Tag: Egypt

Categories
Arab West Report Middle East Published Articles

Dar al-Ifta’: The House of Fatwa

Ali Gomaa, the Grand Mufti

The fatwa is commonly known in the West as a death sentence. Among Muslims, the fatwa can be among the most powerful tools of Islamic populism. On a third front, the fatwa is simply a bureaucratic function. Which definition encompasses reality?

Since the dawn of Islam the scholar has had a place of prominence, celebrated for his command of the Quran, the traditions, and mastery of the sharia. For this reason, the state has always wanted to remain on good terms with the scholars, and if possible, to co-opt or institutionalize them.

What makes a scholar? There is a threshold of necessary knowledge, without which any claimant would be exposed as a fraud. But scholars must also be linked to networks, or else they would simply sit at home issuing fatwas to themselves. It is these networks which are under redefinition in Egypt and much of the Arab world today.

For example, the Muslim Brotherhood has a mufti – the Arabic term for one who gives a fatwa. Is he legitimate? What about each and every Salafi preacher around whom the people congregate? If someone appears on television, is he fit to issue a fatwa?

Conversely, though the state conveys legitimacy on many aspects of society, does it also pertain to religious life? Islamic societies have historically treaded carefully here, wary of the corrupting possibility of power but keen to preserve the stability of the nation.

For centuries, in Egypt especially but also throughout the Sunni Muslim world, the Azhar established itself as the pinnacle of Islamic scholarship. Its graduates secured both popular and institutional credibility. Yet in 1961 President Nasser brought the prestigious university under state control.

The process to diversify – and perhaps dilute – the influence of the scholars was already long underway, however. In the 19th Century under British occupation the Dar al-Ifta’ was created to issue official fatwas. The institution survived the 1952 revolution and was used at times thereafter to obtain favorable rulings for controversial state policies.

As both Sheikh al-Azhar and the Grand Mufti are positions appointed by the president, many have criticized the venerable bodies as being little more than mouthpieces for the ruling regime. It has not been uncommon, however, for many criticisms to issue from scholars of either dubious representation or extremist trends. Is not the state the societal organ best fit to establish proper regulations and qualifications?

Ibrahim Nagm

Though not a justification, Dr. Ibrahim Nagm explains the functions of Dar al-Ifta’. Serving as senior advisor to the Grand Mufti, he seeks to make understandable the concept of ‘fatwa’, which has been sensationalized due to what he would say is its frequent misuse.

Nagm defines a fatwa as ‘non-binding religious advice given by a qualified scholar in response to a question asked by a member of the public’. He then proceeds to unpack the meaning of each key phrase.

Non-binding: A fatwa carried no legal authority or compulsion of implementation. This invalidates the popular idea that a fatwa is a summons to kill a particular individual, for example.

Qualified: Though anyone can give their religious opinion, only a certified scholar is permitted to issue a fatwa. Dar al-Ifta’ insists upon deep Islamic scholarship from a respectable university (such as al-Azhar), and then provides three additional years of training before accrediting anyone.

Question: A fatwa must be spontaneous, issued in response to a real life issue submitted by the public. It cannot be internally generated according to policy. Every day the Dar al-Ifta’ receives +500 personal fatwa requests and +2000 by phone in up to nine languages from around the world.

To handle these requests, the Dar al-Ifta’ has about 50 accredited scholars working in its administration, with an additional 50 scattered throughout Egypt.

Each fatwa issued conforms to the basic methodology of Islamic scholarship, which Nagm outlined as the following:

1)      Consult the Islamic sources: These include the Quran, the sunna, and the legacy of Islamic scholarship. Look for precedents and consider their application.

2)      Understand the person and the issue: Fatwas are expected to apply differently according to circumstances. The legal texts are incomplete without full knowledge of the problem.

3)      Issue the fatwa: To be done in a manner bridging tradition and reality.

As an example, Nagm described a request for a fatwa to see if it was permitted for a particular man to take a second wife. After consulting the sources, the indications were yes – it is permitted for a Muslim to marry up to four wives.

Yet after consulting the situation, the person requesting the fatwa was discovered to be residing in a non-Muslim nation which forbids polygamy. Bridging between the tradition and the reality, Dar al-Ifta’ issued a fatwa instructing the requester to submit to the laws of the country he lived in, and not marry again.

In another example a farmer requested a fatwa to permit or forbid the use of certain chemicals in the fertilization process. Nagm indicated clearly this was a matter beyond the competence of the institution. They referred the question to scientific specialists, who indicated the mentioned chemicals were harmful. Armed with this knowledge, it was a simple matter to issue the fatwa forbidding their use.

Returning to the question of Islamic legitimacy, Nagm does not answer the question, but does paint Dar al-Ifta’ as a thoroughly bureaucratic institution. Its methods are sound, but reflect the dry, thorough work of professionalism.

Professionalism is good, of course, but Nagm frequently contrasted it to academia, which is not enough. It is not scholarship that makes a mufti, but training.

Of course, training is also good. Nagm commented that Osama bin Laden was an engineer, and Ayman al-Zawahiri was a doctor. No matter how substantial their personal study of Islamic jurisprudence, they are not part of a credible, established network.

In terms of establishment, this is certain. But credibility is in the eye of the beholder. Dar al-Ifta’ walks the fine line between professional accountability and state submission. Yet this is no different from the family of Islamic scholars throughout history who have navigated the same challenge.

After all, though scholarship is immensely valuable, it puts no food on the table. It must market its knowledge somewhere. The public trusts the scholar, while marketing, to remain faithful ultimately to God.

That trust is his only credibility.

Related Posts:

Categories
Prayers

Friday Prayers for Egypt: Consolidation

God,

Honor those in authority, and make them men worthy of honor. To the degree they are, may they receive honor from the people.

Yet this asks a lot of the people, God, when so much happens behind closed doors. Once opened and an action is taken, there is little in the way of explanation, leaving everyone in the dark. This past week has been an exercise in groping about.

When President Morsy sacked the top leaders of the military council, did he do so for revolutionary gain or Islamist? The rhetoric issued afterwards means little, for he also took unto himself the military-seized powers of the legislature and oversight of the committee to write the constitution. If it was right for him to remove this from the military, is the reality now an equally undemocratic arrangement? Or is it only so if he will misuse this power?

Perhaps consolidate of power is in itself misuse.

Furthermore, there is consolidation in the ranks of the press. New editors-in-chief appear to have Islamist bent, and worrisome actions have been taken against the president’s critics. But again the darkness obscures. The critics were not simply voicing opinion, they were calling for revolution. Yet the charges hearken back to the days of Mubarak-era oppression, seemingly trumped up and exaggerated. Meanwhile, is the editorial squeeze Islamist in reality, or just the reality of editorial policy, now in the hands of different heads? It is justified to fear, it is so hard to know.

Perhaps consolidation of opinion is in itself oppression.

But God, is consolidation necessary to move Egypt through these times of transition into a free and stable system, as Morsy promises? Is he an honorable man, or does he hold a hidden agenda?

Is it foolish to believe the right must be achieved in the right way? Not everything being done, even if justifiable, seems right.

God, hold accountable those who have committed crimes. Honor those who have presided over difficult days in Egypt. If these are the same men, God, sort out justice as you know best.

God, hold accountable those who have manipulated the news. Honor those who strive to sort through the many vagaries and contradictions of Egypt. If these are the same men, God, preserve the freedom of the press as you deal with them as individuals.

If consolidation is necessary, God, may it be temporary and keep its beneficiaries pure from the temptations of power.

If it is not necessary, then foil all plans, yet deal gently with those of good intention.

Where honor exists, God, no matter how small, honor and multiply it. Cleanse Egypt and make her whole. Shine light into the darkness, and purify all good.

May Egyptians be people of integrity, and their nation a beacon.

Amen.

Categories
Arab West Report Middle East Published Articles

Non-Traditional Justice in Upper Egypt

Throughout Egypt the justice system is known to be very slow. Though it has a long and respectable history, as the population exploded and litigation increased, many turn to non-traditional methods to avoid spending a year or more in court.

Sometimes, a non-traditional method can be thuggery. A landlord, for example, might expel by force a legal tenant and deal with the consequences later – whenever the court gets around to hearing the case.

Sometimes, a non-traditional method can be arbitration. Egypt, mindful of the slowness of its judiciary, has established a limited number of licensed arbiters, especially for commercial and business disputes.

Yet for many, especially in Upper Egypt, the non-traditional method of choice is the reconciliation session. Completely outside the law, two aggrieved parties turn to a respected man of the community, and set their dispute before him.

Reconciliation sessions have a deserved bad reputation, especially as pertains to sectarian conflicts. Rather than ruling by law, the police enforce calm in an enflamed village, and then Muslim sheikhs and Christian priests sit together to ‘reconcile’ their people. Perhaps a local dispute – where a Christian may very well be at fault – escalates and a Muslim mob distributes group punishment by burning shops and homes.

If the judiciary in Egypt is slow, the law is weak. The efficient solution is to engage the sheikhs and priests to determine monetary compensation for the Christians and then make a public display of reconciliation. Valuable as this may be, too often it covers over smoldering resentment and rarely punishes wrongdoers.

Yet far more frequent in occurrence are the ordinary instances of two parties settling their grievance amicably. This does not always mean a happy ending, nor is it free of questionable rulings. But where a flawed legal system is the norm, it works.

I encountered two examples recently which help give perspective. These examples hear from only one side, and both involve Christians exclusively. At the very least, they indicate how Christians are not simply the victims of reconciliation sessions, as often portrayed in the media. On the contrary, they are willing participants mirroring exactly their Muslim neighbors.

In the first example, a Christian family consisting of three adult brothers suffered tragedy when the third brother died young. That he also died unmarried added conflict to the tragedy.

What to do with his share of the family inheritance? To whom should he leave it? If the simple answer is to divide it equally, the equation is complicated by the fact he lived with one of the brothers as a semi-dependent.

Yet the other brother stated he paid ‘rent’ to the first brother to help offset costs. In the end, they took their problem to the church. The two priests of the village convened, heard the stories, and pronounced a simple 50-50 division between the surviving brothers. All were satisfied, and life carried on.

In the second example the dispute involved the church – that is, the priests themselves. The family of the priest in question inherited a large tract of land, complete with ownership papers establishing their right. Further distant relatives, however, received no share but believed they were entitled. Yet as the church was complicated in the conflict, the petitioning family decided to go to a Muslim village sheikh.

This particular Muslim sheikh is very well respected as a non-traditional ‘reconciler’ in the village, by both Muslims and Christians. He is said to deal according to the right, and not by religion or benefit. Yet he also draws a fee for his services; it is not simply a service provided. His authority comes only from village reputation. He has no license from the government.

This fee can reach up to several hundred dollars, and is traditionally paid by the disputant who first appeals to arbitration, win or lose. Trusting the judgment of the sheikh, who has been known by both parties since childhood, the landowning family agreed.

In the end, the sheikh ruled for the landowners – their names were on the legal documentation; it was a simple case. But in doing so the sheikh put himself in a quandary. The landless family was poor; they had no means to pay his fee unless they won the judgment.

In saying so, care here must be taken since the sheikh’s perspective is not known. Yet it is said of him he was on watch for any impropriety on the part of the landowners, so as to extract from them a fee for ‘contempt’.

Apparently, the landowner believed the sheikh was listening too favorably to the complainant’s cause, and not letting him speak. At one point he interrupted angrily, ‘Shut up, sheikh!’

With this highly culturally insensitive remark, the sheikh fined the landowner the several hundred dollars which should have been his fee from the original litigant. Whether or not this swayed his understanding of the case, he then ruled according to what appears to be justice.

Of course, the winning Christian family finds this an example of injustice, but once the non-traditional reconciliation session is begun, its judgments are final.

It is reported the sheikh has spoken privately to other members of the family, saying he will return the fee if the insulting party simply apologizes, or even has his landowning relative do so for him. Both refuse.

These examples are not complete pictures of non-traditional justice in Upper Egypt. They do not include the issues of vendetta, honor killings, or the messy intersection of these with sectarian conflict.

What they provide instead is a picture of the normalcy and unremarkable nature of Christian participation in reconciliation sessions. It is not simply the headline-making instances of miscarriage of justice that characterize the practice.

Swift justice and rule of law would be better. In their absence, however, non-traditional methods work reasonably well.

Related Posts:

Photo Credit: al-Masry al-Youm

Categories
Prayers

Friday Prayers for Egypt: Rafah

 

God,

Once again Egypt is bloody. When manipulations are political it can be understood as the nature of politics in times of transition. Yet this manipulation is evil. Sixteen soldiers were killed on the border with Gaza, by as yet unknown assailants.

Early reports blamed terrorist Islamist groups based in the Sinai. Then links with Hamas or other Palestinians were proposed. Some turned the other direction, including the Muslim Brotherhood, and alleged Israeli involvement.

The political fallout has similarly been all over the map. Some try to link the inefficient Morsy government to lax security and Islamist emboldening. Others nudge at the military council as proof they should leave transitional oversight and get back to protecting the borders. In the background is a budding new and anti-MB revolution planned for August 24, as well as moves to replace editors-in-chief of state newspapers and reorganize spy and security leadership.

The nation is abuzz, all while mourning.

In it all, God, who represents evil? Who would kill to advance their political goals?

How much longer must Egypt suffer, God? Encourage those who believe what has happened in the revolution is good, even if there is much wrong to overcome; even if there is much wrong in store.

May good men prevail. May those who have committed this atrocity be brought to justice. May those behind them be exposed.

May good men shoulder responsibility, God. May they find the truth and tell it. Cause all secrets to come to light; cause all rumors to dissipate. May Egypt be built again, but on a firmer foundation that what was.

Give strength, God. Give Egyptians faith to seize their nation and participate in shaping it. May that which was beautiful not be lost, as they discover now the road is hard and long.

Make it shorter, God, but more importantly, make Egyptians into the kind of people who can endure it. On the other side, may they be whole.

Spare the people any more violence.

Amen.

Categories
Arab West Report Middle East Published Articles

Teaching Evangelism in Egypt

Evangelical Theological Seminary of Cairo

‘Should we sacrifice evangelism for coexistence, or coexistence for evangelism? This debate will concern us for the next several years.’

This quote from Rev. Andrea Zaki ended a presentation by the Evangelical Theological Seminary of Cairo. Founded in 1863 by American Presbyterian missionaries, preaching the Gospel has been a core component of the Coptic evangelical identity since its inception.

Perhaps this is not appreciated by the Western evangelical church. The common perception is that Muslim dominance over Egypt has prevented Christian witness. They see a church shrinking, not growing. On the contrary, the assumption is the church has abandoned evangelism in order to survive. The Western church is sympathetic, but wonders if in forsaking the Great Commission to preach the Gospel to all peoples, Egyptian Christianity is doomed to wither away.

In the choice above, many in the Western church see settling for coexistence is a death warrant for Christian vitality. Better the sacrifice of martyrdom than the slow and steady decline of accommodation. Most Western evangelicals do note the juxtaposition of this thought with the reality of their religious freedom.

Atef Gendy

Dr. Atef Gendy would protest the false choice of evangelism or coexistence. As president of the seminary, he oversees that both are taught. The Missions Department of ETSC has courses in dialogue and in evangelism.

‘We have adopted the holistic approach,’ says Gendy. ‘We encourage dialogue, we preach the Gospel through ethics, service, and ministry, but we also support direct evangelism.’

Yet he noted that dialogue was absolutely necessary, given the social reality in Egypt. A seminary professor polled both Muslims and Christians concerning values. The three worst sins in descending order ranked: 3) Killing someone, 2) Changing religion, 1) Committing adultery.

Such an order does not bode well for the convert, let alone the evangelist.

Therefore, Gendy takes pride in the good relations the seminary enjoys with Muslim leaders, especially the Azhar, the pinnacle of Islamic learning in the Sunni Muslim world. They not only frequently attend interreligious dialogue meetings, they also cooperate practically.

‘We try to develop the religious speech of both Christian and Muslim leaders. We emphasize a shift away from simple ritual and surface issues to focus on ethics and transformation.’

Gendy celebrates much which took place during the Egyptian revolution, but also is worried about increased restrictions on freedom in an Islamic context. Yet for this he emphasizes the strategic decision the seminary has taken in theological education.

‘We must recall our theology in incarnation, crucifixion, and resurrection. This is to challenge our leaders to empower the church. Why should Christians emigrate? Maybe we will suffer – along with many Muslims – but this is only a precursor to our resurrection!’

Within any potential suffering, love must push Egyptian Christians to stand by their Muslim neighbors, but love in the evangelical understanding implies more than just solidarity.

‘We must testify, amidst all sensitivities. But we must also show our love through service.’

In Egypt, the future is unknown, but this is fitting with evangelism, whose outcome is also unknown. Gendy’s hope is in God in both cases. Whether or not the church is declining, he knows his duty as an evangelical Christian.

‘We do not have the responsibility to convert anyone, this is for God. We only must witness to our faith.’

Perhaps he, along with Egypt’s Christians might add, ‘and coexist at the same time’. Over the next several years this will be the vital challenge facing the church.

This article was originally published on August 3, 2012 in Idea Magazine.

 

Related Posts:

Categories
Prayers

Friday Prayers for Egypt: Dahshur and Cabinet

God,

It is good there is now a cabinet in place, because they have work to do.

After a long delay, presumably over negotiations, President Morsy has now sworn in his new government. Public reaction is mostly blah. Most members are technocrats, there are few Muslim Brothers, and no Salafis. Some complain over the number of old regime figures included; others that the cabinet is not at all revolutionary.

If anything, the cabinet is like much in Egypt these days – even the marks of stability seem temporary and transitional.

Yet they are men (and two women out of 35) with responsibility to their country. They bear burdens and must work the wheels of government bureaucracy. Much is on their shoulders, while little has been working the past year and a half.

Give them grace, God, to work as unto you. May their diligence, creativity, and determination be first of all present, and then afterwards rewarded. They have much to do.

Let alone reviving the mechanics of government, there are urgent bubbles bursting. In downtown Cairo there were deaths in classist clashes. In Upper Egypt there were deaths over sexual harassment. Yet the biggest challenge is in Giza – Dahshur – where Muslims and Christians exchanged Molotov cocktails.

A stray bottle killed an innocent Muslim passerby following a simple consumer complaint that spiraled out of control. Security forces intervened when Muslim residents sought revenge for the death of their neighbor. Many were injured protecting the church and Christian homes, but several were burned along with their shops. Police then evacuated 120 Christian families from the village.

It is hard to understand Egypt sometimes, God. Yes, a tribal mentality and culture of revenge is prevalent among many. But how could the masses rally so quickly against an offense? Is it a problem of culture, education, religion?

Forgive the culprits, God, on all sides. Yet hold them accountable. Be merciful in the next world, but may perpetrators and observers see the hand of law in this one. Change the hearts of these men; change the culture in which they live. May grace be valued more than retribution.

The parliament’s upper house has dispatched a committee to seek reconciliation. May they find favor in the eyes of men. May they listen, confront, rebuke, and restore. May they be humble; may they act from purity. Give them the words to say and the hearts to incline. Bring good from this tragedy and knit the hearts of those torn asunder.

Give wisdom to the president, God. His words so far have been wise; may his actions confirm them. He has promised the harsh application of law. He has esteemed Muslims and Christians as brothers. He has pronounced that no citizen must live in fear.

Ah, but may his cabinet apply these sentiments. May the president not rest until his words are enacted. A just settlement will prove so much for his presidency. Fairness may well win over the Copts. It is a new era in Egypt; may sectarian tension not be dealt with in the old ways.

God, may Egypt have peace in all its spheres. May the revolution reach to the hearts and consciences of men. Have mercy, God. Forgive. Above all, redeem and set straight. Continue and complete all the goodness Egypt has won. May the old wineskins be replaced.

Amen.

Categories
Arab West Report Middle East Published Articles

Blind Sheikh’s Family Hosts Celebration for Freed Prisoners

Hassan Khalifa

At an open fast-breaking meal outside the sit-in protest for Omar Abdel Rahman at the US Embassy, Hassan Khalifa shed tears of joy as he concluded his ten minute speech.

‘I apologize for going long, but forgive me, it has been nineteen years that I have been in prison,’ he said.

On June 21 President Mohamed Morsy issued a pardon for 572 prisoners convicted in military trials. Of these, 25 were members of al-Jama’a al-Islamiyya or Islamic Jihad, groups still designated as ‘terrorist’ by the United States. Hassan Khalifa, now in a wheelchair, had been sentenced to death.

‘I praise God; I have never stopped speaking on behalf of al-Jama’a my entire life,’ he said, before switching to intercede for the Blind Sheikh.

‘Omar Abdel Rahman’s only crime was that he was the greatest one in worshipping God. He never ascribed to Islam anything that did not belong to it.’

Essam Derbala, who fifteen years ago led al-Jama’a in its Non-Violent Initiative to unilaterally give up terrorist techniques, presented Khalifa and others with a commemorative Qur’an.

Embraced in freedom

Others honored included:

  • Ahmed Abdel Qadir
  • Amr Gharib
  • Abdel Hamid al-Aqrab
  • Sheikh Abu al-Ai’ila
  • Ahmed Hammam
  • Atef Moussa
  • Attia Abdel Sami’
  • Mohamed al-Fouly
  • Hussein Fayed
  • Shawki Salama
  • Mohamed Yousry

Each of these warrants further investigation as to their crimes. I hope after further investigation to describe if these individuals were directly involved in terrorist activity and efforts to overthrow the government. Large numbers of al-Jama’a members and sympathizers were imprisoned upon association with the group, or even to pressure family members more deeply involved.

Essam Derbala

‘The United States has to stand with the people of the revolution and its demands, which include the release of Omar Abdel Rahman,’ said Essam Derbala. ‘Al-Jama’a will continue to exert all effort to obtain his freedom.’

Abdullah Omar Abdel Rahman (L), with brother Mohamed

Abdullah Omar Abdel Rahman, the Blind Sheikh’s son, added, ‘We congratulate the members of al-Jama’a al-Islamiyya who were released from prison. May God reward you for what you have endured.’

Abdel Rahman also relayed the testimony he received from Ahmed Raghib, the deputy minister for Egyptian affairs abroad in the Foreign Minister. Raghib told him Omar Abdel Rahman’s file was complete, awaiting only the signature of the military council or President Morsy. Once authorized, he said the Blind Sheikh would be back in Egypt ‘within hours’.

Mohamed al-Saghir

Mohamed al-Saghir, an Azhar sheikh and member of al-Jama’a’s Building and Development Party, added, ‘We tell the US administration, if you want to turn a new page with the Egyptian people, let us see your good intentions and release Omar Abdel Rahman.’

‘He was in solitary confinement for 19 years, but did nothing except call people to God.’

Abdel Akhir Hammad

Abdel Akhir Hammad is an Islamic legal scholar for al-Jama’a, and interceded for the Blind Sheikh as well.

‘They lie when they say he is responsible for the explosion of the World Trade Center in 1993; they are the first to know he is innocent.

‘We are not weaker than the government of Yemen which was able to secure the return of Mohamed al-Muayyid back to their country, from an American prison.

‘I call on Morsy to fulfill what he promised and pressure that oppressive nation which claims it defends human rights.’

Nageh Ibrahim

Nageh Ibrahim is another long-term leader of al-Jama’a al-Islamiyya. Along with Derbala and others he shaped the group’s Non-Violent Initiative.

‘We never expected a president who was part of the Islamist movement, but that day has come,’ he said.

‘From the first days of our initiative we have been waiting patiently for some of these people to be released.

‘But their release will not make us forget Omar Abdel Rahman.’

Nasr Abdel Salam

Nasr Abdel Salam is president of al-Jama’a’s Building and Development Party. He focused his words for prayer on the Blind Sheikh’s behalf, especially in the month of Ramadan.

‘God works with us as we work with him,’ he said. ‘So we must aid the right and God will aid us.

‘Let us return to God and ask him to support Muslims everywhere and free Omar Abdel Rahman from prison.’

As God is sovereign in all affairs, may he honor justice, have mercy, and bless those dedicated honestly to their cause.

Related Posts:

Categories
Lapido Media Middle East Published Articles

Copts Split over Boycott of Clinton over Support for ‘Islamo-Fascism’ in Middle East

This article was originally published at Lapido Media on August 1, 2012.

US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton declared religious freedom in Egypt to be ‘quite tenuous’ following the releaseof the 2011 International Religious Freedom Report. Despite chronicling several instances of sectarian violence against Coptic Christians, their community finds itself increasingly divided over its longstanding support for America.

At issue is Clinton’s alleged support for the nation’s first Islamist president, Mohamed Morsy.

The Orthodox Church and Coptic politicians boycotted a recent meeting with Clinton as she visited the fledgling democracy. Some Copts, meanwhile, demonstrated at the US Embassy against her visit.

Bishoy Tamry

‘We believe there is an alliance between the Obama administration and the Muslim Brotherhood, which supports fascism in the Middle East,’ said Bishoy Tamry, a leader in the primarily Coptic Maspero Youth Union, formed following post-revolution attacks on Cairo churches.

‘The US thinks the Brotherhood will protect their interests in the region but it will be over our bodies as minorities.’

President Morsy won a highly contested election rife with rumors of fraud and behind the scenes negotiation between the Brotherhood, Egypt’s military council, and the United States.

‘We knew the next president must have US support,’ said Tamry, ‘because the military council rules Egypt and the US pays the military council.’

Egypt receives $1.3 billion annually in US military aid, compared with $250 million in economic assistance.

Yet, according to Youssef Sidhom, editor-in-chief of the Coptic newspaper Watani, Copts have been disproportionately affected by these rumours.

‘Copts fell victim to the conspiracy theory that said Morsy did not win and Shafik [his opponent] was in the lead. I found no compelling evidence of this conspiracy.’

Nevertheless, Copts find reason to believe the US is taking sides in an Egyptian political question. Muslim Brotherhood deputy leader Khairat al-Shater stated his group’s priority is a ‘strategic partnership’ with the United States.

Clinton, meanwhile, urged President Morsy to assert the ‘full authority’ of his office. Egypt is currently undergoing a struggle between the Brotherhood and the military council over the political transition to democracy.

Bishop Thomas

Bishop Thomas of the Coptic Orthodox Church told Lapido Media, ‘We did not meet with Clinton because of the unclear relationship with the Brotherhood and the support they have given it.

‘Things are not settled in Egypt,’ he said. ‘Why was she in such a hurry to come?

‘The current administration does not understand the agenda of the Brotherhood which has been clear for decades – to revive the caliphate and apply shariah law.’

Emad Gad is one of two Copts elected to the now dissolved parliament. He received an invitation to meet with Clinton, but refused.

‘In exchange for Morsy’s being named president,’ he said, ‘the Brotherhood is expected to protect Israel’s security by pressuring Hamas – the Brotherhood’s branch in Palestine – not to launch military attacks against Israel, and even accept a peace agreement with Tel Aviv.’

Sameh Makram Ebeid

Sameh Makram Ebeid, the second Coptic parliamentarian, gives a different emphasis. Though not invited to the meeting with Clinton, he agreed with the refusal of Gad and other Coptic politicians.

He told Lapido: ‘There are two objections to her visit. The liberal forces say – true or false I don’t know – the Americans were in cahoots with the Brotherhood and handed them the country.

‘The second is that you should not meet with the Copts as Copts, but as part of the liberal movement, as the third way between military and Islamist.

‘She wanted to meet with individual liberal politicians, but they were all Christians,’ he said. ‘If you start segregating the country you’re making a big mistake.’

Segregating and dividing the country was also a concern of Revd. Safwat el-Baiady, president of the Protestant Council of Churches. In an interview with Lapido, he said the Orthodox clergy withdrew from the meeting only one hour before it started, but that Protestants, Catholics, and Orthodox laity attended.

Baiady told Clinton of Coptic fears of a repetition of Iraq, where Christians fled the country following American interference. He also spoke of Egyptian concerns the US would divide Egypt, especially the Sinai, using it as a solution for the problem of Hamas.

‘She is a good listener and took many notes,’ said Mr Baiady.

‘Clinton said we have to back the winners and those who lead the country. They have the best organization and power on the ground, based on the parliamentary elections.

‘We have to support the people, she said, and not oppose them.’

Raed Sharqawi, a reporter present at the Coptic demonstration, agrees with Clinton.

‘America has relations with every nation in the world,’ he said. ‘The US is also the shield for the Copts, and always will be. This protest is foolish.’

As Egypt’s transition muddles forward, there is ample room for confusion. The military and the Brotherhood emerged as the two strongest forces, making Copts wonder about their future. Within this mix, Clinton’s visit in support of Morsy has led to this near unprecedented rupture in Coptic-American relations.

‘The US will make us into another Pakistan,’ said Tamry as the protest continued. ‘We have come to say don’t interfere in our business.’

Related Posts:

Categories
Personal

Syrian Rebel Bribes Way Out of Prison, Runs Revolutionary Cairo Tent

Amin Kazkaz

A few days ago I posted an update about Syria, adding a few reflections. A few days after that, I met a Syrian.

Amin Kazkaz is a lawyer from the city of Hama, one of the flashpoints of the uprising. He had been working in the United Arab Emirates but returned to participate in Syria’s revolution.

Participation for Kazkaz meant armed revolt. On the eve of Ramadan 2011, one year ago, he was arrested in his city – with weapons. This information was volunteered and there was no hesitation in his voice.

Hama, reminded Kazkaz, was not the lead city in the revolution. Residents remembered the crackdown by Syrian authorities in 1982 during an insurrection led by the Muslim Brotherhood. Yet when other cities such as Deraa began meeting resistance for their peaceful protest the people of Hama felt compelled to join in as well.

Kazkaz spent twenty-five days in jail before his wealthy grandfather was able to intercede. A landowner, he bribed prison officials with 1.5 million Syrian pounds ($23,000 US) to free his grandson and erase his name from the national database. The warden opened Kazkaz’s cell and told him he had six hours to leave the country or risk re-arrest.

Immediately, with only the clothes on his back and items confiscated by the prison, he hired a taxi to take him to Damascus. From there he hired another taxi to cross the border into Amman, Jordan. Once settled, he arranged for his family to send him his private belongings.

In Jordan Kazkaz sought medical treatment for injuries suffered during combat and imprisonment, but then returned to the United Arab Emirates where he maintained residency. By this time, however, the UAE was rejecting Syrians within its borders and his residency was denied.

On a formal level the UAE and several nations of the Gulf condemned the Syrian regime for its crackdown and broke off all relations. This included agreements allowing freedom of movement between its citizens. On an informal level, however, Kazkaz stated that a major pro-regime Syrian businessman was active in the UAE and worked behind the scenes to keep Syrian dissidents out as well.

Kazkaz was forced to return to Jordan, but finding it too expensive he transferred to Egypt. This was five months ago; Egypt continues its policy of easy entry for Arab nationals. No visa is required but his passport is stamped with three month validity.

Egyptian policemen, he notes, are very sympathetic to the Syrian cause. At times he, like other Syrians, is questioned now that his residency has expired. Police look at the passport, note the nationality, hear the story, wish him well, and send him on his way.

For the last two months in Egypt Kazkaz has assumed responsibility to oversee the ‘Syrian tent’. The tent was erected at the Qasr al-Nile entrance to Tahrir Square during the ongoing revolutionary activity following the resignation of Mubarak. It serves as a point of awareness and support for cross-pollination in the Arab Spring. Syrians in Egypt visit regularly.

So do Egyptians; though I wondered for what purpose. A day or two earlier Syrian television announced the death of two Egyptians in a suburb of Damascus, where fighting had been intense. What were they doing there?

That evening the family of the Blind Sheikh was hosting a press conference at their open sit-in outside the US Embassy. My article on this event is here. In previous visits to his family I witnessed their fierce prayers against the Assad regime of Syria. Al-Gama’a al-Islamiyya – the Blind Sheikh’s organization – has forsworn violence as a tool of Egyptian political change. Yet I wondered if they would encourage, or at least be aware of, Egyptians to go to Syria to join the jihad.

‘Of course there are’, said Mohamed Omar Abdel Rahman, the Blind Sheikh’s son. ‘But al-Gama’a has nothing to do with them, though it supports the Syrian cause morally. They are individual Muslims – Islamists – only.’

As the sit-in location is only five minutes from the Syrian tent I paid them a short visit first, meeting Kazkaz and hearing his story above. Upon mentioning the names of the two Egyptians, which he didn’t know, his response was quick.

‘I have met 200-300 Egyptians at this tent who have inquired how to join our fight in Syria,’ he said. ‘But we do not allow any foreign fighters in our revolution.’

Kazkaz explained the Syrian revolution was a Syrian cause, but furthermore, involving foreigners would be counterproductive. Not only would it damage their legitimacy but also foreigners do not know the lay of the land. They would be killed in their ignorance and perhaps take Syrians with them.

The only foreigners he has seen are five Iranian snipers he helped capture in Hama.

Yet Kazkaz’s final words, though not at all contradictory, suggest there may be ways for foreign fighters to infiltrate. There are for foreign media.

He offered me personal escort across the border to take a first-hand look at the fighting and to meet the leaders of the Free Syrian Army. All I would have to do is get a visa to Turkey, and he would coordinate everything. He plans to return to Syria within a few weeks.

The time with Kazkaz was insufficient to ask him the following questions:

  • How did you obtain your weapon? How long was peaceful protest underway before you started to use it?
  • To what degree is sectarianism a part of the Syrian revolution? What do you think should become of the Alawite community?
  • To what degree are Christians participating actively on either side?
  • What role do you wish for Islam in a free Syria if you are successful?
  • Are foreign powers equipping you with weapons and support?
  • Do you desire intervention from NATO or an Arab transnational force?
  • What did you do with the Iranians you captured?

As I have mentioned before, it is too difficult to understand Syria through the media alone. Kazkaz’s experience is partisan and that of only one man, but it is first-hand. As such, it is the first I have received.

Related Posts:

Categories
Arab West Report Middle East Published Articles

Coptic Protest Falls Flat amid Worrying Constitutional Developments

Translation: Bread, Freedom, Social Justice; a Constitution for All Egyptians for the Sake of Egypt; No to the Constituent Assembly

The call went out in the media, Facebook, and by text message: The Maspero Youth Union summons Copts for a mass demonstration at the cathedral to demand the church withdraw from the constituent assembly. In the end, twenty people came. Most were members of the Maspero leadership.

The constituent assembly consists of 100 members chosen by the now dissolved parliament to write the constitution. It represents the second effort, after the first assembly was itself dissolved by the courts for appointing parliamentarians and failing to properly represent the full spectrum of Egyptian society. Many believe the second assembly fails similarly, though a court decision has been postponed.

While the assembly exists in limbo it is continuing its work, along with its delegates chosen by Egypt’s churches. Many liberal politicians have withdrawn in protest of Islamist domination, but unlike the first assembly, the church has not yet followed. The Maspero Youth Union demands they do.

From a Coptic and liberal perspective there are worrying signs. The current wording of the draft keeps the word ‘principles’ concerning Islamic sharia as the main source of legislation. Yet it also designates a religious authority – the Azhar – to define what ‘principles’ means. Though the Azhar is currently understood as a moderate Islamic bulwark, the current wording places religious scholars above elected legislators in crafting law. Furthermore, the Azhar is subject to change in membership; it may not always be moderate.

Furthermore, the current draft defines Egypt as a ‘consultative’ state, alongside other modifiers such as democratic, constitutional, and modern. ‘Consultative’ is not clearly defined, but is derived from an Islamic concept in which people advise the ruler. It may be benign, but was insisted upon by Salafi groups who also argued against inclusion of the modifier ‘civil’.

Additionally, Egypt as a country is defined as ‘part of the Arabic and Islamic nation and tied to the African continent’. The previous constitution labeled Egypt an Arab republic, and mentioning Africa is perhaps a useful recognition in comparison to the neglect of the Mubarak regime. Yet whereas Islam had previously been designated the state religion, labeling Egypt as part of a larger Islamic entity opens possibilities toward wider integration. It certainly tightens the identity of the nation along a particular religious expression.

Perhaps the church has not yet withdrawn its representatives due to the draft inclusion of another phrase: ‘Christians and Jews shall resort to legislation derived from their own religions.’ Though many argue the current constitutional reference to sharia law already grants Christians and Jews this right, others say it is necessary to codify the principle. Is it possible the church has agreed to the other phrasings in exchange for this right of independence vis-à-vis the state?

The Islamist leanings in the initial draft compelled the Maspero Youth Union to pressure the church to withdraw from the constituent assembly. They called for a protest at noon on Friday, following the church service held in the cathedral.

That only twenty people came is an indication in search of an explanation. The Union formed following attacks on churches in the initial months following Mubarak’s resignation. At their height they mobilized thousands to protest the destruction of a church in Upper Egypt, which led tragically to the Maspero massacre at the hands of the military. Since then they have had little public presence, though their spokesmen have continued to comment in the media.

Could high noon heat have kept protestors away? Are the issues in the assembly insufficiently known to the general Coptic community? Is the protest premature? Does a pending court ruling on the assembly’s dissolution persuade most that street politics is unnecessary?

It is uncertain. The result, however, suggests the Union has lost a great deal of its popular legitimacy and mobilizing ability. Anonymous critics present at the demonstration suggested the church was even using the Union in search of provide popular cover for their desire to withdraw, though perhaps all did not know this. If true, and if the Union was playing a requested role, the call for a protest rings hollow. Might the common Copt have noted a lack of authenticity?

In the end, the protest was rather inauthentic. Organizers did their best to shout slogans for the few cameras and assembled media, but there was no audience to rally.

Mina Thabit

‘We came to express our objection to the church continuing in this assembly,’ said Mina Thabit, a founding member of the Maspero Youth Union. ‘These are religious representatives for the church, and do not politically represent the Copts.

‘They do not have the wisdom or experience to deal with this situation. The constitution will wind up being far from the principles of human rights, and represent racism, ethnicity, and discrimination between people.’

Indeed, these are worrying concerns. It is too bad no one came to share them with.

Related Posts:

Categories
Aslan Media Middle East Published Articles

Escalating Pressure for the Blind Sheikh

Omar Abdel Rahman, the ‘Blind Sheik’

On Thursday, July 26, the family of Omar Abdel Rahman ratcheted up their rhetoric in their awareness campaign to free their father. The family issued five demands to President Morsy and invited speakers to comment, some of whom threatened America harshly.

Otherwise known as the ‘Blind Sheikh’, Abdel Rahman is imprisoned in America for involvement in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing. His family claims Abdel Rahman’s arrest was political, as the US yielded to Egyptian demands to silence him from criticizing Mubarak. The family has conducted an open-ended sit-in protest outside the American Embassy in Cairo since August of last year.

Abdullah Omar Abdel Rahman, one of the Blind Sheikh’s sons, called for a press conference and invited political leaders to speak on his father’s behalf. He desired to put pressure on President Morsy to intercede in the case, to fulfill his promise made during his inaugural address from Tahrir Square. Morsy identified Abdel Rahman as a ‘political prisoner’ and vowed to work for his release, along with hundreds of other prisoners in Egyptian jails, who were jailed for their revolutionary activity.

Morsy pardoned or otherwise freed over 500 Egyptian prisoners on the eve of Ramadan. He has backtracked, however, on promises to secure Abdel Rahman’s release.

Abdullah issued five primary demands:

  • For President Morsy to form an urgent committee to visit Abdel Rahman in his American prison and check on his health and the state of his confinement
  • For President Morsy to immediately authorize legal advisors to challenge the Justice Department’s use of an antiquated law to keep Abdel Rahman in solitary confinement for 19 years
  • For President Morsy to give the green light to the Foreign Ministry to begin diplomatic efforts to return Abdel Rahman to his country
  • To apply the principle of reciprocity on every American prisoner in Egypt and subject them to solitary confinement as is done to Egyptian prisoners in the US
  • For the presidency to allow some of Abdel Rahman’s family members continual visitation rights in America until he returns to his country

Political leaders in attendance were mostly from al-Gama’a al-Islamiyya, Abdel Rahman’s original group which is designated a terrorist organization in the United States. In the 1990s al-Gama’a formally forswore violent methods. Following the Egyptian revolution it has created a political party, called Building and Development, which cooperated with Salafi parties during the recent parliamentary elections.

Abbud al-Zumur

Abbud al-Zumor was the keynote speaker. A leader in al-Gama’a, he is unapologetic for his role in assassinating President Sadat in 1979.

‘Abdel Rahman was among the strongest to call against Mubarak and it resulted in his being exiled from Egypt,’ he said. ‘Eventually he went to America where he found no human rights, let alone the rights of a domesticated animal.

‘The matter is now in Morsy’s hands and he must move quickly to return Abdel Rahman safely to his family, as he is very sick.’

Mohamed Shawki al-Islamboli

Mohamed Shawki al-Islamboly is also a leader in al-Gama’a, whose brother was the actual assassin of Sadat. He recently returned to Egypt after spending many years abroad in Iran as a political refugee.

‘Abdel Rahman exposed the Egyptian regime so it pressed the US to arrest him in violation of its proclaimed human rights,’ he said. ‘This is a shame upon America.

‘We say to Morsy it is your responsibility to seek the freedom of every Egyptian who opposed Mubarak, whether inside or outside Egypt.’

Nasr Abd al-Salam

The most incendiary comments, however, were issued by Nasr Abdel Salam, president of al-Gama’a’s Building and Development Party.

‘Americans spend millions of dollars every year to improve their image in the Muslim world, but it has only gotten worse,’ he said.

‘If anything happens to Abdel Rahman, America and its people will pay the price. The criminals in the administration and the embassies will pay the price.

‘Abdel Rahman’s dignity is the dignity of every Egyptian.’

The final al-Gama’a speaker was Ezzat al-Salamony. He spoke of the need to ‘lay siege’ to the American Embassy, but Abdullah, the Blind Sheikh’s son, clarified these remarks afterwards.

Next Thursday, Abdullah said, there will be an open Ramadan fast-breaking meeting at the sit-in at the US Embassy. At that time he said they would announce the date for a massive demonstration at the complex, but there were no intentions to permanently close the embassy.

Salamony, meanwhile, clarified Abdel Salam’s remarks about ‘paying the price’. Speaking with him afterwards, he stated there were all sorts of means to pressure the American administration. Specifically he mentioned an economic boycott and sending fighters to Afghanistan to oppose the US military there. The objective would be to do to the US what was done to Russia, resulting in America’s loss of dignity in the world. This is the ‘price’ the American people would pay.

Salamony emphasized nothing would be done to American civilians, as this was against sharia law.

Other speakers outside al-Gama’a included Hanny Hanna, a Copt known as the ‘preacher of the revolution’ for leading Christian prayers from Tahrir Square.

‘The only way for Abdel Rahman to return to his children and grandchildren is to establish Egypt as a national regime,’ he said. ‘We must strive to return all Egyptians from foreign prisons as a humanistic demand.

‘As I love the Messiah I must also love the prisoner.

‘President Morsy has not dealt with his situation in wisdom. When he mentioned it at Tahrir he made the US think it was at the top of his agenda, and he made them aware of the importance of this issue. If he had been quiet and waited two years and asked then it would have been much simpler to secure his release quietly.’

Kamal al-Helbawi

Kamal al-Helbawi is a former member of the Muslim Brotherhood who resigned when the group nominated a candidate for president, believing they had betrayed the revolution.

‘We as Muslims must defend the right in every place, whether it is for a Muslim or a non-Muslim,’ he said. ‘I helped defend Nelson Mandela in South Africa, so how can I not defend our sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman?

‘We must mobilize Muslims and non-Muslims, Islamists and seculars, so as to make Abdel Rahman a national cause.

‘America is not a democratic nation; it is a nation of criminals. What they are doing in Iraq and Afghanistan was not even done by the Mongols or the Tartars. But we do not fear America, we fear God.’

Finally, Yahya Ismail is a religious scholar from the Azhar university.

‘We must support Abdel Rahman from every mosque, every institution, every political party, and even the Azhar itself,’ he said. ‘We must put his picture everywhere and host seminars and raise awareness. What have we done for him so far? He is being persecuted by the Zionists and Crusaders.

‘God has permitted war in the case of aggressing against religious scholars. A nation’s peace rests in the peace of its religion, and the peace of its religion rests in the peace of its religious scholars.’

Chants issued during the press conference included:

  • Oh al-Gama’a, oh al-Gama’a, we want a million-man demonstration!
  • Oh America, collect your dogs, we are tired of your terrorism!

But the microphone for the chant leader malfunctioned shortly afterwards and chants were abandoned.

Following the conference I spoke with Safwat Kamal, an unaffiliated Islamist from the neighborhood of Imbaba, Cairo. With Abdullah Omar Abdel Rahman standing beside, he spoke of the need to escalate the cause.

‘It has been a year now, and the people are getting angry,’ he said. ‘I have told Abdullah many times already, we must storm the embassy or kidnap a few Americans. But every time he says no.’

 

Related Posts:

Categories
Prayers

Friday Prayers for Egypt: Prime Minister

God,

Egypt has taken a step. It is a small one, but a step nonetheless.

It is not a step that pleases many, though. President Morsy finally selected a prime minister to form a government, but turned to an obscure and inexperienced bureaucrat. By appearances, he is also an Islamist, though he claims no membership in any organization. He is young, but can he perform? He has already announced a delay in the naming of cabinet ministers.

Some see the move as backtracking on promises to field a unity government. Others believe he will prove unable to navigate Egypt’s strident politics. A number think he was chosen simply as a yes-man easily controlled by the Muslim Brotherhood.

Notwithstanding, he is a man who has accepted responsibility for his nation. Bless him, God. Give him wisdom to choose able ministers. Give him leadership to tackle entrenched issues. Help him to move Egypt forward and correct its economy – both in needed investment and in long-overdue social justice. May he care for the poor.

These entrenched issues will not be easy, God. Egypt is experiencing protracted labor battles. Water and electricity supply have been limited in many regions. President Morsy succeeded in pardoning thousands of political prisoners, yet a few more were sentenced by military trial just today.

Meanwhile, the anniversary of the 1952 military revolution passed this week. It prompted a passive-aggressive response by Morsy to both honor and limit the importance of the day. In response the extremes were advanced; some praised Nasser as a hero, others condemned him as the initiator of military rule.

With a new prime minister, the president has a bit of a shield. Give Egypt the balance between necessary work for the sake of the nation and necessary action to demand long overdue labor reform. Empty the jails of all wrongly imprisoned, but give police authority to enforce the laws of the state.

And as concerns Egypt’s identity – oh God, may all be welcomed. Save Egypt from the strife of this debate as the constitution continues to be written. Who is an Egyptian? For whom is this nation? Give consensus and humility, God. May love and acceptance be extended to all.

Amen.

Categories
Arab West Report Middle East Published Articles

Sameh Makram Ebeid: On the Wafd, Hillary Clinton, and Current Conspiracies

Sameh Makram Ebeid

Sameh Makram Ebeid handed me his business card with the words, ‘I hope I get to use this again.’ Underneath his name it spelled out ‘Member of Parliament’. He took it back momentarily and penciled in an additional word in Arabic: ‘Dissolved’.

‘I don’t have the right to disagree with a court ruling. We were never MPs; this is what the court said. But I will run again for parliament and make a fight for my district.’

Ebeid is one of two elected Coptic parliamentarians, and won his seat from the Red Sea district under the banner of the Egyptian Bloc. The choice of the Red Sea was personal – he owns a home there and likes the region – but also political. Ebeid estimates 75% of governorate residents hail from Qena in Upper Egypt, which is his family home.

The choice of the Egyptian Bloc as a liberal coalition was natural, as Egyptian politics post-revolution evolved into a secular-Islamist confrontation.

The Bloc is a coalition consisting of the Free Egyptian Party, the Egyptian Social Democratic Party, and the Tagammu’ Party. Under Egyptian law, however, Ebeid does not have to belong to any of these parties. Though his official parliament membership papers list him as a member of the Bloc he ran with them as an independent candidate.

Perhaps this is fitting. Ebeid hails from the historic Egyptian family associated with the Wafd Party in opposition to British colonialism. Saad Zaghloul, a Muslim, and Makram Ebeid, a Copt and Ebeid’s ancestor, contributed to the founding of modern Egyptian politics along nationalist lines without any religious distinction. The party’s logo depicts both the Christian cross and the Muslim crescent.

‘The Wafd is the secular party of Egypt.’

Ebeid had previously served as the Wafd Party’s assistant secretary general and member of the political bureau, but resigned during the chairmanship of Sayyid el-Badawi, who won party elections in 2010.

‘He became very autocratic and wanted to run the party the way he wanted. He was vengeful against everyone who was there before him. He never represented the true Wafd Party which I belonged to.’

Ebeid’s major source of contention was Badawi’s cooperation with the Muslim Brotherhood. He brought on prominent Islamist Suad Salah, and sought to place her on the religion and human rights committee. Compromises such as these turned the Wafd, he said, into a typical ‘wishy-washy’ party.

After the revolution Badawi entered the Wafd into a coalition with the Brotherhood, though they withdrew at the last minute.

Badawi’s election was ‘clean’, states Ebeid, but like the parliamentary and presidential elections, this does not mean they were not manipulated.

‘The elections were not rigged but the road to the ballot was unfair; if you promise people heaven or buy their votes, this is not fair.’

Ebeid is critical of the electoral machinery of the Muslim Brotherhood which distributed food packages in poor areas before elections. Similarly, many Salafi sheikhs stated voting for Islamists was part of obeying God’s will.

Yet Ebeid testifies that in his election monitoring he did not discover fraud; certainly not in comparison to past elections. For this he puts no stock in the conspiracies which say Ahmed Shafiq was the actual winner of presidential elections over Mohamed Morsy.

‘As long as Shafiq did not contest the election, I have to accept it as correct.

‘If he knew the elections were rigged and he did not voice this, it is treason and he should be court-martialed.

‘There were 13,000 polling stations; did he not have this many volunteers to count the vote as the Brotherhood did?’

Even so, Ebeid took issue with the recent visit of Hillary Clinton to Egypt. His critique was not about clandestine US support for the Brotherhood, as many liberals and Copts advanced. On the contrary, in coming to Egypt the secretary of state was just doing her job.

‘I don’t see any reason why Clinton should not visit the president of Egypt; these are the true forces of Egypt. Did they push SCAF to accept Morsy? I don’t know and nobody knows. But it is actually her job and duty to come.

‘I think we should meet with the Americans and tell them what we think right to their face.’

As a politician Ebeid has the right to be frank. His criticism of Clinton, conversely, is in her conduct as a diplomat.

‘There has been a lack of tact on the part of Clinton and her team.’

The failure in tact concerned the nature of her visits to political forces. It was right for her to meet Morsy and the Brotherhood, Ebeid believed. It was right for her to meet with Salafis. It was right for her to meet with the military. But it was not right for her to meet with ‘Copts’.

‘You should not meet with the Copts as Copts, but as part of the liberal movement, as the third way between military and Islamist, and bring in non-Christians.

‘If you start segregating the country you’re making a big mistake.

‘She wanted to meet with individual politicians, but they were all Christians.’

For this reason, Ebeid believes it was correct for liberal and Coptic forces to boycott the meeting with Clinton. He himself did not receive an invitation, but he supported the decision of those who did.

As for the current political situation in Egypt, especially on President Morsy and the Muslim Brotherhood, Ebeid is critical as well.

‘There is no such thing as the Freedom and Justice Party. They call themselves the political arm of the Muslim Brotherhood, which is the real force.

‘So far I have not seen Morsy act as the president of Egypt. We have to see if he will elevate himself above parties to be the president of all Egypt. I hope he will do this.

‘The Brothers have a special agenda and we have a different agenda. If he is representing the Brotherhood then he is not my president, he’s the president of the Muslim Brotherhood. He should be the president of everyone.’

Though Morsy is not directly involved in the crucial issue of the constitution, Ebeid witnesses the Brotherhood special agenda here especially.

‘The constituent assembly [which will write the constitution] was a trick. It was agreed to be a 50-50 Islamist-secular split, but they did not go into the details about parties or people.

‘The Wasat Party and the Reform and Development Party of al-Jama’a al-Islamiyya are Islamist parties, are they not? They must be counted as part of the Islamists. But what the Brotherhood is saying is that we never said it, we said 50% for MB and Salafis. As the Americans say, the devil is in the details.’

Ebeid’s criticism is not just of the Brotherhood, but of the process itself.

‘The whole process was flawed. We should have gone through the list person by person; defining by position means nothing. We could stipulate the selection of a judge of a court, but if he is an Islamist this makes the difference.’

As media reports the progress the constituent assembly makes on the constitution, Ebeid prefers not to comment on details until he sees an official text. Yet he is not reticent to make his views known on certain issues.

‘The first three articles are most important as they define the identity of Egypt. What are we, a secular country or an Islamic country?

‘What does the word shura [‘consultative’, proposed by Islamists as part of the definition of the state] mean? It has been debated for the last fourteen centuries. Putting the word there is not just semantics, it means something.

‘As for the right of Christians and Jews to refer to their own sharia: What about non-believers, what if we have an Egyptian Buddhist?

‘We should have a presidential system for the first two terms, and then move into a semi-presidential like the French. We’re not ready for a semi-presidential system yet.’

Within the debate of these issues, Ebeid was careful never to assert, or even speculate, secret deal-making between political powers. The accusation that someone was an agent of America, for example, has been a political tactic for the last thirty or forty years, he stated. He wanted nothing to do with this pattern.

Yet there was one area where he opened the door just a little. It is the crucial error which resulted in the muddled transition Egypt is experiencing.

‘If there was a deal, the deal that harmed Egypt was made in March of last year in the national referendum. This reversed everything, putting parliament first, then president, then constitution.

‘Deal, negotiation, agreement, whatever; this is what destroyed the whole eighteen month process.

‘The whole thing is a series of errors, whether intentional errors or a lack of knowledge I’m not sure.’

 

 

Related Posts:

 

Categories
Aslan Media Middle East Published Articles

Spinning the Muslim Brotherhood

In politics, spin is inevitable. But in times of great political struggle spin is often transformed into misrepresentation. In Egypt these days, as seen in the press, the Muslim Brotherhood is spun virtually into a dervish.

Consider first this article from al-Akhbar, ‘Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood Reassures Washington’, published April 7, 2012. Though it details current Brotherhood efforts to portray itself as a moderate political force, the article opens with a similar effort from 2005.

Muslim Brotherhood Deputy General Guide Khairat al-Shater penned an article in the Guardian following the group’s victory of one-fifth of the parliamentary seats. US President George Bush had been pushing the region towards democracy, but now the West was fearful of the results.

The article carries Shater’s words, saying:

He added that they only ran for 150 seats out of 444 (in the people’s assembly), because they “recognize that the provision of a greater number of candidates will be considered a provocation to the system” and lead it to “falsify the results.”

Here, the picture Shater paints is of the Brotherhood as a keen political player, limiting their rightful ambition for the greater democratic transition. Rather than provoke the autocrat Mubarak, they will do just enough to keep nudging democracy along.

Fair enough. Only it isn’t the truth. Or, sort of. The Brotherhood alluded as such last month.

At the time there were rumors the Brotherhood had ‘cut a deal’ with the regime for partial political representation. The win-win gave a measure of political representation to the Brotherhood, while Mubarak could complain to the West about the results of ‘democracy’ and continue to rule autocratically. If true, it worked. The Bush administration fell silent and dropped its democracy rhetoric.

These days as well the Brotherhood is accused of ‘cutting a deal’ with the military council.

Therefore it is very interesting to consider the new spin the Brotherhood gives to the 2005 elections. Egypt Independent carried the news of their ‘confession’, on June 13, 2012.

According to ‘an official statement’, the Brotherhood:

Confessed to meeting with the State Security Investigations Service (SSIS) in 2005, saying in an official statement on Wednesday that it attended the meeting “in order to avoid a string of arrests that would have affected hundreds of Brotherhood members.”

The Brotherhood said the SSIS had summoned a number of the group’s members to its headquarters after it nominated 160 candidates for the 2005 parliamentary elections.

In its statement, the Brotherhood said that during the meeting, SSIS leaders asked them to withdraw a large number of candidates and to only compete for thirty seats in Parliament. However, according to the statement, the Brotherhood heads refused the request.

“We said, ‘Let the people elect 40, or more or less. This is their right. We do not expect all 160 candidates to win and no one will withdraw.’” The statement went on to say that the group was threatened, but that they were not intimidated by the threats.

There is plausibility to this story, but it is a different tale than was given by Shater at the time. No longer is the Brotherhood the self-limiting democratic champion, but rather a political player negotiating with the regime for what it can get. There may well be spin in this presentation as well, as it fits with the post-revolution acceptability of exposing Mubarak’s ills. The Brotherhood, in this presentation, is a victim – though not powerless. They stood up to authority to the level possible.

It is noteworthy, though, to notice numbers. The Brotherhood confessed to seeking 40 representatives in this ‘deal’, however coerced it was. Somehow, they wound up winning 88.

In light of similar Brotherhood post-revolutionary promises to ‘limit’ their political representation, it is curious to watch the pattern repeat itself. To what extent in both 2005 and 2011 was the Brotherhood pressed to limit their ambition, and how in either case did they exceed the deal/expectation?

Perhaps they simply play the political game better than anyone else.

This fact becomes clear when examining the spin that is marshaled against them. The Egypt Independent ended its article:

The statement came after repeated accusations from presidential candidate Ahmed Shafiq that the Brotherhood used to meet with and have friendly relations with the Mubarak regime.

Here, the writer does a good job of not endorsing the accusation, putting it in context, but also leaving the impression in the reader’s mind. It is a slight use of spin, but it is there.

Far less subtle is this example from Aswat Masr, published July 19, 2012. The headline reads, ‘The General Guide Commenting on the Death of Omar Suleiman: God, Save us from the Helpers of the Deposed [Regime]’.

Closer examination of the article, however, shows the Brotherhood statement has no direct relation to Suleiman whatsoever.

An indirect relation is possible. July 19 is the day Suleiman died. He was widely reviled for his alleged roles in torturing prisoners, and especially in his efforts to curtail the Muslim Brotherhood and other Islamists.

During the revolution Mubarak appointed Suleiman as vice-president, but only a few days later he fell with the regime. When Suleiman briefly resuscitated his political career in a failed attempt to run for president, he fit well into the secular-Islamic dichotomy and was hailed by some as a hero. Upon his death he was given a military funeral.

While some Islamists have praised his death, the Brotherhood has been more cautious. President Morsy permitted the military funeral, but kept his distance and did not attend. It is judicious for them to keep their silence and not gloat over the fall of their long time enemy.

In this light the headline of Aswat Masr is better understood. It paints the Brotherhood as celebrating Suleiman’s death, and wishing similarly for salvation from those still alive.

Perhaps the writer has divined the Brotherhood’s intentions, but he has not accurately conveyed their words. The article takes from a written, weekly statement issued by the General Guide, Mohamed Badie. The text opens with Ramadan and praise of the Qur’an.

Only later on does the headline quotation occur, and Suleiman is never mentioned. Instead, Badie asks God:

Save us from tyrants, the corrupt, and the helpers of the dead, deposed regime. Aid our president in leading the ship of the nation to safe shores.

This statement can very much be read into the current political struggle between the Brotherhood and the military/old regime. The headline, however, makes the reader think it is an attack on Suleiman, painting the group as a vindictive entity worthy of Suleiman’s attempts at suppression.

When spin is present, it is best to find truth, however difficult.

According to my best and current understanding, the Muslim Brotherhood and the old regime danced together, awkwardly. There were periods of oppression and jailing, and periods of limited freedom of operation. On the whole, the group was free to function socially, but restricted politically. The regime always had the upper hand, but the Brotherhood knew how to exploit its limitations and slowly develop its legitimacy.

Omar Suleiman was a loyal employee, tasked with protecting the state from violent Islamists, and protecting the regime from political challenges. I suspect the tales of oppression are true.

What is still unclear, due the presence of spin from all sides, is if the Muslim Brotherhood is a legitimate democratic governing party. There is a great political struggle underway, and nearly all focus rests on this question.

The Brotherhood is spun, but also spins itself. Perhaps soon the dust will clear.

Even a dervish eventually stops.

Related Posts:

Categories
Prayers

Friday Prayers for Egypt: Running in Place with One Shoe

God,

Egypt seems to be both moving and waiting at the same time. It is as if everyone is waiting for the other shoe to drop.

If the first shoe was Morsy’s election, the second is where he will take Egypt. He gave a preview trying to restore parliament, but there has been only static since then. Three weeks and he still does not have a government in place. In fact, Brotherhood outrage over his now ‘interim’ cabinet is what caused them to field a presidential candidate in the first place.

Much of the reason for the waiting is that key issues are now in the hands of the judiciary – a notoriously slow entity in Egypt that has proved its ability to be ‘timely’ several times during the transition. Will parliament be reinstated? Will the military’s constitutional declaration be overturned? Will the Shura Council fall? Will the constituent assembly to write the new constitution survive?

No one knows, and the judgment on all was postponed again. More waiting. Where is the shoe?

The last judgment on the constitution illustrates this period best. Unsure of its ultimate existence, the committee frantically rushes to complete its work. If it can put forward a document it will create a reality less easily dismissed, even if ruled illegal. The military is then likely to form a new committee that will produce the constitution. Egypt may well face a future in which it has two. Will the people accept either?

In the middle of all the activity, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton arrived to greet President Morsy, other political forces, and the military. It provided enough of a distraction for each side to accuse the other of being behest to American patronage.

God, may this be a breather. Give every player to reflect on where Egypt stands. Turn them from their plans and strategies, if only for a moment, to wonder if their personal conduct blesses the nation; if it blesses the other.

How hard it is to do this, God, and maintain any level of integrity. This week Egypt’s long time spy chief died. He was accused of countless tales of torture, with his eye aimed especially at curbing the Muslim Brotherhood.

President Morsy will give him in a military funeral; his colleagues, meanwhile, can hardly suppress articulating he is now accountable to you.

Is Morsy a hypocrite? Are his colleagues judicious to hold back their loathing? Or is Morsy extending honor even to an enemy? Are his colleagues lacking in similar grace?

God, renew their strength. No one stands righteous before you, but give wisdom to Morsy and his advisors to run Egypt well. Do the same for those who oppose them. And in your greater wisdom and will, produce a future for the best of Egypt.

In fact, God, may all shoes fall before you in humility and awe. May Egypt be holy ground and all go barefoot in your presence.

Amen.

Categories
Christianity Today Middle East Published Articles

Muslim Creativity Comes to Church in Alexandria

One of over 40 award winning pictures taken by Muslim photographers at a recent exhibition at an Alexandria cultural center. All photos were of some aspect of the historic church which hosts the center.

This article was first posted on Christianity Today on July 19, 2012.

Alexandria, Egypt, was once a lighthouse for Christianity, emanating from the southern shore of the Mediterranean Sea. Now it is a stronghold of the Muslim Brotherhood and the even more conservative Salafi Muslims.

So a Christian opening a cultural center for Muslim and Christian artists in Alexandria—within the walls of an Anglican church—demonstrates a stroke of boldness in a city where some 23 Coptic Christians were killed in a church bombing on New Year’s Day 2011.

“For many Muslims,” says Nader Wanis, founder of the Corners for Creativity cultural center, “it was the first time in their life they [had] entered a church. They were astounded we let them in; then they go and invite others.”

Please click here to continue reading at Christianity Today.

 

This article was very fun to research and write; it was a nice break from politics and the challenge of understanding what is happening in Egypt.

‘This is Our City’ is a new feature of Christianity Today, highlighting Christians who are working not just for the good of their church or the good of their faith, but the good of the whole city. It focuses on six American locales – Portland, Richmond, Detroit, New York, Phoenix, and Palo Alto – and then a ‘7th City’ which can draw on good examples from anywhere.

So when I heard about this particular cultural center in Alexandria, I inquired if Christianity Today was interested in highlighting an international effort.

They were. Bangkok, Thailand was first to the pole, but I am glad to help Egypt get the silver medal.

 

Related Posts:

Categories
Christian Century Middle East Published Articles

Wary of Morsy

This article was originally published in the Christian Century on July 17, 2012.

President Mohamed Morsy’s decision to reinstate the dissolved parliament has set off a firestorm of debate in Egypt. Is Morsy fighting for full democracy against a military regime? Or is he trying to institute a full Islamist takeover of government? Christians worry about the second possibility.

“There are attempts to take control of all state institutions,” said Karam Ghobrial, an activist with the Coalition of Egypt’s Copts, “and the biggest proof is Morsy’s decision to bring back parliament.” Ghobrial is one of many lawyers who filed an injunction against the president’s ruling. Ghobrial’s comments reveal a deep-seated Coptic distrust of Islamists. “There should be international attention from the United Nations to protect minorities,” he said, “because Morsy broke his oath to respect and uphold the law.”

Morsy’s presidency did not start off this way. “We as Egyptians, Muslims and Christians,” he proclaimed in his victory speech…

Please click here to continue reading at the Christian Century.

Categories
Arab West Report Middle East Published Articles

Clinton Visits Morsy amid Coptic Protests

Outside the US Embassy in Cairo

Traditionally, it is the Copts who look to America for support of their minority rights. With the Muslim Brotherhood now in the presidency, though not in full power, some Copts wonder if the United States is switching sides.

The statement of ‘looking to America’ should not be taken as normative. The Orthodox Church and most leaders of influence insist on Egyptian solutions to Egyptian problems. They believe an appeal to the West would brand Copts as traitors in their own land. Average Copts, however, often state a sentiment of longing for America – either for pressure on Cairo or as an escape through emigration.

Amid frequent meetings between Islamists and members of the US administration, however, some Copts believe Washington’s interests are beginning to trump its commitment to human rights.

Bishoy Tamry

‘We believe there is an alliance between the Obama administration and the Muslim Brotherhood,’ stated Bishoy Tamry, a member of the political bureau of the Maspero Youth Union, a mostly Coptic revolutionary group formed after attacks on Egyptian churches. ‘This alliance is to support fascism in the Middle East.

‘The US thinks the Muslim Brotherhood will protect their interests in the region, but this will be over our bodies as minorities.’

The revolutionary character of the Maspero Youth Union plays a role in seeing the United States making a deal with the devil.

‘We knew the next president must have US support,’ Tamry continued, ‘because the military council rules Egypt and the US pays the military council.’

Most of the United State’s foreign aid to Egypt is in the form of military support, with smaller percentages given to economic and civil society development.

A few hundred people gathered at the US Embassy in Cairo to protest the visit of Hillary Clinton, the US Secretary of State. Early chants at the demonstration included, ‘The people and the army are one hand’, but these were silenced by Maspero Youth Union leaders. Tamry explained their group called for an open protest, and some attendees see the military council as the best means to limit or even depose Islamist rule.

One such group is the supporters of Egyptian television presenter Tawfiq Okasha, somewhat comparable to America’s Glenn Beck. These are strong supporters of the military council and clashed briefly with assembled protestors when they arrived, according to Ramy Kamel, an independent Coptic activist helping organize the demonstration. This drove the protest ten minutes south to the Four Seasons Hotel.

According to Nader Shukry, the media spokesman for the Maspero Youth Union, the United States is looking to preserve its interests after the Arab Spring shook their control of local governments. Yet their eye is not on the region’s good, but on its destruction.

‘[The US] knows Islamist rule will bring ruin to these countries, and the best evidence of this is their previous experience.’

As for proof of this alliance, it is found in their frequent meetings.

‘We see evidence in the pre-election visits of US representatives to the Muslim Brotherhood headquarters,’ said Tamry. ‘If the US was looking simply to political representatives it would have visited their Freedom and Justice Party.’

Others see this reasoning as absurd.

‘The United States has relations with every nation in the world,’ said Raed Sharqawi, an investigative journalist present at the demonstration.

‘The United States is also the shield for the Copts, and always will be. This protest is foolish.’

During Clinton’s visit she asked President Morsy to ‘assert the full authority of his position’. The president is currently engaged in a struggle with the military council over the dissolution of parliament. His party, the FJP is also pushing him to confront the military over its supplementary constitutional declaration to preserve some of its powers until a new constitution is written. Clinton did state the details of the transition should be left to the Egyptian people to determine, but urged the military return to its role of protecting the borders.

It is an open and contested question if the military is seeking to preserve its power and resist the revolution, or if it is defending democracy against a premature Islamist takeover of all institutions of government.

Nevertheless, whether the demonstrations against Clinton are foolish or astute, it is a dramatic step for a segment of the Coptic community to turn against the United States so publicly.

Translation: No to the Brotherhood-American Alliance to Interfere in Egyptian Issues. (Pictured: Hillary Clinton and MB General Guide Mohamed Badie)

Related Posts:

Categories
Arab West Report Middle East Published Articles

Fatimid Egypt, Built on Tolerance

The Azhar Mosque, built by the Fatimids

Note: This is an article from two years ago, never posted on the blog but presented now in memory of Dr. Ahmad al-Sayih, the primary subject. Last week was the year anniversary of his death. He was a good man.

On February 18, 2010 the Jaffa Center hosted a forum entitled, “The Fatimid State: Protecting the Holy Places of Mecca and Jerusalem”. The Jaffa Center is directed by Dr. Rifaat Ahmad, who was previously interviewed concerning the practice of reconciliation sessions in Egyptian society. He is concerned with combating the spread of Wahhabi thought in Egypt, as is one of the main contributors to the forum, Sheikh Ahmad al-Sayih, who was previously interviewed about Nag Hamadi. Upon receiving kind invitations from both gentlemen to attend the forum, I accepted in hope of strengthening relationships and seeing each in a natural environment.

Ten presenters participated in the forum, each one associated with the Jaffa Center, which aids in their research. The Libyan owned, Egyptian based satellite television channel, al-Sa’a, broadcast the proceedings. Dr. Ahmad served as moderator, and each researcher had ten minutes to present his study. Though topics varied, most presentations focused on the political relations at the time, both internal and external. Fatimid Egypt was described as a strong military and economic state, founded upon scientific inquiry, and welcoming of other religious viewpoints. The leadership of the state was composed of Shi’a Muslims originally from Tunisia, but ruled over a predominantly Sunni Muslim majority. They created al-Azhar University as a tool to promote Shi’a thought, but made little effort, it was claimed, to transform the religious loyalties of the people. Most senior military officials, in fact, were Sunni Muslims loyal to the Shi’a state. Together, they resisted the Crusader’s efforts to reclaim the Holy Land.

Sheikh Ahmad developed this line of thought in his presentation, celebrating the Fatimids for opposing the spirit of denominationalism. Instead, they promoted humanist thinking of the highest degree, espousing tolerance, dialogue, and moral consciousness throughout their territory. They combined respect for scripture with an open minded commitment to reason, welcoming Christian participation in their cause. Sheikh Ahmad highlighted that the Fatimids constructed five churches for the Christian community in Cairo, churches which remain standing to this day. These are in the area of Zuwaila bil-Jamaliyya, near the mosque of al-Hussain.

Sheikh Ahmad proceeded from the historical model to extend pronouncements about the needs of Muslims in the contemporary world. Modern Islamic thought and practice, he declared, are in great need of rediscovery of these sublime principles from the Fatimid era. The denominational spirit is alive today, dividing Muslims and other religious adherents alike. This fanaticism kills both religious and humanistic values, as well as a closed mind which is not fitting for Islamic civilization. It leads some, in fact, to imagine that Islamic civilization built itself upon religious values alone. This is nonsense, Sheikh Ahmad declared, there is no civilization but that which has taken and developed ideas and structure from that which existed before it. This is why, he concluded, modern civilizations must respect and cooperate together. None stands independent; all and mutually benefit through the exchange of culture, ideas, and viewpoints.

I am not a scholar of the period, but the presentations surprised me in two directions. First, my limited knowledge of the Fatimid period was built upon the impression that it was a Shi’a enterprise. Though I had known the population remained loyal throughout its rule to Sunni principles, I had previously only heard negative words spoken of this state. Perhaps this is not unexpected given my residences in Sunni nations alone, but most Muslims with whom I conversed dismissed the Fatimids as a historical exception, finally put right by the Sunni champion Salah al-Din al-Ayyubi, known as Saladin in the West. It was strangely disorientating to hear such positive words uttered on their behalf.

The second surprise was the depth of such thoughts, compared to a particular feature of history which I have heard, but do not know well. The researchers were unanimous in proclaiming the tolerance of the Fatimid state, but it had been my impression that this was the period in which the Copts of Egypt were treated most harshly. While this requires more and thorough research on my part, I had heard this was the era in which the then still majority Christian population, along with the Jews, were forced to wear their distinctive clothing and mount only inferior donkeys for their transport. Many have understood these developments not to be intrinsic to Islam itself but reactions to Crusading Christian pressures which unbalanced internal religious relationships. It seemed, however, from the testimony that these persecutions took place under the reign of Caliph Hakim bil Amr Allah, who described as being an oddity having a personality which constantly changed his opinions and policies. It was said he later succumbed to insanity. As mentioned, these surprises came only from impressions, and impressions are unstable ground for the study of history. I was glad to have received another dimension to my understanding.

Though the study and discussion of history is enjoyable, it was not the purpose for which I attended the forum. Instead I had hoped to develop the relationship with two gentlemen with whom we have been growing in dialogue and cooperation. I had also wished to witness if the call to peace and tolerance from our private meetings would be given with the same enthusiasm in a public setting. Though I did not doubt the sincerity of the earlier testimony of either, I was pleased to see the same enthusiasm expressed amidst a group of their peers. May we all with such consistency both speak and live our convictions.

 

Related Posts:

Categories
Current Events

Friday Prayers for Egypt: Parliament’s Brief Return

God,

President Morsy caused a stir this week by recalling parliament in defiance of the Supreme Constitutional Court which ruled it was illegal and the military council which implemented its dissolution. Many were up in arms, though the president explained he was not violating the court ruling, only delaying its implementation. Morsy promised new elections would be held after the new constitution is formed.

There are too many ways to view events, God. Give Egyptians the wisdom to know who tells them the truth, and who is working on their behalf.

It may be that Morsy is defending democracy against a recalcitrant military. It may be Morsy is angling for Islamists to control all state institutions in violation of the law. It may be Morsy is playing along with the military to present the president as a man of the people. Or it may be they agreed to give Morsy a chance to save face publically while submitting privately to ongoing military behind-the-scenes dominance.

For its part, parliament met for only fifteen minutes, taking action only to refer its legal standing back to the courts.

There is a place for play acting, God, but to symbolize an otherwise untenable situation. There is less place for spin, manipulating opinion, or outright deception.

Egypt deserves a parliament, God, and it also deserves the rule of law. But is this parliament what Egypt deserves, and is this rule of law one that is honest and just? These questions are harder to answer, and the balancing of principles is difficult.

Amidst this confusion, God, bring Egypt forward. Keep Egypt from conflict between the military and the Brotherhood, but keep Egypt’s future out of their backroom negotiations. If the United States is involved, may she be a neutral arbiter and not a further manipulator.

Guide President Morsy, God. May he make stands from right principle and defend the right of the people to rule. Guide the military council as well, God. May their stands also be right and good, guarding the democratic transition to democracy from the power of any one element, even their own.

Guide also those who are unaffiliated, God, whose numbers are many. May they find a voice and a worthy leader, to keep this struggle from being defined along two poles only. May they know with whom to take sides, when, and how to switch as necessary. May they be guided also by principle and what is right and best for Egypt.

Bless also the ongoing work on the constitution, God. May this document honor the nation.

Bless Egypt, her people, and her leaders – all together. Chasten as necessary, but spare them from harm.

Amen.