What the Bishops Have Done and Said
For the past two decades, at least, there has been a notable tendency
for the so-called mainline Protestant denominations such as the Episcopal
Church of the United States (and its Anglican counterpart in England), the
Presbyterian Church, the United Church of Christ, and others to
identify the Palestinians as the victims of the Mideast conflict, and Israel as the
aggressor. This tendency is not always overt; in fact, it is seldom stated
as bluntly as this. But the tendency of the mainstream denominations to
blame the Israeli occupation of Palestinian territories as the fundamental
cause of the plight of the Palestinians and sometimes of the entire
conflict in the Middle East has very nearly acquired the status of an orthodox
tenet.
It has also become orthodoxy among secular liberals, who frequently
denounce Israel's expansion into Palestinian territories, its oppression and
humiliation of the Palestinians, its excessive use of military
force against terrorist outposts in West Bank and Gaza communities, and who
argue that Prime Minister Ariel Sharon is as culpable in the current tragic
violence as is PLO Chairman Yasser Arafat. A recent PBS Frontline special on
the Israeli-Palestinian conflict sometimes made the entire phenomenon seem
like nothing more than a grudge match between Sharon and Arafat: two old men
who had outlived their time.
Acting on the basis of a similar understanding, the three Episcopal
bishops Bishop M. Thomas Shaw, SSJE; Suffragan Bishop Barbara Harris; and
Bishop Roy F. Cederholm, Jr. staged a demonstration outside of the Israeli
consulate in Boston on October 30, 2001, holding signs proclaiming a
Muslim-Christian Alliance and denouncing Destruction in Bethlehem. (The Israeli
Defense Force had recently entered Bethlehem in search of the assassins of an
Israeli cabinet minister the week before.) At the time, Bishop Shaw explained
his understanding of what has been going on in the Middle East: "Today and
every day we stand with our Palestinian brothers and sisters who are
suffering violence in West Bank towns occupied by Israeli forces. There can be
no peace without justice, and the Palestinian people are victims of an injustice
that cannot be allowed to continue." (Boston Globe, 31 October 2001, B1)
In May of 2002, Bishop Shaw led a delegation of pilgrims to Israel and
the West Bank, where they met with private citizens and public officials,
including Yasser Arafat (but apparently no Israeli official). On his
return he held a press conference (reported on the Diocesan web site), in
which he acknowledged the fear that Israeli citizens experience as a result of
the suicide bombings. But he also had this to say about the Palestinians,
and about the conflict in general:
The Palestinians have suffered enormously from the occupation and the
military actions of the Israeli government against the infrastructure
of the Palestinian governmental authority. The physical destruction is severe
and extensive, but even that is not what most impressed me. The
Palestinian people I met seem to have lost hope. And they are angry at what the
Israelis have done. On both sides it seems to me that there is a sense of
hopelessness and little idea of how to move forward...[T]he mistrust between
the Palestinians and Israelis is so deep that I do not see a way for them
to live together without our support. The Israelis I spoke with do not trust
the Europeans to help. Therefore, we...need to bring pressure on our
elected leaders to insist that President Bush become engaged in the peace
process...Certainly, one of my primary goals now is to work toward changing
our government's stance toward the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. I hope to
meet with our elected leadership in the near future about what can be done
to bring peace to the region.
Bishop Shaw could easily have been echoing the words of the Palestinian
Latin Patriarch of Jerusalem, H. B. Michael Sabbah in his most recent
Pentecost message: "On this day of global Pentecost prayers, in a spirit of
solidarity and peace, we call for the establishment of a Palestinian State,
alongside the State of Israel, already existing 54 years. We call for an end to the
occupation of one peoples' lives and lands by another people, that is,
Palestinians under the control of Israelis." (emphasis added)
Why We Think The Bishops Are Wrong
The Bishop's historical memory is alarmingly short. It is certain
that the Palestinian people are suffering, but it is not because of the
so-called occupation. They are suffering because they are living in a combat
zone. And they are living in a combat zone because there is a war going on
which their own leaders started (or rather resumed, since it has been going
on with only rare pauses since the establishment of Israel in 1948), and which
the Palestinian people appear to support wholeheartedly. This war is known
as the second intifada, and it began in September, 2000, while peace
negotiations, under the rubric of the Oslo Accords, were still underway between the
Israeli government and the PLO.
The aim of the Palestinian war is not a separate Palestinian state on
the West Bank (as Fr. Sabbah and Bishop Shaw assert), but a single
Palestinian state from Jordan to the sea. There is some reason to believe that
this was once the view only of the radical minority. But recent public
opinion polls make it clear that a majority of Palestinians support the
destruction of the State of Israel, and consider suicide bombings and other forms of
murder to be acceptable means to this end. Is this radicalization the result
of the Israeli occupation? Hardly. Under the terms of the Oslo Agreement,
the Israeli Defense Forces withdrew from Arab villages and towns on the
West Bank, which were turned over to the day-to-day governance of the
Palestinian Authority, i.e., to the leadership of the PLO, with the full
cooperation of Hamas and other terrorist organizations. Terrorists ran the schools,
the official (and only) Palestinian television network, the police, and the
courts. We know what use the PLO made of this unprecedented authority:
they raised a new generation of haters, from whom the suicide bombers have
been recruited. That is why the bombers have come almost entirely from the
very villages, neighborhoods, and refugee camps that have been controlled by
the Palestinian Authority since the mid-1990s.
Because Palestinian hatred of Israel came before the ocupation, the
occupation cannot be the cause of that hatred. The occupation is
clearly the result of the Arab hatred of Israel, and of Jews generally, which has
taken the form of three wars (1947, 1967, and 1973) and a 50-year campaign
of terrorist violence against Israeli civilians. This campaign has
involved over 15,000 separate attacks since 1947, claiming the lives of XXX Israeli
citizens and wounding nearly X times that many. (In comparative terms, this
would be the equivalent of XX American lives.) During the Six-Day War in
1967, Israel seized the West Bank from Jordan and the Golan Heights bordering
Syria, and took Gaza and the entire Sinai Peninsula from Egypt. This was a
military strategy meant to deny Arab armies easy access to Israeli population
centers.
Israel immediately offered land for peace, and this offer was just
as immediately rejected by all Arab the governments involved. In 1973
Arab armies invaded for a third time, and again Israel was victorious. That
victory led ultimately to the peace agreeement with Egypt, and the
return of the Sinai to Egyptian control. But no peace offers were forthcoming
from the organizations responsible for the terror campaign against Israeli
civilians and loosely organized under the leadership of Yasser Arafat and the
PLO.
The Palestinians have lost hope, and have for this reason become
desperate. In order for peace to come, they must see some sign of progress. This
is an entirely plausible notion that is unfortunately contradicted by the
experience of the Oslo peace accords. In 1993 the Palestinians got the hope they
were presumably looking for: Israel agreed to let the PLO, its leaders and
militamen, return to the West Bank and Gaza from their exile in
Tunisia. Furthermore, the Oslo Accords committed the Israeli government to full
cooperation with the new Palestinian Authority, which would receive
financial subsidies from Israel. In return for the PLO?s agreement to a peaceful
resolution of all issues between the two sides, Israel agreed to
withdraw its military forces from Arab villages and towns. But the result of this
hopeful peace process was a ratcheting up of the terror campaign to
unprecedented levels, culminating in the full-scale warfare of the
so-called Al-Aqsa intifada in September 2000.
It should by now be clear to everyone that the only hope for a
peaceful resolution of the crisis in the Middle East is for the Arabs to give up
their murderous and suicidal determination to destroy Israel and drive the
Jews into the sea. This will require all who hope to make a constructive
contribution to the peace process to be firm in their determination to
reject the PLO and all that it stands for. Encouraging the Palestinians in
their belief that Israel is the cause of their problems will only encourage
more violence. Furthermore, such coddling of terrorist leaders such as
Arafat postpones the time when a genuinely moderate leadership might emerge.
To accept, as the Bishop has done, the terrorist version of Middle East
history in which the Jews are the aggressors, and Palestinians the passive
victims is to collude with Palestinian self-delusion. And as with alcoholics
and drug addicts, collusion only empowers the underlying pathology and prevents
healing.
We believe that the Bishop and all Christians eager to play a
constructive role in this conflict should support the United States government?s
call for reform of Palestinian institutions and the rejection of the terrorist
leaders of the past. Israel has made clear its commitment to continuing
negotiations, but has also made it clear that there is no hope in continuing to
negotiate with Yasser Arafat and the PLO. Given the continuing campaign of
terror waged by the PLO against Israel and its citizens, it is naive to expect the
PLO to change. The Palestinians must, for their own good, see that there is no
hope in terror, and that the world has run out of patience with the Arab
refusal to accept the right of Jews to live in peace with their Arab neighbors.
My friend, I do not accuse you of deliberate anti-Semitism. I know you feel, as I do, a deep love of truth and justice and a revulsion for racism, prejudice, and discrimination. But I know you have been misled -- as others have been -- into thinking you can be 'anti-Zionist' and yet remain true to these heartfelt principles that you and I share. Let my words echo in the depths of your soul: When people criticize Zionism, they mean Jews -- make no mistake about it. - Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. |
|