Khalil says that, while al-Awa portends to discuss the rules regulating relations between Muslims and others, his book is full of lies, invention, mistakes, and provocation of hatred." According to al-Awa, adds Khalil "the Copts control 60% of the Egyptian economy... This is not a problem if an individual has economic power as a result of his own efforts... but if this [superior] economic situation is the result of external help, is linked with external forces, or stems from help that is contingent upon conditions that must be met - herein lies danger."

   In four places in his book, al-Awa reiterates that the Copts constitute only 6% of Egypt's population; this figure is in line with that given by all the Islamic streams. However, Egyptian government figures state that Copts constitute 10% of the population, while according to the Copts themselves; they are 15% or more.

   According to al-Awa, the Copts have privileges that, by right, Muslims should enjoy: "If the state is fanatical, it is fanatical in the Copts' favor. There is no oversight of the churches, and the Egyptian security forces protect them - even though no one knows what is going on inside them. In contrast, the security forces come to every prayer service in the mosques to oversee what is going on - and this is in addition to the 10 conditions for the construction of mosques set by the Ministry of Religious Endowments."

   In addition, al-Awa justifies the acts of the young and violent Muslims who damaged Coptic property during the incidents in Alexandria, and even called upon Muslims to visit them in prison: "The best sacrifice to Allah is to visit them in prison on holidays, and for everybody to ease their situation as best they can. Even if they committed an offense, it was done out of fanaticism for the religion, and in order to defend their religion," al-Awa said (5)

    In concluding his article... [Read More]

  Khalil further explains that: "al-Awa condemns Coptic Pope Shenouda's opposition to the imposition of sharia on the Copts, and the discussion of its details, saying: 'With regard to specific issues raised by Pope Shenouda regarding sharia and its implementation, his dealing with these issues means admitting that he is entitled to discuss the subject of the Islamic sharia and its laws. We do not agree that Pope Shenouda, or any other non-Muslim, may do this. According to Al-Awa, the Copts are infidels. In his book, al-Awa states that the Koran determines that those of ahl al-kitab are infidels."

   However, Khalil sarcastically explained that, "although we are infidels, a Muslim man can marry a Christian woman whom he likes, because a Muslim man is entitled to marry a Christian or Jewish woman who believes in her religion without getting into the details of her faith.  But a Muslim woman is absolutely prohibited from marrying a Christian or a Jewish man. First, this is because he rejects her religion, and second, because of the principle of guardianship. The Muslim man must be the guardian in the relationship, and because the man is the guardian of the woman, a non-Muslim man must not have guardianship over a Muslim woman. Similarly, the Muslim man must be uppermost in bed..."

   In this context, Khalil added that, even regarding neighborly relations, al-Awa determines that "it is preferable to have a Muslim for a neighbor than a non-Muslim. Similarly, if one of a child's parents is a Muslim, the child is also considered Muslim, since a non-Muslim does not have legal authority over a Muslim. Al-Awa refuses to give the Copts a fair part in the media so that their partners in the homeland will recognize their religion. He sees this [i.e. Copts in the media] as missionary activity - which is prohibited in an Islamic country: 'The state must not give in to the demands that are sometimes h... [Read More]

   Khalil also stated that, "al-Awa aims his books at Copts who believe in Islam - knowing that no Christian in the world believes in the Prophet of Islam and his mission, just as no Muslim in the world believes in Jesus’ divinity, crucifixion, and resurrection, and that He was sacrificed for the sake of all mankind. Every religion has its own beliefs, so there is no point in arguing about these beliefs or in pressuring one side to recognize the beliefs of the other..." Khalil explains.

   Khalil's main argument in his article is that al-Awa views Copts as citizens "not in accordance with the rules of a modern state, but in accordance with the rules of citizenship that apply to non-Muslims in a Muslim state... and he declares this openly in the preface to his book: 'We defend the Copts out of our Islamic belief'... He does not recognize modern social concepts, and according to him, 'the treatment of people in the Islamic state is based on their faith - whether they are Muslims or non-Muslims'."

   In his rebuttal of al-Awa, Khalil wrote: "although al-Awa stresses, at all his meetings and in all his writings, that the ahl al-dhimma [individuals with protected status] belong to a history that no longer exist, he preaches that there is now a new protection apparatus that eliminates citizenship. According to this apparatus, all rights and obligations stem not from citizenship, but from religion: 'Islam gives the Copts the protection of Allah, and does not set them under the protection of the government, the police, or the local authorities. Whoever attacks a Copt attacks the overall protection provided by Islam. Islam obliges the Muslims to protect the Copts in Egypt even before the law does. In the first chapter of his study, al-Awa explicitly states that the Koran is the fundamental and primary source for all Islamic laws, values, and virtues and that 'the Koran is what determines the nature of the relat... [Read More]

   Explaining this phenomenon, in a July 9, 2006 article on elaph.com, Egyptian Coptic intellectual Magdi Khalil discussed the attitude of Dr. Muhammad Salim al-Awa, a prominent figure in political Islam in the Arab world, towards Egypt's Copts. In his article, Khalil refers to al-Awa's recent book, Religion and Homeland - Chapters in Muslim Attitudes towards Non-Muslims, that was published in March 2006. (4)

   Dr. Muhammad Salim al-Awa is secretary-general of the International Association of Muslim Scholars, which is headed by the Islamist sheikh Dr. Yousef al-Qaradhawi. Al-Awa is a member of the Arab Group for Muslim-Christian Dialogue and belongs to many Islamic institutions, and is a founder of Egypt's Islamic al-Wasat party. Al-Awa frequently appears on Egyptian television and on al-Jazeera, and his articles are published by many Arab papers. He is also a regular columnist for the Egyptian opposition weekly al-Usbu.

   In his article, Magdi Khalil attempted to expose the real views of al-Awa, who usually presents himself as a moderate Muslim, and to show that these views are essentially no different from extremist Islamist views. Under the title, The first thing that draws attention, Khalil wrote, "is the title of al-Awa's book: Chapters in Muslim Attitudes towards Non-Muslims inflammatory? According to al-Awa, the status of the Copts is connected to Islam: They are non-Muslims. Throughout the book, al-Awa sets out the status of the Copts in all areas of life as if they are adjuncts to the Islamic system and religion - and that they must adapt to Islam's laws, customs, rules, and culture. Al-Awa devotes his book to the unpretentious... who, when they hear the words of revelation of the Prophet Muhammad, their eyes fill with tears because of the truth that they know... and they say: Our Lord, we believe in Islam."

But where does all that hatred towards the Copts come from? What went wrong in Egypt, a country that prided itself on the assumption of peaceful co-existence between its co-religionists who fought together against foreign invaders and celebrated each other’s holidays? Where the incitement of hatred does has come from in the last decades?

   Many Egyptian intellectuals have pointed fingers towards fundamentalist preachers in the last three decades who have been branding Christians and Jews as non-Believers. The wide-brush branding has been allowed and even encouraged by successive regimes after 1952, starting with Nasser and ending with Mubarak. Adding to that, official alliances drawn between the Mubarak regime and Saudi Arabia, and accepting and allowing the propagation of the Saudi Wahabi doctrine, encouraged fundamentalist groups along with Egypt’s al-Azhar mosque to OK the gospel of hatred. Generous endowments of money changed hands between the Saudi government, some of the al-Azhar Sheiks, and fundamentalists bent on demonizing Christians and Jews, and a whole market was established that many people were beneficiaries.

   The Mubarak era witnessed the emergence of preachers given access on national TV, radio, and press, publicly denouncing Jews and Christians. The Mubarak regime helped create several mega star Sheiks from al-Azhar or academia, who competed for public recognition which meant a stardom status within the Arab and Muslim worlds. The stardom status meant official invitations by wealthy Arab Gulf countries, royalties from books, TV and radio shows, and syndicated newspaper columns. The whole phenomenon turned into an elaborate lucrative industry that turned religion into hatred for others.

   These intolerant sermons received the blessings of many Arab regimes. They found the intertwined nationalist and fundamentalist tides useful in venting... [Read More]

Do attacks on Copts have a certain pattern? The writer further claims that: "Recurring rituals: Special rituals have begun to emerge in all attacks on Copts. One of these is incitement against the infidel Copts from the mosques' loudspeakers…Likewise, the security apparatuses are soft on the aggressors, and collaborate with them. Furthermore, telephone lines are cut so that no calls for help are possible. An additional ritual is blaming the Christians for provoking the Muslims – as if it were they who started the attacks. By God, how can a church bell calling people to prayer every week constitute provocation of Muslims? Is the mere existence of the Copt also a provocation? Saudi Arabia provided financial backing for religious radicalism in Egypt. Unfortunately, three decades later… Egypt has become the largest exporter of extremist sheikhs… The Saudi funds helped paint Egyptian life in the colors of religious extremism. In conclusion, I will say openly that the state is mistaken, and everyone in Egypt is mistaken, if they think that encouraging the majority to persecute the minority will lead to the submission of the Copts. This behavior will lead to collective suicide and the destruction of Egypt", the writer concluded.

    Aladdin Elaasar is author of The Last Pharaoh: Mubarak and the Uncertain Future of Egypt in the Obama Age (Excerpts from The Last Pharaoh in this article by permission of Beacon Press). Email: omaraladin@aol.com

“The Last Pharaoh” dissects the political life in Egypt and Arab countries. The book raised the ire of the Mubarak’s regime as it exposes the deep corruption, grave human rights abuses, authoritarianism of the regime, and its use of anti-Semiticism and anti-Americanism. It also reveals one of Egypt’s worst kept secrets: the story of the expulsion and mass exodus of more than 100,000 Egyptian Jews since the military coup of 1952, and the influence of Nazism on Egyptian and Arab politics.

Packed with facts and telling the story of both modern and ancient Egypt; how the modern Arab and Islamic Worlds evolved, and interviewing experts, politicians, journalists and Western diplomats, Elaasar reveals the secrets of the personality cults behind Mubarak and other MidEastern leaders, and how religion has been exploited to give legitimacy to these oppressive regimes exporting extremism globally and undermining America’s efforts in the War on Terror.

President Obama is likely to face an unbelievably bad choice in the largest Arab country, says Elaasar-- discussing several scenarios that can take place in Egypt. “Would America intervene militarily to preserve Mubarak’s faltering rule? Would Egypt witness another Khomeini-style revolution? Considering the alarming rising poverty figures in Egypt and the disparities between the classes: could Egypt be overrun by an angry and hungry mob, French Revolution style?

For inquiries, please Contact:
Beacon Press Tel 224 388 1353
Email: omaraladin@aol.com
http://www.amazon.com/Last-Pharaoh-Mubarak-Uncertain-Future/dp/0615300707

   Is it enough to have the Sheikh of al-Azhar embracing the Coptic Pope in front of TV cameras as a Sign of National Unity as the Egyptian government claims? On that, the Egyptian writer from New York sarcastically calls it the Embracing Show. He adds that: "The Egyptian government maintains that the Copts should be satisfied and thank God for gestures that are a great honor for them. What is the matter with this Coptic greed?! Isn't it enough for them when the sheikhs embrace the priests in front of the television cameras? After all this, they whine about the burning of a few houses, the destruction of a church, and a few people wounded or murdered when a church is opened or rebuilt?! We, Muslim Egyptians have a philosophy according to which we burn the Copts' homes and churches and then apologize to their clerics. Be grateful to Allah that we do not annihilate you!"

   The writer further added: "Interest in image, disregard of essence: All that interests the Egyptian regime is its image abroad; the facts on the ground are a secondary issue. To this end, the regime recruits businessmen to take out advertisements in leading American and European newspapers on various occasions, to say that all is well. It launches delegations at the expense of the Egyptian foreign ministry and with funds from the Coptic taxpayer to say that everything is just fine and we have come to establish a cultural dialogue!! They deny the known facts and disseminate words of deceit. Unfortunately for them, since September 11 these methods are of limited effect. The renovation and rebuilding tax: For every attempt to build or rebuild a church, Copts must pay in lives and property, even though they have building permits. In July 2000, Coptic citizen Fakhri Ayad paid with his life for his attempt to build a church in the village of Sol in the Al-Fayyoum district. The same thing happened in August 2000, at the Qasr Rashwan... [Read More]