Israeli apartheid was one of the more contentious issues which surfaced at the World Council of Churches (WCC) General Assembly, which met in Karlsruhe, Germany from August 31st to September 8th.
EPF PIN friends and followers will remember that the existence of apartheid in Israel and the occupied Palestinian Territories, and how to respond to it, was raised at The Episcopal Church’s (TEC) General Convention in July. Three diocesan resolutions accusing Israel of practicing apartheid were forwarded to the next General Convention for further consideration, while Resolution C039, Justice and Peace in the Holy Land – Our Call to Action, which “condemn[s] the continued occupation, segregation and oppression of the Palestinian people”, but did not use the A-word, was approved.
It was no secret that the Anglican delegation from South Africa, in the spirit of their beloved former Cape Town Archbishop, Desmond Tutu, and at the urging of grassroots Palestinian clergy and civil society leaders, planned to introduce a statement to the influential Public Issues Committee, identifying as apartheid the Israeli laws which disadvantage Palestinians and calling on the WCC to support the international Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement.
The Steering Committee of EPF PIN, having seen the South African Anglican’s statement, wrote to the members of TEC’s delegation on the eve of their departure, urging them to support the effort, and providing them with the statement, as well as reports from B’Tselem, Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International.
Perhaps attempting to avoid, or at least shape discussing the issue, acting WCC General Secretary, the Rev. Prof. Dr. Ioan Sauca, citing discussions with church leaders in the Middle East, urged “discernment, care, and wisdom” to “ensure the decisions we take… help the Christians and people in the Holy Land rather than endanger their very existence.” Paragraphs 62-73 of his opening address flesh this out.
Undaunted, the South African Anglicans, urged by clergy and laity in Palestine, submitted their statement for consideration. Opposition to labelling Israeli actions as apartheid came primarily from the Evangelical Lutheran Church (EKD) in Germany. According to Disciples of Christ minister, the Rev. Jeff Wright, “EKD Bishop Petra Bosse-Huber declared to the gathered delegates that her church ‘would never use the word apartheid to describe Israel’, even though the statement only referred to the studies that had concluded that Israel’s actions fit the definition.”
In his Mondoweiss article, Rev. Wright explains that the Bishop was expressing both her Church’s position, and reflecting German government laws, based on the IHRA definition of antisemitism, making criticism of Israel a crime. Germany was also hosting Israeli president Isaac Herzog at the time, perhaps making it politically important for her to raise objections to the Assembly meeting on German soil.
The final document which emerged was something of a compromise. On the positive side, Seeking Justice and Peace for All in the Middle East, retained this quote:
”In June 2022 the WCC central committee observed that “[t]he discrimination against Palestinians is overt and systemic, and the ongoing half-century-long occupation continues to contradict the equal human dignity and human rights of Palestinians living under this system of control, while the response of the international community continues to reflect egregious double standards.”
It also commented on the Israeli Occupation Forces recent break-ins at a half dozen Palestinian NGOs, including the offices of al Haq, which rents space from St. Andrew’s Episcopal Church in Ramallah (and which was also damaged).
“The recent suppression of several Palestinian human rights organisations by the Israeli authorities without any effective opposition by the international community is an emblematic example of this system of control and these double standards. For Palestinian people, the situation is sadly compounded by the grave failings of the Palestinian authorities, including reprisals against opposition leaders and the lack of legal and democratic accountability.”
And to the presumed displeasure of the EKD representatives, it continued to reference the human rights reports and used the “A-word”.
“Recently, numerous international, Israeli and Palestinian human rights organizations and legal bodies have published studies and reports describing the policies and actions of Israel as amounting to “apartheid” under international law.”
The compromise came in the form of an acknowledgment that,
“Within this Assembly, some churches and delegates strongly support the utilization of this term as accurately describing the reality of the people in Palestine/Israel and the position under international law, while others find it inappropriate, unhelpful and painful. We are not of one mind on this matter. We must continue to struggle with this issue, while we continue working together on this journey of justice and peace. We pray that the WCC continues to provide a safe space for its member churches for conversation and collaboration in pursuing truth, and working for a just peace among all people of the region.
We don’t know how the members of TEC’s delegation voted on this Final Statement. There was no mention of the controversy in the reporting which appeared recently from the Episcopal News Service. And response to a request for comment was not received in time for this PinontheGo issue. (We will gladly update the article if we receive a response.) We do, however, believe that the delegates should have been among the majority who supported the statement.
At the conclusion of the General Assembly, a press release did not mention controversy over the word apartheid, but said the WCC
“is hearing the pleas of the heads of churches in the Holy Land more than ever before in relation to mounting intimidation, violations, limiting access to places of worship, and attacks by radicals… squeezing the Christian presence in Jerusalem, threatening the Status Quo and the multi-religious and multi-cultural identity of the city, along with displacing Palestinians.”
That was similar to the wording in Resolution A216, The Patriarchs and Heads of Local Churches of the Holy Land, passed by the Episcopal House of Bishops this summer in Baltimore, and builds on the EPF PIN-backed Resolution B003, Reaffirm Jerusalem as the Shared Capital of Israel and Palestine, adopted at the 2018 Convention in Austin, Texas.
While affirming “the rightful place of Israel in the community of nations,” the WCC press release focused on Palestinian self-determination, noting:
"At the same time, we affirm the right of the Palestinians for self-determination and that the Israeli occupation of the Palestinian territories since 1967, as well as settlement construction and expansion in the occupied territories, is illegal under international law and must be ended."
"Upheavals, violent extremism using religion as justification, ongoing military occupations, discrimination and systematic violations of human rights, economic crises and corruption, absence of the rule of law, and other factors have contributed to an existential crisis for all in the region.”
Affirming its commitment to the principles of "God's justice and love for all of creation, the fundamental rights of all people, respect for human dignity, solidarity with the needy and dialogue with people of other faith.”, they specifically highlighted their concern regarding:
“…another wave of forced displacement of Palestinian people from their homes—sometimes on multiple occasions since 1948—as in Sheikh Jarrah, Silwan, the South Hebron Hills, as well as in the rest of Area C," and noted that “The expanding Israeli settlements in the occupied Palestinian territories, especially those encircling East Jerusalem, are illegal under international law and threaten fundamental demographic and political changes to the region."
It is perhaps inevitable that a certain level of disappointment follows the completion of the WCC’s 11th General Assembly in Karlsruhe. There was no call to support the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement, which remains the best non-violent method of bringing about social change. And instead of speaking out boldly against Israeli apartheid, they were content to call member churches to “examine, discuss and discern the implications of the recent reports by B'Tselem, Human Rights Watch, and Amnesty International”.
It is also tempting to see the WCC as a rather opaque multinational bureaucracy body, a sort of religious United Nations, that is long on pronouncements but weak in ability to affect change. That may be true, but what if we were to take seriously their call to “examine, discuss and discern” the reports of human rights NGOs in our parishes and dioceses? (We would also commend for your use the recently released Dossier on Israeli Apartheid from Kairos Palestine which summarizes the various reports.) What if we urged the TEC to “consult and reflect on an alternative policy, perspective and comprehensive solution[s] for Palestine/Israel where all people have equal rights before the law”? And what if, as the WCC urges, we were to ask TEC to “call on the government of Israel to lift the blockade on Gaza”?
Editor's note: Thanks to EPF PIN member Randy Hey-Lamb for this report.
