As soon as Egyptian media outlets begin to pursue news regarding facts connected to family problems or the problems of everyday life in a Coptic family, a climate of sectarian strife begins to loom in the horizon. This has happened many times and will certainly often happen again in the future, as long as circumstances remain primed for these kinds of problems. Egyptians have been engrossed over the past few days in following the issue of Mrs. Camelia Sehata, wife of the priest of Deir Mawas church in Upper Egypt, Tadeos Samaan, and it is as if the same scenario is repeating itself unchanged, save for the ending scene. The woman disappeared for unknown reasons, then news spread that she had fled her home with a Muslim man and married him. Thus dozens of inhabitants of the town went to Cairo, where the Coptic Cathedral is located, to protest. They demonstrated and raised banners demanding that the government search for the woman and save her, prosecute the man, stop targeting Copts and put an end to their oppression! During about five days, the old repeated story was directed anew. Yet the ending scene yesterday was different from every time before, as the woman appeared and it was revealed that she had been having disagreements with her husband the priest, and that she had left her home for that reason. Thus the protesters found themselves in the cathedral, having protested for no reason and demonstrated without evidence, and some media outlets found themselves to have been pouring oil on the fire. Nevertheless, these media outlets did not find that playing with fire goes against press and media ethics or against the rules of both profession and conscience. And the question remains, leaping to the forefront every time such stances repeat themselves: when will angry reactions on the part of the Copts to such incidents end and cease? Certainly the matter exceeds family disputes or love stories between Coptic girls and Muslim youths or vice versa, and there are problems, circumstances and types of behavior that make of every minor incident an enormous catastrophe. It is true that there are those who fish in murky waters and others who ride the wave of every incident, as well as conduct by the media that is arousing questions and suspicions. It is also true that there are, whether in the interior or abroad, parties that meddle and seek to exploit every incident to sow the seeds of strife. Yet it is true as well that the government has not taken all the measures and the steps that would ensure nipping any conflict in the bud. Moreover, the climate of fanaticism on both sides (Muslims and Copts) sometimes finds what feeds it in the behavior of men of religion. There is no need to speak of the demands of the Copts, because they are well known, and there is no need either to list the justifications of the ruling party, for not putting forward any Copts as candidates on its electoral lists for example, because such talk has been much repeated and has become tiresome. But the fact of the matter indicates that none of the parties realize how dangerous such a situation might become if it were to explode. It is ridiculous that when a crisis arises some government circles wonder about its reasons, or rush to accuse other parties of being responsible for it or being behind it, despite the fact that the solutions to such problems are simple, and the measures that need to be taken easier than many other measures which have been taken and which many segments of the population have found not to be in their interest. As for the scenes of men of religion on both sides at national or religious occasions (the month of Ramadan is nearly upon us), they fail to convince anyone but those who participate in these Iftar banquets, who go there to eat and to parade in front of lanterns and cameras.
