It is disheartening to see the Church of England being manipulated in support of false emotional and ethical stands.
What do we call a country that had a 100,000 strong and prosperous Jewish community at the turn of the 20th century, that participated in all facets of its life, fully integrated in the political, social, business, industry and arts life, and factored in its progress far more than their numbers suggest; only to be reduced to less than 20 (all over 70 years of age) at the turn of the 21st century?
We call that Modern day Egypt. It is a well known "fact" that 800,000 Jews from Arab countries have seen their numbers dwindle to less than 20,000 in the same period. And what do we call that, if not "Ethnic cleansing" of the worst kind.
And in the article below, we see and read that it is Israel and her policies that are judged as "apartheid" and "racist crimes against humanity including ethnic cleansing [and] acts of genocide." Israel, a country that allows its Arab citizens the right of suffrage, includes their own representatives in the Knesset and extends equal rights under the law to all its citizens.
It is akin to libel when such inflammatory rhetoric is allowed to be aired and by responsible organizations, when the facts of the matter more than refute their stand. I guess saying it long enough and repeating it ad infinitum on the Internet gives that pap, unfortunately, legitimacy that should have been preserved for facts and not fiction.
Feb. 26, 2006 1:56 | Updated Feb. 26, 2006 19:00
The radicals behind the Anglican Church
By SARAH MANDEL
Last week, British chief rabbi Jonathan Sacks came out strongly against the Church of England for its vote for "morally responsible investment" (MRI) in Israel (a.k.a. divestment). In response church leaders stated that the vote was merely advisory. The archbishop of Canterbury, who heads the Anglican Church and supported the measure, claimed it was not a vote for divestment and that he remained committed to "a continued personal engagement with the Jewish communities in Israel and in the United Kingdom."
If there is a lesson from this debacle, it is that attention must be paid to Palestinian NGOs, rather than assuming that such groups are too blatantly biased to influence mainstream institutions.
The Sabeel Ecumenical Liberation Theology Center, for example, spearheaded the international campaign for divestment. This group claims to pursue "a spirituality based on justice, peace, nonviolence, liberation and reconciliation." But it is, in fact, an extremist Palestinian organization that pays lip service to a two-state solution while promoting the "right of return" for all Palestinians, which is a euphemism for the destruction of Israel as a Jewish state.
Led by Naim Ateek, Sabeel brands Israel as "an apartheid state." His 2001 Easter message continued with the language of demonization, such as decrying the "Israeli government crucifixion system... operating daily."
Sabeel's activities are a clear example of the "Durban Strategy," a campaign to undermine and delegitimize the State of Israel by falsely comparing it with apartheid South Africa and pursuing boycotts and divestment as a response. This process began at the Durban World Conference against Racism in 2001, where NGOs adopted a declaration condemning Israel's "racist crimes against humanity including ethnic cleansing [and] acts of genocide."
The Durban strategy turns the concept of morally responsible investment, or at least how that concept is billed to many well-meaning people, on its head. Rather than constructively opposing particular government policies, while condemning terrorism and recognizing the right of self-defense against it, these groups are promoting a wholesale rejection of the legitimacy of the State of Israel itself.
SO HOW does an obscure and extreme NGO like Sabeel get the ear of the Church of England? It turns out that Bishop John Gladwin, who is a member of the Church Synod that voted for MRI, is a patron of Sabeel UK and also chair of the Board of Trustees of Christian Aid. Christian Aid is a major British charity, and as its head, Gladwin is well placed to influence the wider church on questions regarding the Israeli-Arab conflict. Gladwin is one of the few bishops who has vocally defended the Synod vote despite Archbishop Rowan Williams's public backtracking.
The church's resolution urged its members to visit "recent house demolitions" and educate themselves about the situation through first-hand experience. No doubt Gladwin or Ateek will be happy to arrange a tour with the Israel Committee against House Demolitions (ICAHD), a partner and ally of both Sabeel and Christian Aid.
This EU-funded NGO focuses primarily on political and ideological denunciations of Israel, including active promotion of "apartheid" rhetoric and justification of terrorism. Like Sabeel, it is driven by a radical anti-Israel ideology that exploits humanitarian and human rights claims to pursue these goals. The "evidence" that the leaders of both NGOs present entirely erases the context of conflict, incitement and terrorism. ICAHD's international reputation has been significantly enhanced by its association with Christian Aid's youth Web site, pressureworks.org, which publicizes and endorses its campaigns.
This demonstrates the power of the NGO network. Unchecked and unaccountable, some NGOs profess humanitarian goals while their actions contribute to conflict rather than peace. In a similar manner, Palestinian NGOs and their allies were able to get a small group of officials of the British Association of University Teachers to adopt a short-lived boycott of Israeli universities. In that case, the wider AUT membership quickly recognized that claims presented in support of this campaign constituted gross distortions, and revoked the resolutions. Such moral clarity still evades the church, however.
At a time of growing anti-Semitism in Europe, and the election of a Hamas leadership committed to Israel's destruction, it would be nice to believe that the Church of England did not mean to subscribe to the rejectionist beliefs of Sabeel and others when it passed its resolution. However, it has raised the profile and international status of Sabeel, as the leader of the MRI campaign; and promoted the Durban strategy to undermine Israel's legitimacy. If we are going to question why the big fish continue to rally against Israel, we should start by looking at the small ones.
The writer is associate editor of NGO Monitor, at www.ngo-monitor.org.http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1139395488268&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
Original content is Copyright by the author 2006. Posted at ZioNation-Zionism and Israel Web Log, http://www.zionism-israel.com/log/archives/00000011.html where your intelligent and constructive comments are welcome. Disributed by ZNN list. Subscribe by sending a message to ZNNfirstname.lastname@example.org. Please forward by e-mail with this notice, cite this article and link to it. Other uses by permission only.
Constructive comments, including corrections, are welcome. Do not use this space for spam, publishing articles, self promotion, racism, anti-Zionist propaganda or character defamation. Inappropriate comments will be deleted. See our Comment policy for details. By posting here, you agree to the Comment policy.