Why do some Egyptians choose to settle their scores with the ruling regime on American soil? The question arises on the occasion of President Hosni Mubarak's visit to Washington that started yesterday. In fact, there was a race between the Egyptian Embassy and Egyptian opposition members residing in the US - the majority of whom consisting of Copts- to secure the areas close to Mubarak's residence or the areas through which he will pass. As usual, the Copts living in the Diaspora waited for the opportunity provided by Mubarak's visit to lift their banners, and repeat their chants and slogans that all express their usual and well known demands, or to express their opposition to decisions or policies that they see as affecting Copts in Egypt. Meanwhile, the embassy sought to guarantee that behavior of this type would not disturb the visit, and resorted to various means to avoid the organization of demonstrations, whether through direct contact with leading Copts in America, or by renting sidewalks and squares near the residence of the president, or those through which his motorcade will pass. Another question that arises involves the extent of coordination between Copts in Egypt and those abroad; do those in the Diaspora have demands that are different from those called for, by those in Egypt? Does the extent of freedoms outside the country permit something that cannot be discussed or demanded inside the country? Or can demonstrations during visits be considered political blackmail? In fact, Mubarak's visit to Washington comes after more than a five year break in these visits to America, for reasons that are known. It is interesting that the actions by the Copts of the Diaspora meanwhile, are taking place at a time when there's an absence of sectarian tension in Egypt that had existed in the past. This led some to believe that requesting foreign assistance is a method used by some Egyptian opposition groups, whether or not there are actual reasons for disputing with the Egyptian regime, and that trying to reap political gains sometimes without considering (Egypt's) higher national interests - even when all opposition supporters employ the slogan of preserving these interests. In general, groups in the US will feed and encourage these scenes, and seek to see them take place. They can then be used to exert pressure or win compliance for American demands. In this regard, it remains that the Egyptian government must play certain roles that go beyond an attempt to prevent such demonstrations so that the visit can go smoothly, to searching for the reasons behind these demonstrations and eliminating them. Meanwhile, opposition groups outside the country, and most of all, the Copts of the Diaspora, should realize the extent of popular anger over seeking foreign backing, and the extent of popular rejection of foreign pressure in Egypt, even if these involve freedoms, or achieving an interest of the Egyptian people - or a segment of it. They should also realize that this position does not change with the change in a US administration, and whether the pressure is coming from Bush or Obama, which regardless is still pressure, and nothing else. Furthermore, while there might be numerous aspects of protests taking place inside Egypt, and moving from one place to another, and while their demands might break off into political ones or ones involving sub-national groups or communities, the issue of settling scores abroad remains striking and unpopular among the different segments of Egyptian society. This is irrespective of the anger of official circles over these protests abroad as the government wants no protests at all to begin with, whether inside or outside the country. In the end, the Copts still have brethren within Egypt and a church that the Egyptians respect, and a country that Pope Shenouda said about it that it lives in them, and not just that the Copts live in it.
