 |
 |
DECEMBER 1999, pages 84-86 Christianity and the Middle East Religious Leaders Urge End to Iraqi Embargo
Twenty-four leading American Christian religious leaders sent a letter to President Clinton on Sept. 27 urging him to support the lifting of the nine-year-old economic embargo against Iraq, describing this as “a morally intolerable situation.” Individual appeals expressing humanitarian concerns have been issued by numerous church bodies over the past decade. What makes this letter significant is that it was signed by so many heads of Catholic, Protestant, and Orthodox denominations. “We believe this will strengthen our common witness and impress upon our government the urgency of the situation,” said Bishop Craig B. Anderson of the Episcopal Church USA, who also serves as president of the National Council of Churches of Christ in the USA, in a press release which informed church membership of the decision to speak out on this issue. “We are increasingly concerned and impatient with the morally intolerable suffering that continues in the absence of any change of policy,” said Bishop Joseph A. Fiorenza of Galveston-Houston, president of the National Conference of Catholic Bishops, noting how a series of similar appeals by Catholic leaders over recent years has gone virtually unheeded. The appeal refers to the accumulation of evidence that the embargo has brought about a drastic deterioration of living standards and life expectancy among the general public of Iraq, and that children especially are faced with malnutrition and death. The letter makes clear a position that continues to hold Iraqi government leaders responsible for the suffering of their own people by failing to comply with the Gulf war cease-fire resolutions and by failing to take full advantage of existing exemptions to feed and care for their people. At the same time, such actions do not relieve the international community of its responsibility to end the dreadful suffering caused by the embargo. It states that the international community cannot pursue its legitimate goals of eliminating Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction by threatening the lives and livelihood of innocent people. It is morally imperative, the religious leaders concluded, for the international community to take prompt action to ease the intolerable suffering of the Iraqi civilian population caused in part by the embargo’s indiscriminate effects. The full text of the letter and names of the signatories follows. Dear Mr. President: We write as religious leaders and as concerned citizens to seek your support for addressing the worsening humanitarian crisis in Iraq by quickly ending the comprehensive economic sanctions which have been in place for over nine years. We have long been deeply concerned by clear evidence that the embargo against Iraq is contributing to falling living standards and life expectancy. By almost every measure—such as malnutrition, child mortality and overall morbidity—the situation of most Iraqi civilians has deteriorated markedly over the past eight years. A recent UNICEF survey of infant and maternal mortality shows marked and widespread declines in these basic indicators throughout most of Iraq. As another U.N. report stated earlier this year: “The gravity of the humanitarian situation of the Iraqi people is indisputable and cannot be overstated.” We know from visits to Iraq by staff of our various organizations that Iraq is facing a deepening social and humanitarian crisis. Reports from colleagues in the region testify to its very personal significance for most Iraqis. Many lack adequate food and clean water. Diseases run rampant for lack of basic medicines. Family structures, education levels and living standards are all deteriorating. The scale of this suffering requires a prompt, effective response. After nine years under economic sanctions imposed at the end of the Gulf war, as well as damage inflicted by the war itself, the economy of Iraq has virtually collapsed. In recent years Iraq has imported substantial quantities of food and medicine through the oil-for-food program under U.N. supervision. This is an important but inadequate response to the humanitarian crisis. It was never intended to meet the overall needs of Iraq’s people. Even with expanded sales now permitted, this program cannot meet basic needs, much less fund the rebuilding of Iraq’s infrastructure and civilian economy, which alone can ensure adequate nutrition and health standards. We are well aware that the embargo is by no means the sole cause of the continuing suffering of the Iraqi people. The Iraqi government’s failure to comply with the Gulf war cease-fire resolutions and to take full advantage of existing exemptions to feed and care for its people is indefensible. So too is the apparent diversion of scarce resources to the armed forces and security services. These clearly make an untenable situation worse. The Iraqi government’s actions, however, do not relieve the international community of its responsibility to end the dreadful suffering caused by the embargo. The international community cannot pursue its legitimate goal of eliminating Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction by threatening the lives and livelihood of innocent people. Continuing to do so effectively punishes the Iraqi people for the misdeeds of an authoritarian regime over which they have no control. We therefore urge that the economic embargo be ended quickly. Restrictions on normal trade in civilian goods should be lifted, while retaining appropriate political sanctions and a strict embargo on military-related items. Taking these steps should not be seen as rewarding irresponsible conduct on the part of the Iraqi government, but as necessary to relieve a morally intolerable situation for which the international community bears a share of responsibility. Whatever the cause, whoever the adversary, we cannot tolerate the suffering and death of countless innocents, especially the very old and the very young. It is time for fresh thinking and new approaches. We do not underestimate the challenges posed by the Iraqi government and its determination to retain weapons of mass destruction. But the continued effort to restrain Iraq’s acquisition of these weapons should be pursued through more focused and morally defensible means. While pursuing Iraqi disarmament, fresh efforts toward regional disarmament should also be undertaken. In signing U.N. Security Council Resolution 687 that ended the Gulf war, the United States pledged that disarming Iraq was to be a step toward “the goal of establishing in the Middle East a zone free of weapons of mass destruction.” Serious efforts to negotiate a regional regime for such weapons, which would improve prospects for success in controling Iraq’s arsenals, should commence as soon as possible. In closing, we again wish you well and urge that you act promptly to help meet the pressing needs of the people of Iraq. We say with all our strength and conviction: Do not delay in addressing the dire situation of “the least of these” who now suffer in Iraq! Sincerely, The Right Reverend Craig B. Anderson, President, National Council of Churches USA The Reverend H. George Anderson,Presiding Bishop, The Evangelical Lutheran Church in America Mathews Mar Barnabas, Metropolitan of the American Diocese of the Malankara Orthodox Church (India) Archbishop Khajag Barsamian, Primate, Diocese of the Armenian Church of America John A. Buehrens , President, Unitarian Universalist Association The Rev. Joan Brown Campbell, General Secretary, The National Council of the Churches of Christ in the USA Bishop Joseph A. Fiorenza, President, National Conference of Catholic Bishops Brother Stephen Glodek, SM, President, Catholic Conference of Major Superiors of Men’s Institutes Wesley Granberg-Michaelson, General Secretary, Reformed Church of America The Most Reverend Frank T. Griswold, Presiding Bishop and Primate, Episcopal Church, USA William Boyd Grove, Ecumenical Officer, United Methodist Council of Bishops Richard L. Hamm, General Minister and President, The Christian Church Disciples of Christ in the U.S. and Canada Archbishop Cyril Aphrem Karim, Syrian Orthodox Church of Antioch Clifton Kirkpatrick, Stated Clerk of the General Assembly, Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) Dr. Ronald J.R. Mathies, Executive Director, Mennonite Central Committee Johan Maurer, General Secretary, Friends United Meeting Kara Newell, Executive Director, American Friends Service Committee Metropolitan Philip Saliba, Primate, Antiochian Orthodox Christian Archdiocese of North America Paul H. Sherry, President, United Church of Christ Metropolitan Theodosius, Primate, Orthodox Church in America The Right Reverend Dr. Zacharias Mar Theophilus, Bishop, Mar Thomas Church Joe Volk, Executive Secretary, Friends Committee on National Legislation Bishop Vsevolod, Ukrainian Orthodox Church of USA The Rev. Dr. Daniel Weiss, General Secretary, American Baptist Churches
The Rev. Munib A. Younan, bishop of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in Jerusalem and the Holy Land, called upon members of the U.S. Congress to “vigorously oppose” efforts to force a move of the U.S. Embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. In an Oct. 4 speech in the Dirkson Senate Office Building the Lutheran bishop called for a special status for Jerusalem as an internationally administered open city guaranteeing equal rights to all faiths. He called upon the United States to avoid any action that would “predetermine the outcome of the final status negotiations.” The full text of Bishop Younan’s speech follows: I am honored to be given the opportunity to share some thoughts with you on the significance of the Holy City of Jerusalem for the Christian churches at this critical moment in history. Jerusalem is significant for the Church because it is the place of the life, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, the place where the Christian Church had its origin. It is for the Church throughout the world no mere relic of a bygone age, but a community that functions with vitality in the present day. It is the center of the Church’s life, the place to which it returns again and again to reaffirm its heritage and find strength for its renewal. It is for Christians throughout the world a place of pilgrimage, study and meditation. It is in the shadow of the Holy Places that the Church finds inspiration for its witness and service to the world. As a Palestinian Christian who was born and raised in the Christian Quarter of the Old City, my family’s home was a mere two minutes from the Church of the Holy Sepulchre and five minutes from the Al-Aqsa Mosque of the Muslims and the Wailing Wall of the Jews. I have always felt that those Christians who live within Jerusalem had a special responsibility to carry the living torch of the faith that is handed to us by the Apostles and the early Church. Just as Jerusalem is dear to us Christians, however, I recognize that it is also dear to Jews and to Muslims. For this reason it holds the possibility for the creation of both conflict and harmony, estrangement but also reconciliation. The Palestinian Christians have lived in Jerusalem since the time of the early Church. They are composed of four families of Churches, namely: Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, Catholic and the Evangelicals. At one time Christians comprised 15 percent of the population. Due to the unstable political situation, the Israeli closure of Jerusalem, confiscation of Palestinian residency permits, the building of settlements and the absence of economic and cultural opportunities, however, the Christian population of Jerusalem has been drastically reduced. Out of a population of 27,000 in 1967, there are now only approximately 8,000 Christians in the city. If this trend continues, our Churches will become museums. The very city that witnessed the birth of Christianity will have become a place devoid of a viable Christian presence. As we approach the celebration of the 2,000th anniversary of the birth of Christ, a great many apocalyptic and millennial sects are taking a special interest in Jerusalem. These sects understand Jerusalem to be the place where a series of events will take place prior to the Second Coming of Jesus. Some of these groups, coming primarily from the U.S.A., believe that it will be necessary to tear down the Al-Aqsa Mosque of the Muslims in order to rebuild the Third Temple, thus hastening the second coming of Jesus Christ. These groups cause tensions and harm the good Christian-Muslim and good Christian-Jewish relations that the local Palestinian Churches have established throughout the centuries. These groups abuse and/or misuse the Bible for their own interests. Jerusalem cannot afford such tensions. The Jerusalem we know is the Jerusalem of dialogue, the place of mutual acceptance and reconciliation. I fear that if Jesus comes again and sits on top the Mount of Olives, He will weep again with the words: “Jerusalem, if only you recognized the things that make for peace!” (Luke 19:42) Jerusalem is a city to be shared by Jews, Muslims and Christians alike. This is the position of the Christian Heads of Churches in Jerusalem. In November 1994 we issued a statement which took into account Israel’s exclusive claim to Jerusalem as its unified, eternal capital, and the Palestinians’ claim to East Jerusalem (presently “occupied territory” according to United Nations resolutions) as the capital of the future Palestinian state. The statement can be summarized as follows: 1. Jerusalem is a place of equal just coexistence for Israelis and Palestinians where their political aspirations may be implemented and where they will have their national, civil, human and religious rights fully practiced. 2. Jerusalem must be the place where Judaism, Christianity and Islam must equally co-exist and live their faith. Jerusalem must be a secure haven for all three monotheistic faiths. They must not only have free access to their Holy Places, but must enjoy the blessing of justice, equality, dialogue, plurality, and reconciliation in Jerusalem. 3. The local Christian Church is the local expression of the Worldwide Christianity. For this reason, the local Christian communities, as the local Jewish and Muslim communities, should enjoy all those rights that enable them to continue their active presence in freedom and fulfill their responsibilities toward both their own local members and the Christian pilgrims from all over the world. Palestinian Christians, like all other citizens, religious or not, should enjoy the same fundamental rights, whether they be social, cultural, political, educational and national. Among these rights are: A. The human rights of freedom of worship and of conscience, both as individuals and as religious communities. B. Civil and historical rights which allow them to carry out their religious, educational, medical and other acts of charity. C. Their rights to have their own institutions for the study of Bible and Traditions, centers for encounter with believers of other faiths, monasteries, churches, cemeteries and so forth, and the right to have their own specialized personnel and run their institutions. 4. The local Christians demand a special statute for Jerusalem. They believe that all the above presupposes a special legal and political statute for Jerusalem which reflects and emphasizes its significance. The Church leaders add that: “Experience shows that local authorities, for political reasons or the claims of security, are sometimes required to violate the rights of access to Holy Places or the rights of other nations or communities. Therefore, it is necessary to accord Jerusalem a special statute which will allow Jerusalem not to be victimized by laws imposed as a result of hostilities or wars, but to be an open city which transcends local, regional or world political troubles. This statute, established in common by local political and religious authorities of the three monotheistic religions, should also be guaranteed by the international community.” 5. It is also important that the local Christian Churches be represented as observers during negotiations on the future status of Jerusalem in order to guarantee that these principles are adhered to. They have been accepted by the Churches in Jerusalem and supported by the World Council of Churches, the Vatican, the Lutheran World Federation, the Anglican Communion and many other Christian Communities. Finally, I would like to make one urgent request. It is that you vigorously oppose efforts that would force a move of the U.S. embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. I ask you to oppose any measure that would seek to change the status of Jerusalem prior to the conclusion of a negotiated agreement between Israelis and the Palestinians. As the facilitator of the peace process the United States should avoid any action that would predetermine the outcome of the final status negotiations. It is now the time of truth for Jerusalem. It is time that the United States use its influence to guarantee that the city of Jerusalem, the “City of Peace,” be not exclusivistic, but pluralistic in nature. It is my dream that Jerusalem will become a shared city of equal rights and responsibilities corresponding to the aspirations of the two nations, the Israeli and the Palestinian, and the three monotheistic faiths, namely Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. There will be no peace in the Middle East without a just peace for Jerusalem. Jerusalem is the symbol and promise of God’s reconciliation to all humankind. It can become a living paradigm of coexistence and reconciliation between two nations and three faiths. I ask you to help us to realize this dream of a shared Jerusalem. As a Palestinian Christian Bishop, I urge you to work and pray for the just peace of Jerusalem. May God Bless You. Dr. Fred Strickert is professor of religion at Wartburg College in Waverly, Iowa and co-author with Mitri Raheb of Bethlehem 2000: Past and Present, available through the AET Book Club. |
|
|