Background:
Deputy Director, Khayrī Jambik from the Royal Institute for Inter-Faith Studies (RIIFS) discusses his institute‘s approach toward peace-building in the Near East, its latest dialogue programme, the general role of interfaith dialogue and other factors to be examined when looking at seemingly religious conflicts. Furthermore, Cornelis Hulsman and Volkhard Windfuhr discuss fundamentalist tendencies among Christian Egyptians. Journalist Volkhard Windfuhr explains in German the terrorist attack in front of the Egyptian Museum in downtown Cairo (18/09/1997), its repercussions on tourism, the fight against terrorism and religiously motivated violence in general.
For more information on the RIFS, please refer to the tape The Establishment of the Royal Institute for Interfaith Studies, Jordan
Side A:
Khayrī Jambik from the RIIFS introduces the dialogue programme’s view on the role of religion in conflict resolution through interfaith dialogue as a confidence-building measure. Meant by this is the studying of the process of peace-building in the Near East with emphasis on the role of religion in the conflict and its resolution with the dual objective of finding ways to enhance the process and developing a global paradigm on the role of religion in conflict resolution. Jambik states that although the Arab-Israeli conflict is essentially a national conflict, it takes on a religious significance. Further, he outlines points concerning the role of religion that need to be understood in order to understand the conflict. His institute treats the Arab-Israeli conflict also as a case study for more conflicts of similar kind. Using the example of the Israeli society, he demonstrates how religion can become the principal factor in mass mobilisation. The coming together of Jews, Christians and Muslims in the days after the Israeli-Jordan peace treaty was handicapped by recent tensions. Ultimately, dialogue can only be one instrument for the overall course of achieving better harmony among people. It is a necessary instrument, but not a sufficient one. In fact, while religious sentiments often set fuel to the fire, real political considerations consistently overcome supposedly fundamental religious or cultural differences, Jambik explains.
Volkhard Windfuhr states that the Egyptian Christian church is a fundamentalist one; most avoid contact with Muslims and reject a secular state. Hulsman disagrees that these Christians are the vast majority, but highlights variations according to both their social and geographical positions.
Jambik resumes and quotes a common wrong assumption that religion is the highest thing preoccupying people. Under the umbrella of humanity, religion is a subcomponent alongside with society, culture, nationalism, ethnicity, polity or folklore. He explains that the dialogue programme at the RIIFS continues to be keen in examining the phenomenon of the fear of peace in Arab and Israeli societies, in particular with emphasis on the religious-cultural, psychological strategic and economic components. The RIIFS provides in an innovative manner for the discussion of universal human dilemmas and challenges related in some way or another to religion. The dialogue programme, established in 1995, maintains and builds on the momentum of already initiated interaction among Jews, Christians and Muslims. Since its founding, the programme has pioneered dialogue activities and research projects with related institutions worldwide.
German journalist Volker Windfuhr states that a terrorist attack like the one in front of the Egyptian Museum in downtown Cairo (18/09/1997) has a deteriorating effect and was aimed at harming the government, as tourism has become Egypt’s most important foreign exchange earner. In general, Egyptian safety measures are quite good and he expects more secret service agents to be moving around popular tourist sites.
Side B:
Windfuhr is asked for the details of the terrorist attack and provides a detailed account of the happenings. Three terrorists had attacked a tourist bus carrying 33 persons (only Germans) that arrived from Hurghada. Two of them boarded the bus, one shooting around and the other throwing explosive devices. Before they fled, the third person threw explosive devices through one of the broken windows. Two of the group have been caught, while the third escaped in a white Peugeot, snatching a small girl.
At the time of the interview he has not been caught yet, but chances are good to get him. At the same time as the shooting began, another heavy exchange of shots occurred in the Egyptian Museum’s front garden, with details still being unkown. Nine German tourists died immediately and six are being treated in a hospital, two of which are seriously injured. The other seventeen passengers remained unharmed. Windfuhr believes that the Egyptian security authorities are seriously committed to securing touristic sites and hopes that tourism in Egypt does not collapse.
According to the German embassy, Egyptian security services arrived at the site 70-80 seconds after the attack began. For two years in a row, Germany was the number one tourists’ origin, but he does not assume it was a deliberate attack on Germans. When Windfuhr was asked about the sufficiency of Egyptian anti-terror efforts, he admits he does not know how to improve the fight against terrorism any more and believes that the terrorist cells’ inner core has been broken up, otherwise there would have been many more victims. Any religious preachers who promote terrorist ideas should be imprisoned. Instead, the Azhar shaykh Muḥammad al-Ghazālī for instance is highly praised by the Egyptian state although publicly declaring the writer Faraj Fūdah’s assassins as martyrs. Windfuhr does not believe that terrorism is contained in islamic thought and refers to Christian terrorist ideas. He rather believes that followers of a pervert, following the inhuman version of Islam should be stopped. Talking about religiously motivated violence and the moral right to fight one’s occupier, the examples of Israel and Ireland are briefly discussed.