Friday, May 28, 2010
[The following, by Will Spotts, is crossposted from The PC(USA) on Israel and Palestine.]
The Middle East Study Committee of the PC(USA) was given a rather ambitious mandate:
"The study should include an evaluation of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.)'s mission and relationships, including an assessment of the future for the Christian presence and witness in the Middle East, an overview of the complex interactions among religions, cultures, and peoples that characterize the region, an analysis of U.S. policies that impact the area, and steps to be taken with our partners in the Middle East and the United States to foster justice, improve interfaith relations, and nurture the building of peace toward A SECURE AND VIABLE FUTURE FOR ALL."
They had two whole years to accomplish these modest goals. In order for the Middle East Study Committee of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) to have produced anything even remotely helpful two things would have been necessary to start: the members of the committee would need to have represented "a broad spectrum of viewpoints" (as specified by the General Assembly instruction that created the committee), and the information sources used by the committee would need to have been accurate and broadly based - covering a wide range of perspectives.
Let's see how they did.
The 218th General Assembly placed only one requirement on composition of the Middle East Study Committee:
The 218th General Assembly (2008) requests that the Moderators of the 218th, 217th, and 216th General Assemblies (2008), (2006), and (2004) select a nine-member committee from a broad spectrum of viewpoints from PC(USA) members.
The first question is this: how broad are the opinions of Presbyterian members? It really depends on the questions asked. Significantly more members and elders opposed the PC(USA)'s phased, selective divestment policy instituted in 2004 than favored it. Significant numbers (30%) had no opinion on this policy. The greater the respondent's reported awareness of the policy, the more likely he or she was to oppose it. At the same time, majorities of Presbyterians agree that, "the PC(USA) should shift its investment funds away from such corporations if it is unable to dissuade them from doing things that directly or indirectly SUPPORT VIOLENCE against Israeli or Palestinian civilians (as it already does from corporations involved in tobacco, military-related production, and human rights violations)." This was consistent with the stand of the 2006 General Assembly. It is, however, inconsistent with the modified stance of the 2008 General Assembly in which the MRTI report managed to include the tag "construction and maintenance of settlements or Israeli-only roads in East Jerusalem and the West Bank, the Israeli military occupation of Palestinian territory, and construction of the Separation Barrier as it extends beyond the 1967 "Green Line" into Palestinian territories". Majorities of Presbyterians favor a two-state solution. Majorities of Presbyterians oppose the expansion of settlements. When asked to rate the importance of maintaining relationships between Presbyterians and the US Jewish community, 76% of member and 77% of elders considered it "important" or "very important". It would only be a slight oversimplification to say that most Presbyterian members tended to be thoroughly moderate and well within the mainstream of political discourse.
The Middle East Study Committee consisted of nine members and was assisted by four PC(USA) employees.
The four employees were:
Christian Iosso, coordinator of the Advisory Committee on Social Witness Policy. The ACSWP's record is one of thorough anti-Israel bias over numerous years. This is well-documented elsewhere, but it is readily apparent when one reads the 2003 and 2004 ACSWP reports (and numerous other recommendations) at the General Assemblies or when one peruses the ACSWP's former publication, Church & Society.Rev. Victor Makari, oordinator for the Middle East, Asia Minor and the Jinishian Memorial Program for the General Assembly Council, is notable for his Mammon comment in accounting for Jewish reaction to the 2004 divestment decision.
PC(USA) Mission Co-Worker Douglass Dicks has provided an email list from which he culls every possible (English language) criticism of Israel appearing in Middle Eastern, European, and decidedly left-wing US publications, and forwards them to Presbyterians as if these were accurate representations of the conflict.
Rev. Kerry Clements is the director of Communication, Development, and Technology for the Office of the General Assembly.
Minister members included:
Rev. Susan R. Andrews, moderator of the 215th General Assembly (2003) has been an outspoken supporter of the 2004 divestment action, and was influential in misrepresenting the decision of the 217th General Assembly that literally removed the 2004 divestment instruction.Rev. John Huffman publicly endorsed the 2004 divestment decision.
Rev. Rebecca Reyes - at the time of the appointment her public opinions on Israel and Palestine were unknown.
Rev. Marthame Sanders - a former PC(USA) mission worker in the West Bank - whose website in 2003 and 2004 recommended a blanket boycott of Israeli goods.
Rev. Ronald L. Shive opposed the 2008 overture calling on the PC(USA) to be non-partisan.
Rev. John W. Wimberly was the only member of this committee known to have opposed to the 2004 divestment policy and to have advocated for greater fairness. Rev. Wimberly resigned in protest at the one-sided makeup of the Middle East Study Committee and the direction it desired to take.
Elder members included:
Frederic W. Bush is a professor emeritus of Fuller Theological Seminary who has participated in several FOSNA sponsored events.Nahida H. Gordon has publicly accused Israel of ethnic cleansing.
Lucy Janjigian is an artist who has been outspoken on her criticisms of Israel.
Byron Shafer replaced Rev. John Wimberly on the MESC and provided the only dissenting vote.
The net result here is that the chosen committee members do not reflect the diversity of the opinions of PC(USA) members on the subject. By a margin of at least seven to two, the committee was predisposed toward a particular outcome. The PC(USA) support staff for the committee, by a margin of at least three to one was already publicly committed to (or against) one particular side in the disputes between Israelis, Palestinians, and neighboring states. Yet, as glaringly obvious as that lack of diversity remains, it seems to be lost on the chair of the committee. Rev. Ron Shive opined, "This report reflects the extensive, hard work of the study committee and the wealth of experience each member brought to our discussions. Given the interest in this topic and the diversity of our backgrounds, our conversations were always lively. And yet, we managed to have consensus on the bulk of our report and recommendations."
The Middle East Study Committee believes (or at least says of itself) that:
"The methodology for the study has been to engage as many representatives from a spectrum of perspectives on the Israel-Palestinian conflict and to embrace the witness and concerns of our Christian partners in the region. This approach involved conversations both in the United States and in the Middle East; with both Israelis and Palestinians; Jews, Muslims, and Christians. We have worked diligently to listen to the multitude of voices that are crying aloud in the midst of the Middle East conflict."
It is true that the authors of the MESC report only said "A SPECTRUM" of perspectives, and it is true "that limited time, resources, and other circumstances prevented us from engaging some voices." But they claim to have "worked diligently to listen to the multitude of voices that are crying aloud in the Middle East conflict." So the natural question: with whom did they meet? They provided a listing in appendix 1. I urge you to carefully examine this document.
All told, the MESC reports that it met with more than 50 individuals in addition to several larger groups. I realize, of course, that the names will be unfamiliar to many readers. Yet a pattern emerges: By my count, the Middle East Study Committee met with 43 people who were - either personally or representing groups who were - at a minimum, highly critical of Israel. I must say categorically that many of these have interesting things to say; committee members may have gleaned considerable information from these contacts. Some of them have displayed restraint in their public criticisms; others have tended toward the vitriolic, the dubious, and sometimes extreme. The Middle East Study Committee had 3 contacts that are difficult to evaluate and could easily be regarded as neutral. The Middle East Study Committee also met with 9 people favorable to Israel.
43 pro-Palestinian (often anti-Israel, sometimes more extreme) TO 3 neutral TO 9 pro-Israel.
The problem here is not that the Middle East Study Committee met with any of the persons listed. The problem is that their meetings were overwhelmingly weighted in one direction. While the MESC met with ICAHD, JVP, Rabbis for Human Rights, and B'tselem, and listened attentively to all of their criticisms of Israel, it did not meet with any equivalent Palestinian organization that leveled the same degree of critical focus on Palestinian society. While the MESC met with numerous representatives of Sabeel, and with a Christian Peacemaker Team in Hebron, it did not meet with any equivalent organization taking the contrary viewpoint.
One of the 9, Rabbi Ed Rettig of the American Jewish Committee in Israel described his meeting with this committee:
"[T]hey listened to nothing... When interlocutors like me try to lay out for them that what is taking place [in Israel] is not in a cartoon but involves real people living real lives and facing real threats and having real rights ... they did not open their minds and hearts to listen, which is terribly disappointing."
Yes, they met with a lot of people. Yes, they traveled. What the MESC study committee failed to encounter over the course of two years was diversity of opinion.
Once those three determinations were made - a committee membership with pre-existing (and publicly stated) opinions heavily weighted in one direction, support personnel sharing that bias (some of whom have an impressive record of anti-Israel animus), and a series of contacts heavily skewed to one side - the Middle East Study Committee became an exercise in futility, an enterprise predestined to fail at its mandate from start to finish. There was simply no way that a group of people with that set of pre-existing opinions, using that set of resources, could possibly achieve the outcome desired by the 2008 General Assembly.
Will Spotts
Contacts of the Middle East Study Committee:
These NGO's have very public records of intense criticism of the State of Israel.
- Speaking for Rabbis for Human Rights: Rabbi Navah Hefetz
- Speaking for B'tselem: Yael Stein
- Speaking for the Israeli Committee Against House Demolition: Angela Godfrey-Goldstein
- Speaking for PASSIA: Dr. Mahdi Abdel Hadi
- Speaking for Churches for Middle East Peace: Ambassador Warren Clark
- Speaking for the Sabeel Ecumenical Liberation Society Center: Rev. Ian Alexander, Nora Carmi, Cedar Duaybis, Samia Khoury
These church groups have public records on Israel/Palestine - that, while variable, could hardly be construed as favorable to Israel:
- Representing (affiliated with) the Middle East Council of Churches: General Secretary Guirgis Saleh, Wafa Goussous, Archbishop Boulos Matar
- Representing members of the Middle East Council of Churches: His Beatitude Igantius IV Hazim (Greek Orthodox Patriarch of Anticoch and All of the East), His Beatitude Gregorios III (Greek Catholic Patriarch of Antioch and All of the East), HE Metropolitan Elias Audeh (Archbishop, Greek Orthodox Church of Antioch and All of the East), Rev. Boutrus Zaour (Evangelical Church of Damascus)
- Representing the World Council of Churches: Chris Ferguson
- Representing the Lutheran World Federation: Rev. Mark Brown
- Representing the National Council of Churches of Christ of the USA: Archbishop Viken Aykazian
- Representing the National Evangelical Synod of Syria and Lebanon: Rev. George Mourad, Rev. Fadi Dagher
- Representing the Office of International Justice and Peace, U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops: Dr. Stephen M. Colecchi
- Representing the Episcopal Church as the National Cathedral's Canon for Global Justice and Reconciliation, Rev. Canon John L. Peterson
- Representing the Episcopal Diocese of Jerusalem and the Middle East, Rev. Canon Robert Edmunds, Rev. Fa'eq Haddad, Rev. Fadi Diab
- Representing the Evangelical Lutheran Church of Jordan and the Holy Land: Pastor Samer Azar
These individuals have taken public stands highly critical of Israel:
- Bill Somplatsky-Jarman is the PC(USA)'s associate for Mission Responsibility through Investment.
- Dr. Marc Braverman is listed as "clinical psychologist and author, executive director of the Holy Land Peace Project." He has also served on ICAHD's board of Directors and Sabeel's advisory committee. He has argued that Israeli actions create antisemitism.
- Dr. Noura Erakat is listed as "adjunct professor, International Human Rights Law in the Middle East, Georgetown University." She has also worked for the US Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation. Interestingly, Dr. Erakat appears in the PC(USA)'s photo directory participating in an Israel/Palestine Mission Network event - reading "one of Rachel Corrie's email messages ... Erakat spearheaded the development of 'Rachel's Words.'"
- Dr. Mary Mikheal is listed as "president, Near East School of Theology, Beirut, Lebanon." She has also referred to Hezbollah as a resistance group - suggesting it was formed to rid Lebanon of Israeli occupation.
- Rev. Dr. Riad Jarjour is listed as "general secretary, Arab Group for Christian-Muslim Relations". Dr. Jarjour has accused Israel of genocide and colorfully refered to Sharon as the grinning servant of the Prince of Darkness.
- His Beatitude Fouad Twail is listed as "Patriarch, Latin (Roman Catholic) Patriarchate of Jerusalem". He has also spoken out against 60 years of occupation - indicating, of course, that he objects to the existence of the State of Israel.
- HE Avraham Burg is listed as "Former MK and Speaker of the Knesset and Cabinet Minister and author". His book, The Holocaust Is Over; We Must Rise From Its Ashes, is quoted favorably in the MESC report and used as part of the basis for the MESC claim "This sense of historical victimization creates for some Israelis a compensatory reflex to choose power and armament; to reject the claims and critique of others; and the adoption of a philosophy that the "end justifies the means," even if that means the loss of human rights, life, and the dignity of others." [This claim is made by the MESC - not Burg, but his book is used to support it.]
- Dr. Judith Harel is listed as "Information and Advocacy Unit, UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs". Among other things, Harel speaks of the IOF - Israeli Occupation Force, and has called for a boycott of Israel.
- Rabbi Na'amah Kelman is listed as dean, Hebrew Union College. Rabbi Kelman also serves on the board of Rabbis for Human Rights.
- Dr. Tawfiq Nasser is listed as chief executive officer, Augusta Victoria Hospital. Augusta Victoria Hospital is operated by the Lutheran World Federation. Dr. Nasser has spoken at several Sabeel conferences.
- Rueben Brigety is listed as director of the Sustainable Security Program, Center for American Progress. He was also a researcher with Human Rights Watch.
- Dr. Paul Haidostian is listed as president, Haigazian University.
- HE. Metropolitan Mor Theophilos George Saliba is listed as archbishop of Mount Lebanon, Syrian Orthodox Church. He signed the Middle East Oriental Common Declaration - which said, among other things, "A comprehensive and permanent peace with justice is achieved when the Palestinians are given full right for an independent state having Jerusalem as its capital, when the occupation by Israel of the West Bank, Jerusalem, Gaza, Golan Heights and Shebaa Farms is ended. The attempts to change the demographic structure of Jerusalem aiming at its Judiazation, ignoring the international agreements, building more settlements, confiscating lands, military aggression against the Palestinian people, refusal of the return of the refugees and besieging of the people in their towns and villages, etc., all these will widen the circle of violence"
Officials of governments often opposed to Israel:
- HE Ambassador Riyad Mansour, permanent observer of the Palestine Authority to the United Nations
- His Excellency Senator Akel Biltaji, former minister of Tourism and Antiquities and special advisor to His Majesty King Abdullah II
- Madame Colette Khoury, cultural advisor to President Bashar Al-Assad
Others (difficult to evaluate):
Representatives of organizations:
- Dr. Joseph Jabbra, president, Lebanese American University.
- Father Nabil Haddad, the Jordanian Interfaith Co-existence Research Center
Government officials:
- HE Ambassador Thomas Goldberger, director, Office of Israel and Palestinian Affairs, Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs, U.S. Department of State. [Goldberger is impossible to classify as he has taken positions that are all over the map. This is probably a function of his role.]
Sources favorable to the Israeli position:
- Representing the Interreligious Coordinating Council in Israel: Rabbi Dr. Ron Kronish, Ophir Yarden, Rabbi Shelton Donnell
- Representing the Jerusalem Center for Jewish Christian Relations: Daniel Rossing
- Representing the Jewish Community (Israeli Settlement Association) of Hebron: David Wilder
- Representing the American Jewish Committee, Jerusalem: Rabbi Edward Rettig
- Stuart Schoffman, senior fellow, The Shalom Hartman Institute, Jerusalem [moderate left of center - favors a two state solution, opposed divestment.]
- Mark Pelavin, associate director, Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism
- HE Ambassador Daniel Carmon, deputy permanent representative of Israel to the United Nations