Islam). Churches may only be built in the lands that were "benignly entered" with the prohibition still holding for the construction, or rebuilding, of portions of churches that have been eroded or destroyed. The realigning of society based on concepts such as dhimma, milla, (religious group) sects or minorities contradicts the very concept of citizenship that implies a national unity encompassing everyone. Within the context of such a national unity the shared common good becomes the principal arbiter that governs citizens' actions, and the means by which national integration can be attained. One historic example that is often cited to demonstrate the consolidation of Muslim- Christian ties is that of the "milla" system under the Ottomans. But this is an example that is stated out of context, if it is used in reference to Egypt. Historic research shows that the "milla" system was never implemented in Egypt and that in the Mameluk era under the Ottomans, Muslims as well as Christians suffered arbitrary rule that enforced upon them the payment of fines. The reading of history subsequently gains supreme importance in the lessons it gives us in dealing with actual problems. One cannot reinvent the wheel with the start of every era. The disregard or obliviousness of history's facts may induce some to evoke ideas or models derived from outside of the Egyptian historical experience. It can cause some to negatively interpret events that others consider a renaissance. In his Tuesday Discourses for instance, Imam El-Banna describes the nationalist revolution of 1919 as "divine punishment". Again this raises questions about the exent to which the Brotherhood has interacted with respected Islamic endeavours that have dealt with both the Coptic question and the Egyptian nationalist movement. In concluding one must underscore that these are but some of the points that need to be raised in discussing the position of the Muslim Brotherhood towards the Copts. They merit a dialogue that is free of sensitivities given that the ultimate aim rallying together all Egyptians is the common good, and their integration under a modern civil state founded upon national unity, and the principle of citizenship. * The writer is a political researcher.
