[Peace-discuss] Alternative Perspectives on Presbyterian resolution

[David Green]

Letters from Martha Reese, a recent visitor to our
community and involved layperson, regarding the
Presbyterian GA resolution, followed by statement from
JVP.

NEW YORK TIMES: letters at ...

Re: "Presbyterians Revise Israel Investing Policy,"
June 22

Goodstein reports that the Presbyterian General
Assembly has voted to "back
off" from its 2004 vote on phased, selective
divestment. Not so.

The vote affirms the essence of the overture passed
two years ago: corporate
engagement continues; divestment, as before, is the
available option if
negotiations with corporations fail to induce business
practices that
qualify as "peaceful pursuits."

A stunning 483 of 512 (94.3%) commissioners voted for
the new overture,
affirming that, in the words of the overture itself,
"the customary
corporate engagement process...of our denomination is
the proper vehicle for
achieving this goal."

It's inspiring that the Presbyterian church has kept
its integrity in the
face of tremendous pressure, continuing its
longstanding involvement in
promoting positive, nonviolent social and political
change.

* * *

BOSTON GLOBE: letter at ...

Re: "Presbyterians reverse stance on Israeli
divestment," June 22

According to Radin's wishful thinking, the
Presbyterian Church has
"reversed" itself on divestment. (Tellingly, his
article quotes numerous
opponents of the church's 2004 overture and denies its
numerous supporters
any voice.)

A stunning 483 of 512 commissioners voted to continue
the "customary
process" of the denomination. Divestment--never the
church's primary
goal--continues to be an available option if
negotiations fail to induce
corporations to engage in "peaceful pursuits."

The church rightly promotes humane business practices
and refuses to invest
in or profit from violence and oppression. The new
overture reaffirms the
church's longstanding commitment to economic
engagement as an instrument for
nonviolent positive social and political change.
Congratulations to the
Presbyterian commissioners for maintaining their
integrity despite
relentless pressure.

* * *

CHICAGO TRIBUNE:
http://www.chicagotribune.com/about/custom/contact/ >
Voice of the People

Re: "Presbyterians won't divest over firms' ties to
Israel," June 22

Brachear writes that "Presbyterians won't divest" as a
result of their
recent General Assembly vote. While dropping the word
"divestment," the new
overture affirms the process begun two years ago:
corporate engagement
continues; divestment, as before, is recommended if
negotiations fail to
yield corporate practices that qualify as "peaceful
pursuits."

Divestment is not--and never has been--the church's
primary goal, rather the
promotion of humane business practices and refusal to
invest in or profit
from violence and oppression. A stunning 483 of 512
(94.3%) commissioners
voted to continue the "customary process" of the
denomination--which remains
unchanged.

In the face of tremendous pressure, the Presbyterian
church has maintained
its integrity and reaffirmed its longstanding
commitment to nonviolent
economic engagement as a force for positive social and
political
transformation in the US and around the globe.
________________________________

We here at Jewish Voice for Peace headquarters have
been absolutely stunned by the Orwellian headlines and
poor reporting about this week's Presbyterian General
Assembly vote to use economic pressure to end the
occupation. It’s an almost exact replay of the 2004
General Assembly when most media outlets got the
Presbyterian decision wrong, falsely proclaiming that
the church had voted to divest from Israel. In a
sense, this misrepresentation builds on the earlier
one. 

In 2004 the Presbyterians voted to begin a process of
phased corporate engagement, including investigating
selective divestment, from companies that profit from
the occupation. Yesterday they reaffirmed that vote.
They did not rescind it, as has been reported. Nor was
the 2004 vote a decision to embark on a divestment
program, as was reported back then. It was a decision
to investigate the various ways the PCUSA could use
economic pressure to help bring about a just peace in
Israel-Palestine.

At JVP, the folks most upset about the poor reporting
are people like Judith Kolokoff from our Seattle
chapter, who along with Mo Shooer of the Bay Area,
represented JVP at the General Assembly in Birmingham,
AL. 

Judith told us, “I have great respect for PCUSA
because they did not back down from their
traditionally principled positions in spite of the
horrendous attacks against them organized by the 12
powerful Jewish mainline organizations who totally
misrepresented their actions in the 2004 assembly. I
know that the alternative voice of the American Jewish
community (our voice) as well the voices of our allies
from Israel and the Palestine were heard
.and
ultimately the loud voices of justice were able to
prevail."

What the 2006 General Assembly vote did NOT change

Clearly, the Church has no intention of backing down
from making a powerful moral judgment about the
occupation. Despite overwhelming pressure to rescind
their vote, the Presbyterian GA reaffirmed their
policy of using economic pressure to help bring an end
to Israel's occupation in Gaza, the West Bank and East
Jerusalem, a policy that JVP has long supported both
in other groups and with our own shareholder activism
with Caterpillar. The PCUSA voted overwhelmingly to
continue the same process of corporate engagement they
started in 2004. This means, as in 2004, the process
could still end in a vote for divestment in 2008, and,
just like in 2004, that is a measure of last resort.
They also reaffirmed their opposition to the portions
of the wall being built on pre-1967 territory, and
their commitment to ending the occupation not only in
Gaza and the West Bank, but also in East Jerusalem.
It's difficult to imagine why many organizations that
work overtime to block critics of the occupation are
crowing about this as a success. But perhaps the truth
just hurts too much.

What changed

One of the most striking changes was the inclusion of
an admission that the decision in 2004 had “caused
hurt and misunderstanding among many members of the
Jewish community and within our Presbyterian
communion....We are grieved by the pain that this has
caused, accept responsibility for the flaws in our
process, and ask for a new season of mutual
understanding and dialogue.”

Relating to divestment, the most significant change
was in language used to describe the longstanding
Presbyterian process used to pressure companies linked
to human rights abuses in various countries.The 2004
language was this:

“7. Refers to Mission Responsibility Through
Investment Committee (MRTI) with instructions to
initiate a process of phased selective divestment in
multinational corporations operating in Israel, in
accordance to General Assembly policy on social
investing, and to make appropriate recommendations to
the General Assembly Council for action.”

As of yesterday, The new language is this:

“7. To urge that financial investments of the
Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), as they pertain to
Israel, Gaza, East Jerusalem, and the West Bank, be
invested in only peaceful pursuits, and affirm that
the customary corporate engagement process of the
Committee on Mission Responsibility Through
Investments of our denomination is the proper vehicle
for achieving this goal.”

As you can see, the vote was an affirmation that the
"customary corporate engagement process", which opens
the door to divestment, "is the proper vehicle for
achieving this goal." It should also be noted that the
GA voted this year to use this very same corporate
engagement process in the context of Sudan.

To be sure, this is a softening of the divestment
language, and it means the push to get the PCUSA to
apply firm economic pressure to end the occupation
needs to intensify. But it is also a far cry from
revoking the 2004 decision, as the media and some
pro-occupation groups are portraying it.

Jewish Voice for Peace applauds the Presbyterians for
standing fast to their principles while also showing
that they are willing to go the extra mile to maintain
positive relationships with Jews across the spectrum
of our community. The vote this week means that the
issue of economic pressure will almost certainly come
up again in 2008. We are urging all of our members and
supporters to engage with their local Presbyterian
churches and with friends, colleagues and associates
who are Presbyterian. Tell them that an end to
occupation that leaves Palestinians viable territory
and a real chance to build their own future is in the
best interests of Israelis, Palestinians, and Jews and
Arabs the world over. Urge them to support even-handed
and fair-minded methods of economic pressure to bring
about an end to this awful conflict that has wasted so
many lives. 

For a just peace,

Cecilie Surasky
Mitchell Plitnick

Jewish Voice for Peace





__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com