Why is the Obama administration downplaying the plight of the Egyptian Copts?

Howdy, Marwan, good to meet you. I agree that every nation has the right to determine its own course and solve its own problems. That being said, your response would answer a question of what you think of interventionist US foreign policy, but it doesn't answer the question that was asked.

The Obama administration did indeed campaign on a platform plank of noninterventionism, but it has practiced the opposite since it took power, and it has asserted a particular interest in Egypt since the spring revolt and justified intervention with arguments of humanitarian concern. Its avoidance behavior on the issue of violence against the Copts is not explained by saying that staying out of the internal affairs of other nations is the best policy, nor would it be by saying (incorrectly) that the administration follows that as a general rule. It does not, and clearly does not sincerely think it should, so the question remains: why?

I don't think it should be part of the Obama foreign policy to intervene in the state of another. The Copts are an intrinsic part of the Egyptian state and are Egyptions. The society will sort out their problems in good time; what is actually hapening now is part of the aftermath of the Egyptian Revolution, there is bound to be chaos, there are many problems that still need to be sorted out, things to do with unemplyment, wages, production that is affecting the whole of society and the copts are only a part of that.

I cant really gove you an answer,but what I can give you is a way to a solution, that is you have to find the anglde that you relate to or peaks your interest. A good paper is one that people get drawn into because it reaches them ln some way.As for me WW11 to me, I think of the holocaust and the effect it had on the survivors, their families and those who stood by and did nothing until it was too late.