Wednesday, May 23, 2012

Egypt: Copts tip the balance for the future of democracy

CoptsIn a vote that seems far less predictable than the recent parliamentary elections (which were dominated by Islamists), the support of the country’s Coptic Christian minority is now being courted. 

The two most popular candidates in the polls are two independents who need the support of the Copts: former Arab League leader Amr Moussa (Mubarak’s former foreign minister) and the unorthodox Islamist Abdel Moneim Aboul Fotouh (who has much more support than does Mohammed Morsy, the official Muslim Brotherhood candidate).

Just a few nights ago, Moussa and Fotouh faced off in the first TV debate in the history of Egyptian politics. At first glance, it might appear that the Copts’ support would clearly be for the more secular Amr Moussa. 

But the news from Cairo reveals a more complex scenario: there is support for Aboul Fotouh even among Christians. This is not too surprising, since in his former roles as Secretary General of the Union of Medical Professionals and member of the Central Committee of the Muslim Brotherhood, Foutouh was always considered a reformist. One of the first to join the demonstrators in Tahrir Square, he left the official Islamist movement just a few months ago, when he was forbidden to run for president. 

During his long electoral campaign, he placed much focus on gaining support from the Copts: in March, he spoke at an evening event organized by the Jesuits in Cairo, where for two hours he answered a barrage of questions from the audience about his views on the rights of minorities. 

During that time, he was also a prominent attendee at the funeral of Coptic Pope Shenouda III (as was Amr Moussa).

But there is one fact that clashes with this moderate image: after the Electoral Commission recently excluded Salafi candidate Hazem Salah Abu Ismail from the running, Aboul Fotouh gained that group’s official support. This has only increased the suspicions of those Copts who had never trusted him to begin with.

The rift emerged clearly a few days ago during a meeting organized by the General Coptic Organization in Egypt, whose president, Sharif Dus, heavily promoted Aboul Fotouh to Copts. While he has given assurances that Copts will have nothing to fear if an Islamist president were to be elected, the public has demanded to know the “price that will have to be paid to the Salafis.” 

Beyond verbal skirmishes, the fact remains that - at least for the moment - the leadership of the Coptic Church seems to be united when it comes to electing a new president. It should be noted, however, that the activities of the next few days will be just the first round: the real battle will, in all likelihood, occur during the voting to take place on 16 and 17 June. 

Of course, the fact that the Coptic Church is currently in the midst of the delicate process of choosing the successor of Pope Shenouda III also weighs heavily.

Just this week, the commission headed by the Regent, Bishop Pachomius, extended the deadline for submission of candidates to the end of the month. From this group, the shortlist of names will be chosen to be put to a vote, in order to select the final Triad. This means that the timeframe for selection of the new patriarch is certain to be extended even further.

Finally, it is important to note that there are different points of view within Egypt’s Christian community, a fact that became clear last week at a conference organized in Brussels by the European Parliament and COMECE (the Commission of the Bishops’ Conference of the European Union) on Christians and the Arab spring. Cornelius Hulsman, a Dutchman who has lived in Egypt for 25 years, including 15 in Cairo, expressly distanced himself from the rather bleak picture given by representatives of organizations such as Aid to the Church in Need and Open Doors

Hulsman runs Arab West Report, a website that rebroadcasts news stories from Egyptian newspapers on relations between Christians and Muslims. Without denying the difficulties that undoubtedly exist, Hulsman warned against the “risks of misinformation,” arguing that exclusively emphasizing tensions exacerbates rather than solves problems.