I do not believe that we should link the explosion that took place in front of the Church of the Virgin in the Zeitoun neighborhood in eastern Cairo last week, and the imminent visit by US President Barack Obama to the Egyptian capital, on 4 June. The explosion was not the first, and will certainly not be the last, as long as conditions that push some people into committing such acts remain unchanged. Also, former US presidents visited Cairo during the years of religious violence that struck Egypt in the 1990s, without being deterred by an explosion here or an assassination there. The measures taken to safeguard the foreign visitors to Egypt usually guarantee their safety, even if at the expense of citizens' comfort. More importantly, some people have forgotten that other explosions have taken place, in recent months. The most important of these is the one that struck al-Hussein area, near the Khan al-Khalili tourist quarter. The people behind that incident are still at large. As long as they remain free, such violent incidents will be repeated, until the perpetrators are apprehended, or until they achieve their objectives. Most likely, based on the initial information, a certain group, which might be an Islamist extremist organization, decided to detonate primitive explosive charges, with a strong impact, in various places, to undermine security. Or, they might be motivated by the desire to seek revenge against the regime for one reason or another, in response to a certain government measure or policy. Since the ceasefire initiative launched by the long-time leaders of al-Gamaa al-Islamiya 12 years ago, on 5 July 1997, fundamentalist violence gradually abated, until the same organization took a historic decision in March 1999, announcing that it was halting violence, renouncing the practice, and adopting peaceful dialogue as a means of change. Afterward, al-Gamaa explained the reasons for its peaceful transformation. There was an increasing conviction about the honest intentions of al-Gamaa leaders, and the initiative. Later on, members of al-Jihad, headed by the group's mufti and founder, Sayyed Imam al-Sharif, went in the same direction; they renounced violence and abandoned their old ideas. Despite these efforts and the peaceful transformation of al-Gamaa and al-Jihad, local, regional and international conditions continue to permit the formation of new cells and other organizations. These might have less expertise, but the impact of their operations is quite strong. From the nature of the two explosions, in al-Hussein and in front of the church, the goal has not been to demonstrate that the organization has the intention to spread terror, as long as the perpetrators remain free and the security organizations' ability to frustrate the formation of these organizations remains deficient, and the street is no longer safe, whether in front of a mosque, as in the case of al-Hussein, or in front of church, as in what happened in Zeitoun. The leading reason for the peaceful transformation by al-Gamaa al-Islamiya and al-Jihad is their realization that violence would not succeed in toppling the regime, and that the explosions and random assassinations robbed the fundamentalist ideology of sympathy on the part of those who were wounded by shrapnel, bombs and bullets. Despite this, “the explosion organization” continues to believe that it can achieve “the impossible notion” of shaking the regime via some explosions in various areas, without benefiting from the experience of the organizations that earlier used the same method, which was proven to be a failure. In general, some of the factors fomenting violence remain in effect, whether in Egypt or elsewhere, although justifying violence is rejected at all levels. However, we should continue to discuss the overt reasons, even if those responsible for the explosions are caught. Working on the prevention of a bombing is better and safer than seeing one taking place, and then catching the culprits. Certainly, violence, whether by fundamentalist or other groups, is a type of behavior that has its motives, irrespective of how valid or mistaken they are. This behavior is the symptom of a disease that requires treatment; society should be fortified against its spread before it once again turns into an epidemic, just like swine flu.
