Mīlād Hannā was born in June 1924, and he is married with two daughters and a son. He obtained his BE in Civil Engineering from Cairo University in 1945 and a PhD from Saint Andrew's University, Scotland in 1950. He worked as a teacher at the Faculty of Engineering, University of Alexandria from 1945 to 1947, and he was the assistant of the head of the Roads and Bridges Service from 1951 to 1953. In 1952, he was a research-fellow at Massachusetts Institute, Boston, USA. ¹

- Member of the Institution of Structural Engineers, London, January 1951
- Member of the London-based Society of Civil Construction Engineers, 1954
- Member of the International Association of Bridges and Structural Engineers, Zurich, 1956
- Member of the International Association of Shell Structures, Madrid, Spain, 1969
- Member of the the Supreme Council of the scientific committee of the ESE rapporteur, 1970-1975
- Chairman of the International Committee of the National Progressive Unionist Party, Cairo, 1974-1984
- Chairman of El-Tawfic Coptic Society, Cairo (established in 1882)
- Co-founder of the UPGP and rapporteur of the party’s foreign relations committee, 1984
- Founding member & Deputy Chairman of the Egyptian Society of Human Rights, 1984
- Chairman of the Housing Committee of the People's Assembly of Egypt, 1984-1987
- Egypt's UNESCO-nominated candidate for the Simon Bolivar International Prize, 1992
- A regular contributor of the Watani weekly newspaper which expresses the views of Egyptian Copts
- Member of the National Unity Committee
- Member of the Supreme Council for Cultural Affairs
- Member of the Holding Company of Construction
- Chairman of the Committee of Scientific Culture Ministry of Culture
- Member of the Board of Trustees, Arab Organization of Human Rights
- Member of the Asian-African Writers Union
- Regular contributor to al-Ahrām, the most popular newspaper in Egypt and the Middle East
- Member of UNDP Task Force for Strategies of Sustainable Development in Egypt ¹

Hannā said that he could have easily been a minister if he had chosen to do some lip-service to President Mubārak; however, the fact that he has criticized the government on multiple occasions has prevented him from becoming a cabinet member. Hannā also said that he prefers paying attention to his studies to participating in politics, especially as he believes that none of the positions which could be offered to him would be suitable for his capacities and extensive experience, which are the reasons why he declined the invitations he received from various Egyptian political parties and factions, including the Muslim Brotherhood. ²

The Constitution of Egypt:
Hannā considers the second article of the constitution of Egypt, which states that Islam is the religion of the state and the Islamic sharī^cah is the main source of legislation, a discriminatory article that ignores Christianity.

In 2005 he described the amendment of article 76 of the Egyptian constitution, which allowed candidates to compete for presidency for the first time, as a “brave step”. Ahead of the first presidential elections Egypt witnessed in September 2005, Hannā expected the results of the elections to be in the favour of the candidate of the National Democratic Party (President Husnī Mubārak), saying that rigging elections is a “chronic disease” in Egypt that started in the 1930s. He highlighed the necessity of international monitoring of elections in Egypt to prevent rigging, as that could be the only way to stop such practices.

Hannā rejected the idea of assigning a quota for Copts in elected councils, arguing that it advocates the perception of Copts as a minority. He also refused to refer to the position of Copts using the word “persecution”, since that gives the impression that Copts are exposed to torture and imprisonment and are formally excluded from social and political life in the Egyptian system, while the truth is that Copts are “respected and beloved”. ³

Accepting the other:
According to Hannā, the idea of “accepting the other” started to grow in his mind in 1995 which was declared the Year for Tolerance. It developed as a counterargument to Samuel Huntington's “Clash of Civilizations” argument. Hannā was quoted as commenting on this as follows: “The argument (Clash of Civilizations) was annoying for me. I questioned: how could a thinker explain a phenomenon throughout propagating another phenomenon” ⁴.

Hannā pointed out that a thinker can claim whatever he thinks is right, and propagate his claim in a theoretical frame. It is not challenging to derive from history, religion and theories racist aspects that can lead to clashes among people, for example when “Zionists say that they are ‘God’s chosen people’, and Christians claim that they are the ‘children of God', and Muslims claim that ‘the religion of God is Islam.’” Such examples of ideas a thinker can propagate are destructive and lead to unjustified hatred.

Hannā said that he was not satisfied with the term “tolerance”, as it gives the impression that the “tolerant” party is the “right side” that decided to forgive those who are different. Instead, Hannā argued for replacing “tolerance” with the expression “accepting the other”, because it shows the reciprocal dimension of the relationship. “Accepting the other” is based on the idea that no one chooses what he or she is born like, or what kind of upbringing he or she gets. The first step towards accepting the other is accepting oneself; the second step will be accepting the other, which will lead to a stature of dialogue centered around a core of “cultural uniqueness” that results from accepting diversity as a universal phenomenon.

Hannā argued that the uniqueness of Coptic culture in Egyptian society does not contradict the principle of national unity; since Egyptian society contains various communities, each could retain its own cultural features. All these groups are united in the united political frame of Egypt, and in this case it is true that the common features outnumber the differering ones. At the same time Hannā thinks that the oft-used term “national unity” is not entirely accurate, instead preferring to replace it with the term “unity inside the frame of the same country” to include the idea of cultural diversity as well as the idea of national unity.

Hannā said that his theory does not specify who “the other” is, for it is “not a theory in physics like the Gravity Law”; it is a humane theory about accepting the other, in which everyone can himself or herself define who his or her other is.⁴

Lastly, Hannā believes that the beginning of the clash between Islam and the West came about at the time of the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989 and the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, when the US decided to be the superpower in a unipolar international system.

Copts: A Minority Group?
In 2007, Hannā expressed his suspicion regarding the real aims of the Conference on Minorities in the Middle East, which was organized by the head of the Copts United organization ⁵ , ^cAdlī Abādīr ⁶, and took place in Switzerland. Hannā said that the conference reflects a dangerous tendency that contradicts with the spirit of coexistence that prevails in Egyptians society. He commented on the conference with the words: “Leave us (as Egyptian Muslims and Copts) alone, coexisting happily as we have always had our own formula of coexistence which does not need to be codified. Christianity has been existent in Egypt for nineteen centuries and coexistent with Islam for fourteen centuries.” ⁷

Hannā said that the Coptic cause should not be left to deal with by security forces, as using the security approach to questions with a religious dimension is not enough and could even be dangerous. He suggested that the Coptic question should rather be tackled by the presidency.

In 2004 he commented on the incidents surrounding a priest’s wife, Wafā’ Qustantīn, who was kept at a police station whereto she had resorted declaring her conversion to Islam and asking for protection. Hannā blamed the presidency for giving the security forces the space to interfere in this hot issue, while these forces had proved unable to deal with political questions with a religious dimension. He also accused the Egyptian government of generally neglecting issues relevant to religion for fear that it might lead to sectarian strife (fitnah tā’ifīah) and to avoid clashes with Islamists, which might encourage others to undertake anti-Christians practices ⁸

He has reservations about using the word “strife” (fitnah) to refer to the tensions that occasionally arise between Muslims and Copts, as it gives the impression that such a discriminatory attitude is collective. He suggests that it is more suitable to perceive such practices as individual actions that result from an escalation in religious sentiment in a country where religious institutions (churches and mosques) are much stronger and have much more appeal than civil society institutions such political parties.

Hannā believes that the Coptic character has retreated since the July 1952 military coup, wondering: “Do you find a Coptic Minister of Interior or Foreign Affairs?” ⁹.

He stated that he asked Jamāl ^cAbd al-Nāsir why the Movement of Free Officers which led the 1952 coup did not include any Copts. According to Hannā, Nāsir replied: “The Movement of Free Officers was a secret movement, hence the officers were moving in a very limited scope where coincidentally Muslims were the majority”.¹⁰ Hannā thinks that Nāsir was generally far from a religious fanatic, unlike Sādāt, who had a clear Islamic background that influenced his political thought.

Hannā argued that some of the practices of the Coptic Church should change, such as the symbolic marriage between the pope and his position till his death, because “this is not religion, this is a tradition”.¹¹ Moreover, he thinks that the idea of reviving the Coptic language is an irrational and illogical idea and that the Coptic language should be perceived as heritage. He also asserted that calling for American interference cannot be considered a common Coptic attitude.

The Muslim Brothers: What Has Changed?
Hannā made a contribution in a seminar entitled “For A Muslims/Copts Relationship Not To Be Confined To ‘Beards’ Kissing’”. In this seminar, Hannā expressed his sympathy with the Muslim Brotherhood, saying that the Egyptian political regime is afraid of the Muslim Brotherhood and that it is not only oppressing it but even spreading fear of it among Egyptians, especially Copts. This has resulted in the Muslim Brotherhood, who are actually honest citizens, being excluded from socio-political life in Egypt and being deprived fro, national unity.

In the same seminar Hannā blamed the ruling party, the National Democratic Party (NDP), for the deterioration of the relationship between Muslims and Copts as part of the general deterioration of Egyptian socio-political life as a whole.

In 2005, the Muslim Brotherhood won thirteen seats in the People’s Assembly in the three-stage parliamentary elections (thus becoming the biggest opposition bloc in Parliament).¹² Hannā commented on this victory, by warning against what could be the future of Egypt if the Muslim Brotherhood took command of Egyptian political life. He said: “I am warning Egyptians, if the Muslim Brothers are the authority, Egypt will be an Islamic state just like Iran and Sudan.” ¹³ He added that if these parliamentary elections were transparent, the Muslims Brothers, rather than the National Democratic Party, would have won the majority of seats.

To justify this change in his attitude towards the Muslim Brotherhood, Hannā said: “I have always tried to be on good terms with the Muslim Brotherhood in order to prevent any dispute in Egypt's countryside and in order to preserve the Coptic minority from being eradicated. However, the whole political map of Egypt is changing… If one day the Muslim Brotherhood got fifty percent of the parliamentary seats, rich Copts would leave the country; only the poorest strata of Copts would stay, and I would expect some of them to convert to Islam. I wish to die before such a day comes.”

Hannā’s statements raised reactions of dissatisfaction, in particular his statement: “If the Muslim Brotherhood came in charge, I would pack up and leave Egypt.”¹⁴ He believes that the political discourse of the Muslim Brotherhood does not mirror their real intentions towards Copts if it were to rule Egypt, and that it falsely claims to embrace the idea of citizenship.¹⁵ There is a major difference, according to Hannā, between Egypt being a religious society, and it being ruled by a theocratic regime. Even though Egypt is a religious society, it provides for religious freedom, and Copts have always lived happily in Egypt. Living in a civil state and a religious society has always been the formula that suited Egyptians.¹⁶

Again in 2007, after the Muslim Brotherhood uncovered the details of their suggested program for a political party , Hannā commented saying: “What is mentioned in the program regarding Copts is good-worded, reasonable and reflecting good intentions; however, it is a fact that the logic of any religious madhab is usually stronger than intentions.”¹⁸ He also said that the Muslim Brotherhood could be able to achieve economic and social development in Egypt; however, they will also seek to apply Islamic sharī^cah, and hence Copts will become a second-degree strata. Hannā rejected the Muslim Brotherhood’s invitation to Copts to join their political party, as he considered it a clever maneuver from the Muslim Brotherhood to win the voices of Copts and deliver a message to the government suggesting that they are building their party on a civil basis. At the same time he said that Copts are intelligent enough not to think of establishing their own political party, as it would be very fragile compared to a potential Muslim Brothers’ party.

Zionism:
Hannā said that he is against Zionism, as well as certain other ideologies such as fascism; however, he cannot be against Jews as a group of people. Hannā argues that of the three Abrahamic religions Judaism is the most “closed” and that it is not directing its message to all humanity. He added that Christianity and Islam are the two most open and dialogue-oriented religions.¹⁹ . He believes that reading history teaches us that people can coexist regardless of differences and disagreements between them. If one looks at Christian history for example, one will realize that Christianity has experienced various cultural encounters: first with the traditional Roman Empire, and then within the Christian spiritual community itself, which in turn resulted in the emergence of different Christian denominations: Orthodox, Catholic and Protestant, that continue to coexist up till the present. The same can be said for Islamic history. Hannā thinks that the greatest danger that Egyptian culture faces is the hatred of “the other” who is culturally different.

Hannā did not welcome the so-called Wider Middle East initiative, which is an American project for socio-political reform. He said that as soon as he realized that Israel was a part of this project, he rejected the whole idea “because Egypt and Israel cannot be in one boat". Furthermore, the initiative gives the United States the right to interfere in Egyptian internal affairs.

Nevertheless, Hannā thinks that the Arab –Israeli conflict cannot last forever. He thinks that at some point the either Arabs will eliminate Israel, and the Israelis will go back to Europe, or the Israelis will accept to turn to be a secular state living peacefully with Arabs, or Arabs will accept the prevalence of Israel over them. In any of the three hypothetical cases the conflict will come to an end.

In the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks, Hannā expected negative sentiments around the world due to the events and the subsequent declaration of a military campaign against the so-called “axis of evil” countries. Talking about international terrorism, Hannā said that it is a very dangerous issue. He believes that terrorism should not be combated only through the security approach, as it is not only a security issue. Terrorism has a very strong cultural dimension and the state cannot face it on its own; intellectuals and reformists should play a great role in combating terrorism with words. The struggle against this international phenomenon should be undertaken by security forces, intellectuals and common people in cooperation.

Missionary activity and Da^cwah:

Hannā called for the stagnation of practices of Christian missionary activity and Islamic da^cwah, saying that such practices increase the conflict between these two world religions, since believers on both sides see propagating their religious teachings as their duty. Thus, it turns into a severe competition between the two religions. In Egypt, when someone converts from Islam to Christianity, for example, Muslims overreact showing their anger; on the other hand, when someone converts from Christianity to Islam, Muslim communities celebrate his conversion. Also, one might see the negative consequences of this competition when Copts decide to build a church. What usually happens is that some Muslims try to prevent this by buying the land where the Copts wanted to build their church. Hannā described such practices as “uncivilized”, but one can also find some positive demonstrations of this competition, such as the building or hospitals and schools by both groups out of religious missionary motives.

He thinks that as long Egyptians are religious, and as long as each party feels some sort of religious superiority over the other party, such tensions will continue to exist, until the moment that both parties realize that religion is a private matter and that secularization of Egypt is the way, and when the severe clash between the Islamic world and the west calms down. At that moment Egypt will be civilized and “becomes like Europe”. Hannā believes Egyptians are already exerting an effort in this respect, for example by organising a shared Iftār during Ramadān where Muslims and Christians hold their Iftār together in a public place.

Hannā thinks that there is an old political conflict with a religious dimension between Islam and western Christianity, especially certain evangelical denominations that are influenced or even “penetrated” by Judaism to become what is called “Jewish Christianity”. This old conflict is a political conflict with a religious dimension in which holy texts play a considerable role. Hannā noted that in the Book of Revelation, for example, there is a prophecy about the rebirth of Israel. Belief in such a text is reflected in George W. Bush’s attitude towards Israel.²⁰ Hannā said that most interfaith dialogues are tackling the question superficially and avoiding the core, which is the holy texts with their exclusive nature. He therefore considers all of the participants in these interfaith dialogues “liars”, since they only stress the holy texts that boost peace and avoid the fanatical ones.

Hannā thinks that Egyptians in general are used to avoiding certain sensitive issues. Muslims are used to not touching on the Trinity issue when they talk to Christians, and Christians are used to not questioning the issue of the revelation of the Qur’ān or the effect of the Arabic language on our culture. This way, the common ground between Muslims and Christians in Egypt has been strengthened and common rituals between the two groups have been created. However, sometimes a particular cause raises the culture of fanaticism on one of the two sides. Hannā also thinks that there is a reversed relationship between the maturity of the civil society and the spread of fanaticism. He said that in states where the government controls political life, excludes political parties and unions from the process of decision-making, and oppresses its opposition, one finds people less involved in common activities, and hence dialogue between people holding different viewpoints hardly takes place.

Hannā believes that there is no church in the world that does not engage in politics, and it is a fact that Pope Shenouda III is the “strongest religious politician” in Egypt and the Middle East. He argues that Pope Shenouda indirectly dominates Coptic political life through other Copts who he encourages to join political parties and institutions. Hannā argued that the dominance of the Pope Shenouda on the Coptic political sphere does not work in Copts' favor, as it prevents other Coptic political figures from playing a role in Egyptian political life, which would be useful not only for Copts but for Egyptian political life in general. However, Hannā supported Pope Shenouda’s attitude towards the Palestinian cause, especially when the Pope barred Copts from visiting Jerusalem.

Hannā introduces himself as an “Egyptian and Arab in the first place, then as a Copt, an African, a Mediterranean, and a global person.”²¹ He said that he was decided on abandoning Egyptian church politics, and instead intended to concentrate his energy on strengthening political life in Egypt in general. He suggested introducing to the Egyptian school curriculum a course for both Muslim and Christian students, the focus of which would be the “encounter” between Islam and Christianity and their coexistence in Egypt for centuries.

Christians of the Orient:
Hannā wrote a series of articles in al-Ahrām newspaper on oriental Christians and the role they can and should play in bridging the gap between the West and the Islamic world. In his articles, Hannā gave an introduction to the history of Christianity in the Arab region, and mapped Christian oriental churches and groups, saying that most Arab peoples and even leaders do not know much about the different Christian groups and dominations in the Arab region: “Christian Arabs are peaceful ancient separate groups of people who have been living in the region and practicing their rituals – often – without difficulties, and their relations with the Muslims of the region are generally fraternal.” ²² Hannā also gave an overview of the various groups of Christians in the United States, pointing out that there is a fanatic group of Christians in the US that is affiliated to the Zionist movement, and a less fanatic group of Christians that must be less hostile towards the Islamic world, but we have not yet learned how to contact the latter group.

Hijāb:
With regard to the statements of Minister of Cultural Affairs Fārūq Husnī against the Islamic veil in 2006, Hannā argued that Husnī is a free Egyptian intellectual who has every right to express his opinion about different issues and phenomena in Egyptian society. At the same time, he said that every woman is free to wear what she thinks is suitable for her. However, exaggeration in the question of being covered or uncovered is not acceptable: “It is not acceptable for a girl to wander around the city streets wearing a swimming suit; however, it also provokes me to see a girl or a lady completely covered to the extent that she can hardly see her way through two little holes in the cover over her face.”²³ He praised the Coptic silence in the hijāb debate, saying that it is not a Coptic interest but a Muslim affair, and therefore Coptic silence is the wisest stance.

He said that the real problem of Egyptian society is that it is not embracing liberal thought, which is reflected in the reactions of people towards controversial issues. The hijāb is a personal matter and no-one has the right to impose or ban it, as it is a debatable issue and moreover asserts the idea of diversity.

Diversity is a keyword in Hannā’s writings. He insists on the diversity of cultures and religions in the world as a source of power, and the US is a clear example of a country that makes good use of the diversity inside its diversity.²⁴

Cartoons:
Commenting on the offensive cartoons depicting the prophet Muhammad which were published in a Danish newspaper in 2006, Hannā said that it is a waste of time to continue to debate issues with a religious nature. He argued that issues like poverty and wars deserve international attention more than religious dialogue: “Religion is a private matter. Christians believe that Jesus Christ is God’s son, and they are free to believe so…Muslims believe that Muhammad is a prophet, and they are free to believe so… Every religion has a dogmatic feature.”²⁵ Hence, he believes, criticism in this respect should be rationalized. He also reasserted the idea that the religious and cultural diversity of the world is what makes it brighter.

Furthermore, Hannā said that these cartoons showed a lack of common sense with regard to Islam in the West, and he stressed that these cartoons have offended all Egyptians including Copts who have coexisted with Egyptian Muslims for centuries: “The Orient has proved more civilized than the West as it pays more attention to the feelings of religious people.” Hannā rejected the idea of boycotting Danish goods, however, saying that Egyptians with their cultural and civilizational heritage that is goes back further than the establishment of Denmark as a state should not be influenced by a published article.²⁶

- “I Want a House” (1978)
- “Copts? Yes, but also Egyptians” (exact year of publication unknown)
- “Working Papers to Alleviate the Housing Problem in Egypt” (1985)
- “Clash between Civilizations and the Humane Alternative” (1995)
- “Politicians and Monks behind Bars” (1997)
- “Acceptance of the Other: Thought, Belief and Practice” (2005)