I was disappointed to learn of the decision of the Church of England's General Synod to divest from those companies that support Israeli occupation of Gaza and the West Bank. As much as I sympathize with their stated reason "To heed the call from our sister church, the Episcopal Church in Jerusalem and the Middle East," I find that an inadequate response to the enormous, and increasingly, complex situation in the Middle East. As I have stated previously: I strongly support a two state solution. That solution requires there to be a viable Palestinian state living as a respected and responsible member of the community of nations, alongside their neighbor Israel. Further, I believe that it is important that the international community bring pressure to bear on all parties to find a just and lasting peace. However, I disagree with those who propose divestment as a method to achieve this end because, though it does have the good effect of focusing attention on the plight of ordinary Palestinian, as a tactic it is simplistic and fails to recognize the plight of the ordinary Israeli as well. What is called for is Constructive Engagement not Disinvestment.
I find myself in agreement with the reported statements of Michael Whine, defense director for the Board of Deputies of British Jews who said, "The vote was simplistic and unbalanced, and fails to take into account the realities of the Middle East and the threat that Israel continues to face from terrorists." I agree as well with the reported statement of the retired archbishop of Canterbury, The Most Rev. George Carey who said that the resolution was "a most regrettable and one sided statement" that ignored "the trauma of ordinary Jewish people" living in Israel.
February 9, 2006
Bishop Mark Sisk
Fifteenth Bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of New York
Cheers to Bishop Sisk for articulating what I think many bishops believe but haven't said yet.
Posted by: Jim Naughton | Feb 10, 2006 at 10:44 PM