Palestinians Experience MORE TERRIFYING than Apartheid

Dear Friend,

I first met (Rev) Allan Boesak when Western Theol. Seminary in Holland, MI, brought him to town to discuss the Belhar Confession in the mid-1980s. He was one of the writers of the Belhar and was asking for US help in the struggle against the South African (Dutch) apartheid administration of de Clerk and company.

There was a willingness to engage him in conversation. Some Reformed (Dutch) Christians in Western Michigan even were willing to talk with our Dutch cousins about dismantling the apartheid system, even advocating boycotts, divestments and sanctions against the existing government there. (Not everyone was on board with it in Western Michigan, I'm sure you understand!)

The Middle East Monitor (below) asked Rev. Boesak to compare South African apartheid with what is happening to Palestinians in the state of Israel (including the West Band and Gaza). Here is his response: The Palestinian version is "MORE TERRIFYING".

Kairos Palestine is an effort by Palestinian Christians to learn from the anti-apartheid Kairos South Africa experience. Many of our friends have been (or are now) in South Africa, learning how the native Africans peacefully (without a lot of violence) were able to end the apartheid state in South Africa and bring equality to all the inhabitants of that beautiful land.

Those of us in FPI (Friends of Palestinians and Israelis) are now investigating what an alliance with Kairos Palestine would mean here in the US. Stay tuned.



The Palestinians Experience "MORE TERRIFYING" than South African Apartheid



Dr Hanan Chehata interviews Revd Allan Boesak

MEMO – Middle East Monitor
17 November 2011


The Reverend Allan Aubrey Boesak is a veteran of the South African
anti-apartheid struggle. He is the former president of the World Alliance of
Reformed Churches, and is a signatory of the South African Christian
response to the Kairos Palestine Document. This year he gave expert
testimony at the Russell Tribunal on Palestine session in Cape Town, at
which he spoke to MEMO’s Hanan Chahata.



Hanan Chahata: You were one of the signatories of the South African
Christian response to the Kairos Palestine Document. In this you said that
the Palestinian experience of apartheid is “in its practical manifestation
even worse than South African apartheid”. Can you explain what you meant by
this?



Allan Boesak: It is worse, not in the sense that apartheid was not an
absolutely terrifying system in South Africa, but in the ways in which the
Israelis have taken the apartheid system and perfected it, so to speak;
sharpened it. For instance, we had the Bantustans and we had the Group Areas
Act and we had the separate schools and all of that but I don’t think it
ever even entered the mind of any apartheid planner to design a town in such
a way that there is a physical wall that separates people and that that wall
denotes your freedom of movement, your freedom of economic gain, of
employment, and at the same time is a tool of intimidation and
dehumanisation. We carried passes as the Palestinians have their ID
documents but that did not mean that we could not go from one place in the
city to another place in the city. The judicial system was absolutely skewed
of course, all the judges in their judgements sought to protect white
privilege and power and so forth, and we had a series of what they called
“hanging judges” in those days, but they did not go far as to openly,
blatantly have two separate justice systems as they do for Palestinians [who
are tried in Israeli military courts] and Israelis [who are tried in civil,
not military courts]. So in many ways the Israeli system is worse.



Another thing that makes it even worse is that when we fought our battles,
even if it took us a long time, we could in the end muster and mobilise
international solidarity on a scale that enabled us to be more successful in
our struggle. The Palestinians cannot do that. The whole international
community almost conspires against them. The UN, which played a fairly
positive role in the struggle against apartheid in South Africa, takes the
disastrous position of not wanting to offend its strong members like the
United States who protect Israel. So even in the UN, where international law
ought to be the framework wherein all these things are judged, where
international solidarity is not an assumption but is supposed to be the very
foundation upon which the UN builds its views on things and its judgements
as to which way it goes, the Palestinians don’t even have that.



Palestinians are mocked in a way that South Africans were not. In a sense,
the UN tried in our case to follow up on its resolutions to isolate the
apartheid regime. Here, now, they make resolutions against Israel one after
the other and I don’t detect even a sense of shame that they know there is
not going to be any follow up. Under Reagan the United States was pretty
blatant in its so called constructive engagement programme and in its
support for the white regime in South Africa, but what the United States is
doing now in the week that UNESCO took the decision to support the
Palestinian bid for a seat in the United Nations, to withdraw all US
financial support; to resort immediately to economic blackmail, that is so
scandalous. So in all those ways I think we are trying to say that what is
happening in Israel today is a system of apartheid that in its perfection of
that system is more terrifying in many ways than apartheid in South Africa
ever was.



HC: During an event celebrating black history month earlier this year you
likened the US Civil Rights Movement to the South African struggle against
apartheid. Would you liken both of those struggles to the Palestinian
struggle today?



AB:I have just finished a chapter for a book that I hope will be out next
year in which I speak of the similarities between the civil rights struggle,
the anti-apartheid struggle, and the Arab Spring and the lessons we can draw
from them.



I think it is fascinating in so many different ways. It’s almost as if I
personally lived through the difficult choices that people have to make in
North Africa and in the Middle East every day. As every day goes by my
admiration for them grows. I see what is happening in Syria and in Yemen and
that there is still relatively little violence on the part of the
protesters. You can still see that their basic fundamental goal is to get
rid of the tyranny through non-violent protest and it is amazing to watch. I
do believe that there is such a thing as historic moments that never
disappear from which people learn. South Africa learned so much from Ghandi
in India; Martin Luther King learned from Ghandi; we learned from Martin
Luther King and we had our own traditions and I’m sure the young Arab people
who saw some of these things happening are drawing on that. 1994 (when the
first democratic government of South Africa was formed) and the 1980s are
not that far behind us. Many of those people who are participating today
were sat in front of their televisions watching when we were in the streets
day after day after day braving the dogs and the guns and the tear gas,
burying our people, funeral after funeral. When I see the funerals taking
place in the Arab world I think of the time Archbishop Tutu and I buried 27
people (actually 42 were killed but the police would not release the other
bodies); I think of that when I see bodies being carried out to be buried
Friday after Friday in the Arab world.



Our struggle had all sorts of political ideologies but it was never
completely secularised. The faith, as Archbishop Tutu said this morning,
that there is a God of justice who will help us sustain the struggle is an
amazing thing. When I see all those thousands of Muslims go down and bow
down before Allah I must say, when I saw it for the first time I looked at
my wife and I said, I tell you now, if people sustain that, all those
tyrants will be quaking in their boots and they know that they will not be
able to hold out against that power.



I believe that, just as a few years ago the civil rights struggle in the
United States, and then more especially the anti-apartheid struggle, became
the moral standard by which the world was judged in terms of its taking
sides in terms of right or wrong and getting on the right side of the human
revolution for humanity and for justice and for the restoration of dignity
and for the future for children; that particular moment in history where the
world is invited to participate in this revolution for the sake of the good
and for the sake of the future and for the sake of justice; and where that
decision hinges upon evil and wrong on the one side and justice and right on
the other side and will mark the world in a way that says this is a litmus
test for international solidarity and for international law and justice,
that test today comes from the Arab Spring.



HC: The Arab Spring or Palestine?



AB: You have the Arab Spring taking place but at the hub of it all is
Palestine. I believe that what is happening now would not have happened if
it had not been for the perennial struggle of the Palestinian people. They
may not be mentioned every time but I can tell you now that if it was not
for them, nothing like the Arab Spring would ever have happened in the
Middle East.



Just as we thought, when we watched Martin Luther King or when we went
through our own struggle, that the face and direction of history and the
world, whether they like it in the West or not and whether or not they come
to it with hidden agendas for the sake of greed or whatever, it does not
really matter; what is happening in the end is that something fundamental is
changing in the Middle East and thereby something fundamental is changing in
the history of the world. Those people, I believe, who are going through
that revolution now will, for instance, never make the same mistakes that
their parents and grandparents made, thinking that the West is always good
and that the deals we make with the West are always for the good of our
people. There is a new critical element that has come in. Never again will
people think the same; what I am hoping is that the Arab revolutions will be
so sustainable and so successful and morally so strong that they will force
the West to think differently about themselves in terms of the viewpoints
and stands they take on events.



HC: Christianity is under threat in the Holy Land. People tend to forget
that this is not an issue between Jews and Muslims; there are Christian
Palestinians too. There has been a disturbing trend over the years, which
has seen Christian Palestinians leaving the Holy Land because of the
extraordinary difficulties that Israel has placed on their lives. In what
ways has the occupation affected Christians?



AB: The Christian community in Palestine has been decimated in many ways. By
doing this the Israelis are doing two things: they are simplifying the
presentation of the struggle as if it is only between Jews and Arabs, with
the result that Christians outside think that there is nothing and nobody
for us to be in solidarity with. Hence, the Christian Zionists, those ultra
conservative fundamentalists in the United States who have for so long
helped to dictate foreign policy under the Bush and Reagan administrations,
they can say “it’s not about us; it’s not about Christians and Christian
witness, it’s about those Muslims”; that, I think, is the intention. I’m
hoping that those of us who are Christians outside the Middle East will keep
that fact alive and will find ways and means to inject that argument into
every single political situation so that the discourse that goes forward and
gives rise to action does not push aside the reality of Christians in the
Middle East, especially in the Holy Land.



The second thing they are doing is that they are dislodging, not just
denying, but dislodging the roots of the Christian faith in the Middle East;
that’s where it all started. If you dislodge that it’s like cutting off
your nose to spite your face - you are cutting yourself off from the most
ancient roots of Christianity and that will set the Christian church adrift,
and in the end that will not be good for Israel. So I’m glad to see that the
World Council of Churches is rising up again. It is not nearly as radical as
it should be, it’s not nearly as clear as it should be nor as hard-nosed as
it should be on this issue, but at least it is taking up the Palestinian
issue and responding to the situation in Egypt, Iraq, Syria and elsewhere
where Christians are under pressure. In doing so they must remember that
this is not just a Christian cause; it’s not important just because of the
Christians involved, but also because the future of humanity is at stake.



HC: There are an estimated 50 million Christian Zionists worldwide. How
would you council them with regards to their support for the state of Israel
which is based, they would say, on Biblical reasoning?



AB: It’s like with so many things, it’s the way that people read and
interpret the Bible and so we must just make sure that we are as clear and
as enthusiastic and as open about our understanding of the Bible and as
willing to engage our understanding of the Bible as they seem to be. There
must be ways; we have just not been imaginative enough. I think one reason
is because we have not, until very recently, realised the very dangerous
nature of the views that those people hold, not just for Palestinians and
for Muslims in general but also for the Christian Church itself. Now that we
begin to see how deadly that kind of logic is, how absolutely anti-Christian
and anti-human that logic is, we have no excuses left.



HC: Israel is demanding that Palestinians recognise it as an exclusively
“Jewish state”. How would you respond to this demand?



AB: They can’t. There is no such thing as a specifically Jewish state. You
can’t proclaim a Jewish state over the heads and the bodies and the memories
of the people who are the ancient people who live there. That is Palestinian
land we are talking about. Most of the Jews who are there come from Europe
and elsewhere and have no claim on that land and we mustn’t allow it to
happen to the Palestinians what happened to my ancestors who were the
original people in this land (South Africa) but now there are hardly enough
of them to be counted in the census. That is Palestinian land and that
should be the point of departure in every political discussion.



HC: In the past you urged Western countries to impose economic sanctions on
the South African apartheid regime. Would you support a similar call for
sanctions against the state of Israel?



AB: Absolutely! Pressure, pressure, pressure from every side and in as many
ways as possible: trade sanctions, economic sanctions, financial sanctions,
banking sanctions, sports sanctions, cultural sanctions; I’m talking from
our own experience. In the beginning we had very broad sanctions and only
late in the 1980s did we learn to have targeted sanctions. So you must look
to see where the Israelis are most vulnerable; where is the strongest link
to the outside community? And you must have strong international solidarity;
that’s the only way it will work. You have to remember that for years and
years and years when we built up the sanctions campaign it was not with
governments in the West. They came on board very, very late.



It was the Indian government and in Europe just Sweden and Denmark to begin
with and that was it. Later on, by 1985-86, we could get American support.
We never could get Margaret Thatcher on board, never Britain, never Germany,
but in Germany the people who made a difference were the women who started
boycotting South African goods in their supermarkets. That’s how we built it
up. Never despise the day of small beginnings. It was down to civil society.
But civil society in the international community could only build up because
there was such a strong voice from within and that is now the responsibility
of the Palestinians, to keep up that voice and to be as strong and as clear
as they possibly can. Think up the arguments, think through the logic of it
all but don’t forget the passion because this is for your country.



Click here

to read the full South African Response to the Kairos Palestine document.

A Candle in the Darkness

Our businessman "friend"(FPI)in Ramallah sends us a report on a J Street sponsored junket to Isr/Pal by some US House of Representatives.

Many issues come to light in this article. Read it completely for insight into present day realities. The narratives are still at war and neither side shows any sign of wavering or compromise. The Occupation continues full steam ahead.

Right now, the US Congress is fully in the thrall of AIPAC. This visit by mostly AFrican-American Congresswomen might portend a hopeful shift from the AIPAC-dominated viewpoint being foisted on the US with endless repetition. Thank you Sam Bahour, JRK

Source:http://bit.ly/yb95mJ

JTA: The Global News Service of the Jewish People

U.S. congresswomen see Israel, Palestinians in the eyes of J Street

By Linda Gradstein · February 27, 2012

KALANDIYA, West Bank (JTA) -- The U.S. congresswomen get off the bus and stand in the chilly shadows of the Kalandiya crossing point between the West Bank and Jerusalem.

It’s late morning, well past the rush hour when thousands of Palestinians congregate here, and only a few dozen Palestinians stand in line. To cross, the Palestinians go through aseries of metal turnstiles and wait with their documents until they are called, one by one, toapproach the Israeli soldiers sitting behind bullet-proof barriers.

One Palestinian man strikes up a conversation.

“I have American citizenship but I am not allowed to travel through Ben Gurion Airport because I have a Palestinian ID card,” Hamad Hindi of Louisiana tells the congresswomen. “We are seen as guilty of something because we are Palestinian.”

After crossing to the Palestinian side, the congresswomen -- part of a trip to Israel and the West Bank organized by the J Street Education Fund -- head to Ramallah.

“This is a ticking bomb waiting to go off,” says Rep. Eddie Bernice Johnson (D-Tex.) “There must be some other way to do this. After so many years there should be some resolution for this issue.”

The congresswomen clearly are moved by their experience at the checkpoint, and that’s the point.

J Street, the “pro-Israel, pro-peace” lobbying group that heralds itself as a left-wing alternative to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, is trying to present an alternative to the usual pro-Israel fare on congressional missions to Israel. The trip last week included six U.S. congresswomen and a group of women from the Women Donors Network, a coalition of women involved in progressive and social causes.

A spokeswoman for J Street, Jessica Rosenblum, said the trip was part of the organization’s overall effort to promote a two-state solution.

"Our hope is that this and future delegations will help to open up and deepen the conversation in Congress about American policy in the Middle East,” Rosenblum told JTA. “Inparticular,” she said, the trips are meant to “encourage participating members to convey to their colleagues the urgency of the situation and the need for sustained and vigorous American engagement to reach a two-state solution.”

Over six days, the delegation met Israelis and Palestinians, both leaders and “ordinary women.”

Among the Palestinian business leaders the group met in Ramallah was Sam Bahour, a Palestinian-American entrepreneur who says he has had difficulty acquiring an Israeli residency permit.

“I really appreciate what J Street is doing -- it’s a breath of fresh air that there is not one line of thought in the American Jewish community,” he told the delegation. “We are at a fork in the road. Either there will be a two-state solution or it will be too late.”

On the way to the Kalandiya checkpoint, two women from Machsom Watch, an Israeli organization that monitors Israeli soldiers at checkpoints, spoke to the group.

“We believe occupation is ruining our society and threatening our democracy and future existence,” said Neta Efrony, director of a 2008 documentary about the Kalandiya checkpoint. “We need your help and to hear your voice. Israelis don’t want to hear and don’t want to know what is happening.”

If the delegation members’ reactions were any gauge, J Street’s strategy shows promise.

“There’s no awareness of this in the U.S.,” Donna Hall, the president and CEO of the Women Donors Network, said in reference to difficulties faced by Palestinians. “The congresswomen are so brave to be here, especially in an election year.”

The congresswomen also heard from Palestinian businesswomen and female hedge fund managers who described ways to empower Palestinian women in business.

“To see people who are building and hopeful and looking forward to the future is so important,” said Rep. Gwen Moore (D-Wis.) “We are already figuring out how to change the dynamics of U.S. policy in the region.”

A single mother living on welfare, Moore began her public career as a community organizer and today is also the Democratic chairwoman of the Congressional Women’s Caucus.

The J Street trip also included visits with Jewish settlers in the West Bank.

From Ramallah, the group drove to Shiloh, a Jewish town in the heart of the West Bank halfway between Ramallah and Nablus that because of its location likely would not be incorporated into Israel in any two-state settlement.

A group of Jewish women from several area settlements met with the congresswomen and told them they have no intention of leaving their homes.

“I’m holding the Bible; Shiloh was our first capital before Jerusalem and it has layers and layers of history,” Tzofiah Dorot, the director of Ancient Shiloh, told the women. “This is the heart of Israel and I don’t see a future for the state if you take the heart out.”

All of the women said they were sure that their settlements would remain part of Israel.

“This is our homeland, the homeland of the Jewish nation -- period,” Tamar Aslaf told the delegation. “A Palestinian who lives here is welcome to stay. It’s his home but it’s our homeland.”

Several of the settlers described a scenario in which Palestinians could stay in their homes but not receive national or voting rights. That drew a sharp reply from the congresswomen,five of whom are African Americans.

“Some people would call that apartheid,” said Rep. Jackie Speier (D-Calif.), the only white congresswomen on the trip.

“It’s easy to sit in your comfortable house and decide what is good for the Jews,” Dorot responded. “I’m begging you to see that we’re not pieces of Lego you can move around. Thisis life and death. We all need to think out of the box. I’m asking you to forget about the two-state solution.”

Several members of the delegation said the trip gave them a more sophisticated understanding of the complexities of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.


“In Jerusalem and Tel Aviv it’s so easy not to see much of what we saw,” said Rep. Donna Edwards (D-Md.). “But what does it mean for democracy when you are willing to sacrifice somuch in the name of security?”

A Palestinian Christian Leader Speaks Out

Dear Friend,

Fr. Firas Aridah is a Roman Catholic priest in the Holy Land. He was invited to address peace-makers at a Washington D.C. conference February 7 - 9 on behalf of the Bishop, Fr. Twal. We have been colleagues for a long time. Here is his address to the assembly. It is a cry from the heart.

On this Ash Wednesday, we need to be in contrition that we have not done more to bring justice and security to the land on which our Lord lived, taught, died and rose again. JRK


Washington, D.C.

7th - 9th of February 2012

I want to thank you for the honor of being able to speak with you today/ tonight about the situation of the Christian community in the Holy Land. My name is Father Firas Aridah from Jordan. I am a priest of the Latin Patriarchate of Jerusalem, the Roman Catholic Diocese of the Holy Land, serving in Israel, Jordan, the Palestinian Territories and Cyprus. Our Church of believers was born on the day of Pentecost, first established by the Apostles and for a time led by St. Peter after whom St. James, the disciple of Christ, was chosen as the Holy City’s first bishop. Together the Christian community in the Holy Land is indelibly linked to the life of Christ, his death and resurrection and together they formed the first Church described in the Acts of the Apostles as the community which: “remained faithful to the teaching of the apostles…was filled with awe at the many miracles…and who owned everything in common…with one heart” (Acts 2:42-46) This is the Mother Church of Jerusalem, this is the Holy Land.



It is a beautiful place, quite different from the beauty of Washington D.C, but still a beautiful place with beautiful people. It is a land sacred to Christians, Jews and Muslims; all three faith communities have existed there for centuries. Historically it was home to many nations (including the kingdoms of Palestine and the kingdoms of Israel) and now, in the modern context, it is a home to Israelis and Palestinians. One land, two peoples, three faiths; each rooted in conviction and vigor for Jerusalem, each who need to be reminded that there can be no exclusive claim which will be accepted.



What I had in mind when I came to serve in Jerusalem, was to focus all my energy in performing the ‘normal duties’ of a parish priest—tending to the needs of the Christian faithful and the community at large. It was there, in the midst of my ‘normal duties’, where I became unwillingly drawn into this on-going conflict. It was never my intention to get involved in politics – and I am still resolute to leave the politics to the politicians – but my focus is the people. And in my service to the people, I dealt with the occupation. With the occupation came the confiscation of lands and the demolition of homes. With the confiscation of lands and demolition of homes came the building of walls of separation in the name of security. With the building of walls of separation came the destruction of olive orchards. These ‘normal duties’ of a parish priest have been particularly painful in Palestine.



Olive trees are a main source of livelihood for Palestinians. They are used to derive products such as: olive oil, soap and wood crafts. These trees and this livelihood are thousands of years old, handed down from one generation to the next. The groves are a lifeline with great significance and value in our culture. In the aftermath of the 26 foot high wall that now surrounds most of the West Bank and with new border enforcement, people can no longer get to their farms. Families have been divided; many have lost their jobs or have become deprived of advanced medical care at hospitals which are no longer accessible. As a priest, a pastor of souls, my conscience and my calling drive me to be “a voice for those who have no voice and to defend the weak and the oppressed.” (Patr. Sabbah. Seek Peace and Pursue it. 1998) How then can I say nothing as this tragedy befalls the people who I am serving? How can I remain silent when the Christian community I am serving is disappearing because of this situation?



The current situation we face is this: Today, we have fewer Christians in the Holy Land than we had in 1947 going from 8% to 1.6% in 2000. When at one point we numbered 27,000 Christians in Jerusalem, now we are only 9,000 Christians. Our people are emigrating, our presence is threatened and if the trend continues, our future is moving towards extinction. This is impacted by the fact that there are over 550,000 Israeli settlers living in the West Bank and East Jerusalem. Many of our villages are under military control, with restrictions on movement from one village to the next, meaning that we have immediate family who have become separated from each other. Our lands are still being confiscated all around us to build more Israeli settlements or to expand settlements that already exist. Recently Israel has confiscated around three thousand acres from 59 Christian families in Beit Jala to continue expansion of the Gilo settlement and the separation wall. The recent development of clashes between settlers and Israeli civil authorities is proof that settlements are a phenomenon which has grown far beyond Israel’s grasp. They violate the laws which have been put in place to protect them and they unquestionably threaten peace and stability in the region. As the book of Proverbs says: “Where there is no hope, the people perish” - an entire generation of Israelis and Palestinians have grown up witnessing and experiencing violence, occupation, separation, and hatred. There continue to be fewer and fewer opportunities to interact. There is heightened suspicion and apprehension on both sides and so, our people deeply feel a sense of hopelessness and despair.



So then an obligation falls upon our shoulders not to give in to the missed opportunities of our governments, nor is it for us to play the blame game. Rather, it falls on us to speak and remind everyone of the objective truth. In the words of our Patriarch Fouad Twal: “ultimately, Israelis and Palestinians … must work out their differences in a just and righteous manner, in ways that require painful compromises.” No, we the Christian community of the Holy Land, the people of Calvary, will not allow for our hope to die nor will we allow others to use our voice. We will not stand for a fundamentalist interpretation of the Bible which seeks to legitimize the infringement of Palestinian rights. We have a unified Christian message which we are able and willing to give to the world. This message can be found in the Kairos Palestine document. We are thinkers, we are theologians, we are philosophers, we are teachers, we are believers in the Bible and in Jesus Christ who “interpreted to the disciples of Emmaus the things about himself in all the scriptures” (Lk. 24:27) and we are rolling up our sleeves and are making a difference by shedding light in a bleak situation.



The Church in fact has found ways to give people hope and an opportunity for a better future. As an example, the Catholic Church is the largest private educator in the area which we serve, with some 70,000 children in the over 100 schools run by various institutions of the church. We run 14 hospitals in the area with 3 Universities. We serve the poorest of the poor through our orphanages, nursing homes, centers for children with special needs and centers for the pastoral needs of families and young adults. We run youth groups, scouts and we provide a safe place for children to come and play. We are doing our part in providing educational opportunities for our youth who are the future, we believe that if Christian, Muslim and Jewish children play together, they will become friends – then and only then will we have a prospect for lasting peace. Sadly, in the midst of this conflict, few are looking to serve humanity; few are seeing the human faces of children, mothers, fathers and the elderly which are violated by oppression and violence. We see these faces and we realize that we cannot do it alone.



Now, it falls upon you to realize that our governments in Israel and Palestine “are not able to (make the compromises necessary) without external intervention” because:

·There is an asymmetrical power relationship,

·There is a lack of trust in the political alliances existing on both sides,

·The forces of extremism are growing and gaining followers and supporters,

·The recent Arab Spring is a phenomenon which has caused great unrest and instability in the region. It is an instability against which no one is immune (not even Israel), and

·The possibilities for a just resolution are rapidly deteriorating.



Local government and international intervention (including that of the United States) has failed for too long to do what is necessary. It is vital that this administration realizes that time is no longer on our side and that actions to secure peace which is one sided (or in one’s own vested interests) will bring us nowhere. Prolonging the conflict between Palestinians and Israelis will serve only the extremists on both sides and will weaken the supporters of peace on both sides. If you intervene you can save the prospect of peace, before it is extinguished by extremism and violence.



In our schools children learn and experience humanity, after all that is what Jesus taught: to love our enemies, to forgive those who do us harm, to be peacemakers, and promote dialogue and foster reconciliation. The Christians in Palestine are small in number, but we are doing our part to work for a better future for both Palestinians and Israelis. Time and time again we have seen the youth who graduate from our schools and universities or those who benefit from the work of our institutions – they leave with a changed mindset. Despite the despair and the violence in society, they still believe in the ability to change the world and so they become leaders for justice, peace and tolerance instead of pupils of death and destruction.



I, like those who are hopeful, truly believe Israelis and Palestinians can live together. Growing up in Jordan we were raised to accept the other, Christian or Muslim, northerner or southerner, we all belonged to one country, with one king who worked for the mutual benefit of all. This belief is not foreign to the Middle East, but in order for it to be a reality, each side must recognize the dignity of the other and be willing to unconditionally accept each other, for the sake of humanity. With great fervor and courage, we must make a renewed and genuine effort to promote peace and extend our hand to all faiths and peoples who share in the pursuit of peace, justice and liberty. This is why I stand before you today. In the Pledge of Allegiance of the United States, you stand tall before your flag and you recite the key to what has made America great: “One Nation under God with Liberty and Justice for all.”



The occupation must end because it is a sin against God Himself. Violence and terrorism must stop. There must be no more settlements built on Palestinian land. Our Christian presence must be supported and nurtured. You must support the efforts of institutions who are working to serve humanity. Use your voice and your influence to bring the prospect of peace back. If you don’t who will? Give us the chance to one day stand with you and say: Two Nations under God with Peace, Liberty and Justice for all!



On behalf of all the Christians in the Holy Land and all of us at the Latin Patriarchate of Jerusalem thank you for your time, generosity and support. In the name of His Beatitude our Patriarch Fouad Twal, I invite you to come to the Holy Land as pilgrims, to be present in our lives and to pray for us and with us, and to support our projects, so that we can arrive together one day to the goal in which we are all interested – Peace. May God bless you all, and bless every step you take to support the dignity of human life in this world. Amen.

--


John & Sharon

jandskleinheksel@gmail.com

Presbyterians (USA) take an Historic Stand

Dear Friend,

1) The Presbyterian Church (USA) is recommending divestment from three companies profiting from the illegal occupation of Palestinian land.

Here is the official announcement. (It will be discussed and voted on at this year's General Assembly in Pittsburgh, PA).


2) There were six (6) responses to my "Discussion Starter" piece, which I'm attaching without comment, although I'd like to respond to several. It adds to the important discussion needs to take place. One thing I will say is that our Christian Palestinian friend in I/P is stressing the systemic cause of the conflict, whereas I was highlighting the "personal, and relational" aspect of the break down in human relations. Both aspects come into play in my view. (I'm also attaching the original "Discussion Starter" piece in case you missed it). JRK


Presbyterian Leadership Takes Historic Stand
LOUISVILLE, KY - February 17, 2012 - The General Assembly Mission Council (GAMC) of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) voted to send a recommendation to the July meeting of the 220th General Assembly (national Presbyterian voting body) to divest its holdings from Caterpillar, Inc., Hewlett Packard, and Motorola Solutions. The original recommendation came from the denomination’s Mission Responsibility Through Investment Committee (MRTI) at its meeting of September 2011. MRTI’s recommendation first went to the GAMC Subcommittee on Justice, who passed it on to the larger body by unanimous consent.

Brian Ellison, Chair of MRTI, made presentations to both the subcommittee and the larger body, covering the long and painstaking process of corporate engagement that led to this recommendation. A Presbyterian pastor from Kansas City, Ellison made it clear that MRTI’s attempts at engagement with the top executives of these companies over the years have borne no fruit and that according to the Presbyterian Church’s own investment guidelines, MRTI is left without any choice but to recommend divestment as the last step of the process. When asked why these companies are being singled out among all those that do business in Israel, Ellison said that these companies profit from non-peaceful pursuits by supporting illegal occupation, which is not in line with Presbyterian values or investment philosophy.

When a member of the subcommittee mentioned that she had received information by e-mail from a Presbyterian opponent of divestment suggesting that MRTI had not gone far enough in contacting company executives, Ellison disagreed and went on to say that MRTI and its ecumenical partners persistently contacted CEOs and top executives of the three companies over several years, and received no meaningful responses to their questions or concerns.

The Israel Palestine Mission Network of the PC(USA) [IPMN]commends the General Assembly Mission Council for this historic vote. Much like the decision by Presbyterians in 1983 to divest from companies profiting from Apartheid in South Africa, this is an action that will send a clear message to the world that our Church will do everything in our power to make sure it does not profit from violence or the systematic violation of Palestinian human rights. If history is our guide, then such action, when combined with those of other religious bodies and individuals of conscience, will help bring change and transformation to the land that holds deep meaning for all the people of the three Abrahamic faiths.

About IPMN: In joyful obedience to the call of Christ, and in solidarity with churches and our other partners in the Middle East, this network covenants to engage, consolidate, nourish, and channel the energy in the Presbyterian Church (USA) toward the goal of a just peace in Israel /Palestine by facilitating education, promoting partnerships, and coordinating advocacy.
Our network speaks TO the Church not FOR the Church.


Presbyterian News Service on PC(USA) website

A Discussion Starter on the Root of Conflict

This slight study on Gen. 16 is meant as a discussion starter for those seeking resolution of conflict. Reconcilation is the goal. Patience and persistence is the rule and way forward. Peace to all. JRK

THE ROOT AND RESOLUTION OF CONFLICT
A Bible Study based on Genesis 16:1-10, by (Rev) John R. Kleinheksel Sr.
Such a presumptuous title from such a slight study! And yet here are helpful insights so we can cope with conflict—whether in our biological family, with our neighbors, or among those in a cross-cultural situation (like Israel/Palestine). This short study is meant as a discussion starter!
I THE ROOT OF CONFLICT
Sarai, Abram’s wife, was childless. This was a sore spot, an underlying inadequacy in her eyes and the eyes of her society. Abram didn’t love her any less, but she felt undervalued just the same. Furthermore, her children-bearing years were coming to an end. She was starting to panic and was desperate to have a family.
Hagar was an Egyptian maidservant in the employ of Abram’s household, attending especially to Sarai. She was hired at some point during the ten years that Abram had been living in the land of Canaan.
“Sleep with my maid”, Sarai suggests to Abram. “Maybe I can get a family from her” (v. 2). (This sounds like the origin of the fall of Adam and Eve in Genesis 3, when Eve invites Adam to partake of the forbidden fruit).
Abram agrees to do it (v. 2). There is no evidence of emotional entanglement with Hagar, no evidence of any agonizing over the ethics of it. (It sounds like a bid for “Open Marriage”!) He slept with Hagar, a lower ranking member of the clan; yet never denying his love (wholehearted?) for Sarai, his wife. But oh, what a rat’s nest was stirred up!
When Hagar becomes pregnant, Sarai was sure she detected a superior attitude in the actions of her servant (v. 4). Hagar had a smirk on her face in Sarai’s presence. Hagar held her in contempt. Sarai: She treats me like dirt; I’m a nothing to her (v. 5, The Message).
So Sarai begins a carpet-bombing campaign, aimed at Hagar. “Choose between her and me”, she demands of Abram. Abram wisely refuses to choose between them, but does give Sara the freedom to deal with her maid as she chooses (v. 6). Sarai becomes so abusive that Hagar flees to the desert (vs. 6b, 7). Sarai has the power. Hagar has no power. Who oppresses whom? If Hagar wanted to push Sarai into the sea, Sarai wanted to banish Hagar to the desert. Who wins in this contest?
Here we have the root of conflict between people. There is not only class warfare; there is a power imbalance. We constantly play the “Blame Game” (like Adam and Eve), and refuse to understand the issue or resolve it. Our well being (security) as humans come from being loved (valued). This comes about from God in the primary sense, and through parents, spouses, children, neighbors, fellow citizens, and outsiders. We are extremely sensitive when “others” act in such a way that throws our “value” into question. (As Tom Friedman puts it in a New York Times editorial on Russia and the Arab Spring: (P) olitical eruptions . . . are driven . . . by the quest for dignity and justice. Humiliation is the single most underestimated force in politics (NY Times, January 31, 2012).
Sarai was certain that Hagar despised her. Hagar was NOT an equal. Hagar was inferior, lower on the scale of valued persons. When Hagar was “successful” as a woman and child-bearer, it stirred up spiteful jealousy and a desire for reprisal in Sarai, the superior person in the network.
Conflict continues to fester when two parties each feel profoundly disrespected as persons. Rebellion is engendered when, in our view, our dignity in the scheme of things is being trashed. Fortunately or unfortunately, our self-image (how we understand and accept ourselves) is influenced by how others perceive us, giving it more value than may be warranted.
Instead of being reassured by the constant affirmations of love from Abram, Sarai allows Hagar’s haughty view of her to take precedence. Feeling abused, she abuses in return. Felling like she is “nothing”, she treats Hagar as “nothing”.
This is the huge Abyss that forms between persons and peoples if allowed to fester unchecked, unchallenged, and unchanged. This is the seemingly insurmountable chasm that leads to a widening gulf refusing to be bridged (Israel/Palestine!). It also happens in families or communities or among nations.
II THE RESOLUTION OF CONFLICT
Except that there is help. There is a way forward. It is in the word given to Hagar in v. 9. First some background. Hagar has fled. She feels she is being kicked out of her home and place in the scheme of things. She finds herself near a spring of water “on the road to Shur”—v.7) [The reader wonders if this is might be a separate account of the “well of water” that miraculously appears to Hagar in 21:17-19].
“God” asks her a question: What are you doing here? She might have replied, Because I’m not being treated with any dignity/respect by my mistress. But she replies: I’m running away from my mistress (v. 8).
God responds: Go back to your mistress. Put up with her abuse. I’m going to give you a big family, children past counting (vs. 9, 10, The Message).
The way forward is to be present in the oppressive situation, quietly outlast the abuse and experience how you are chosen, loved, and favored by God (and others). Keep hope alive that you will take your place in the family, in the neighborhood, in the family of nations. Hagar is also chosen and loved. Chosenness goes to all people, not just one person, family or nation.
Each of us has to confront abuse and overcome it, knowing we are loved and that our role will be vindicated when the time comes. (This is as much a way forward for Sarai as it is for Hagar. When the love deficit is filled there is no room for envy or jealousy).
I can whine all I want. I can launch a counter-offensive. Or I can see adversity through the eyes of faith and work toward reconciliation. I am more than my despised self. I too am a child of God.
God always comes alongside of the oppressed and outcasts, and works to bring them into the family.
Break Out Questions:
• In what way have you been (or at least felt) devalued?
• What ways have you used to cope?
• What are the ways you (and others) will now try to cope?
• How might this apply to the conflict between Israelis and Palestinians?

Interfaith Report from NYC to Isr/Pal to US

Ribbi Ammiel Hirsch reports on a Jewish, Muslim and Christian groups of religious leaders from NYC who spent five days in all parts of Isr/Pal. Here is his report. 1) The present status quo is not sustainable jumps out at you.
2) The need to bring hope to a situation that is hopeless.
3) We must turn enemies into friends, is the call of religious leaders


Turning Enemies Into Friends in Israel and the Palestinian Territories

Posted: 01/25/2012 4:38 pm on Huff Post

In early January, 15 senior rabbis, ministers and imams traveled together to Israel and the Palestinian territories. We are from among New York City's leading religious institutions. Collectively, our houses of worship are home to tens of thousands of prominent New Yorkers.

Anyone who appreciates the hectic schedules and unique demands upon congregational clergy realizes that it is no small matter to bring 15 spiritual leaders together for five days. So why did we leave our congregations for a week? Why did our congregants insist that we go and even pay for our mission?

In the post 9/11 world, religious rapprochement is no longer a luxury; it is a necessity. To ignore dialogue is to invite destruction. If we do not find ways to live together in dignity we will die together in agony. Religious moderates must build new bridges of coexistence or religious extremists will burn the last bridges of peace.

Our presence in the Middle East was intended to broadcast that we can live together, work together, travel together, dream together and build together. In a world awash in religious conflict, we wish to model a different way: the way of coexistence, respect and peace.

It was a tough trip. We did not paper over our differences. We visited the heart of the conflict. There were moments of despair. We met with presidents, prime ministers, members of parliament and mayors on both sides of the Israeli-Palestinian divide. We met with priests, imams and rabbis. We met with journalists, academics, students, villagers and farmers.

Daily headlines do not begin to tell the story. None of the people we met -- not one -- believed that the Middle East is closer to peace today than ten years ago. If this is the truth, we need to hear it. Progress rests upon the solid rock of reality, not the shifting sands of fantasy.

Despite it all, many of us returned to New York guardedly optimistic. None of the people we met -- not one -- felt that the status quo was sustainable. Everyone understood that a way must be found to break out of the suffocating reality. There is broad agreement that the present is not working and that a new future must be forged.

People of faith have a unique role to play. Both Israeli President Shimon Peres and Palestinian Prime Minister Salam Fayyad urged us to engage. Both of them emphasized that religion could be a source of enormous support as the politicians seek a political solution. We can help to create a context that is conducive to peace.

Religion specializes in hope. We are good at articulating our common humanity and giving voice to the better angels of our nature. We were also cautioned that if we do not step up the forces of religious intolerance will continue to drag the rest of us towards war. Our era has placed a sacred obligation on the forces and figures of religious moderation to speak out and act out.

There are many good people working to build bridges. In Haifa we met Christians, Muslims and Jews who have built a true house of coexistence. In Tel Aviv we met doctors, nurses and hospital staff who treated illness without regard to race, religion or creed. Even on the Gaza border, in Israeli towns that were fired upon in a barrage of missiles, there were people who were reaching out to the other side.

Peace is made piece by piece, from the bottom up. Progress is advanced day by day, person by person, each laboring in their own corner of the universe, connecting with others who together create an irresistible force. We should connect with those people and strengthen their hand. This daily labor is heroic work.

Jewish sages ask: Who is a hero? They respond: He who turns an enemy into a friend.

This is our task: person by person to help turn enemies into friends.

Musalaha Get at the Issues

Dear Friend,

Our friend Salim Munayer works directly with Muslim, Jewish and Christian persons, to get at the underlying issues that wound and divide people in Israel/Palestine. Read his latest post and sense how real change is coming at the grass roots level. Thank you God for Salim and Musalaha. John Kleinheksel


A report on our Muslim-Christian women’s groups

We often share with you regarding our work between Palestinian Christians and Israeli Messianic Jews. But we have another area of work where we focus on bridge-building initiatives between Muslims, Christians, and Jews. In Romans 12, Paul calls us to live at peace with everyone. Our role as the salt of the earth requires us to reach out to our community and deal with the prejudice, offense and mending of relationships between us and others. Many times when the relationship between Muslims and Christians is highlighted in the news, we hear about clashes and conflict. In turn, we sometimes react with fear and suspicion of the other. In the face of religious and ethnic conflict, we often turn inward instead of turning outward and making overtures toward the other side.

Cardinal Francis Arinze addressed the issue of Christian-Muslim relations in an important talk given at the Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding in Georgetown University nearly 15 years ago. He emphasized that over half of the world’s population is either Christian or Muslim, and that a good relationship between the two matters not only to Christians and Muslims, but also the rest of the world. In short, he gave several guidelines for desirable relations between these two religious communities: 1) through better knowledge of the other, 2) acceptance of the other and respect for differences, 3) actual engagement in dialogue, 4) joint witness to shared values, and 5) joint promotion of peace.

He then detailed several obstacles and challenges: 1) the weight of the past, 2) lack of self-criticism, 3)manipulation of religion by politics, 4) religious fanaticism or extremism, 5) different approaches to human rights and especially to religious freedom, and reciprocity. Finally, he discussed some ways of meeting the challenges through: 1) healing of historical memories, 2) learning to exercise self-criticism, 3) liberating religion from political manipulation, 4) facing the phenomenon of religious extremism and 5) promoting religious freedom, 6) promotion of development and justice, 7) more attention to the spiritual dimension, 8) and joint concern over the use of the earth’s resources.

While Cardinal Arinze’s talk was addressing the global Christian and Muslim communities and we are working with a very specific and local group of participants, we have nevertheless found Cardinal Arinze’s talk instructive in our bridge-building initiatives. In this short report, we would like to share our recent observations of positive relationship-building encounters in recent meetings in Bethlehem between 25 Muslim and Christian women.

We met in the context of growing religious tension in the Israeli and Palestinian communities, and these women openly and candidly shared their perceptions of the other side. We observed that it was easier for the women to list the obstacles and challenges than it was for them to articulate the importance of having a good relationship between the two communities.

The women discussed the following obstacles and challenges:
· Mixed marriage – The Christian community of Bethlehem sees the marriage of Muslims and Christians in Bethlehem as very threatening to their small, minority community. Many Palestinian Christian men study overseas for a number of years, and some Christian women have begun to marry Muslim men. The Christian community sees Muslim men pursuing their women, but when there are instances of Christian men seeking to marry Muslim women, the Muslim reaction to this is much harsher than the Christian reaction to the opposite.

· Religious prejudice – Oftentimes Christians are not accepted to Muslim institutions (whether for work or for charity), while Christians are open to accepting Muslims into their charities and schools (but not as staff). Also, there is a new phenomenon where Christians in Bethlehem prefer to buy only from Christian vendors, and Muslims only from Muslim vendors.

· Exhibiting religious identity aggressively – Due to increased religious radicalism, people are beginning to show off their religious identity to the point that they are making the other side uncomfortable. For example, some Christian shops have so many crosses and icons hung up that Muslims feel that they are entering a church, not a store. Likewise, many Muslim shops are increasingly being decorated with verses from the Quran. Also, many Muslim women are dressing more conservatively as an outward expression of their religiosity.

· Outside propaganda – Religious channels on TV often broadcast Muslim and Christian shows from outside of the country that bring a message of intolerance, degrade the other religion, and often provide misinformation. This has a detrimental effect on the relationship of the local communities.

· Rise of Islamic political parties – In the past, national parties would bring both Christians and Muslims together. Now, religious parties are becoming increasingly prevalent, which results in excluding members of the community.

· Discrimination in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict – The women discussed who the Israeli army favors more as evidenced in the number of permits Christians and Muslims receive. Some of the women wondered if this is a strategy of “divide and rule” or if this is the result of one side’s collaboration with Israel, a very serious accusation in Palestinian society. This affects the relationship between these two religious communities in Bethlehem.

· Historical narrative – Both sides emphasized the most hurtful parts of their narrative, which often exclude the other side. The Muslim women focused on the Crusades and colonization while the Christians focused on Arab expansion and various massacres, such as the Armenian massacre.

· Lack of information – Both sides lack knowledge and information of the other, as is seen in their understanding of one another’s religion and history.

In the beginning the women focused on how they hurt one another. When they began exploring their commonalities, they found that there are many areas where they can work with each other. Muslims and Christians in Bethlehem have many similar life challenges and can support each other if they have a relationship with one another. The women saw the need to strengthen the areas of commonality between them, readily acknowledging their responsibility toward their neighbors, and noted that it is important not to let outside sources influence their relationship.

What we gleaned from this meeting is that we have made progress in relationship building and communication, but there are still areas for growth and further discussion. We found the meeting to be promising as the women openly communicated with one another and listened to each side voice their perceptions. We were able to address some of Cardinal Arinze’s guidelines for desirable relations through beginning to get to know one another better, beginning to engage in dialogue, and realizing our shared life situation. The women renewed their commitment to meeting together as they realized their communication empowers them to be agents of change in their society, and helps them build bridges within their communities.

When faced with ethnic or religious conflict, we should engage with one another, listen to each other, and respectfully learn to make room for each other even when we do not agree on everything. We see this all the time in our reconciliation initiatives between believers, and many of these same principles hold true in our bridge-building initiatives between other segments of society. We are on a journey of reconciliation, and this journey is made with little steps in the right direction.

By Salim J. Munayer, PhD

Musalaha Director