by STEVE MCDONALD AND MARK DAVID, PJ MEDIA
On August 11, 2012, delegates from across Canada gathered at the United Church of Canada’s (UCC) 41st General Council in Ottawa. The General Council is a triennial meeting of the largest Protestant denomination in Canada, a denomination also widely considered the most liberal of the mainline Protestant denominations in the Great White North. Unfortunately, as has been the case in some American churches, the gathering affords an opportunity for a small group of “boycott, divestment, sanctions” activists within the UCC to yet again make their move.
The UCC and the Canadian Jewish community have had a complex and difficult relationship regarding Israel. In 2006, a proposal calling for the support of BDS against Israel was presented to the UCC’s General Council. Through representations by the Canadian Jewish Congress (CJC), the proposal that was eventually accepted by the General Council was more balanced and included among several positive elements the recognition of Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state.
In 2009, a number of anti-Israel proposals came before the General Council, including a call for academic and cultural boycotts of Israel. As a result of significant work by the CJC and related agencies, these proposals were rejected by UCC delegates and the General Council went so far as to repudiate the language of the documents. However, the 2009 General Council did encourage individual congregations and local/regional church entities to consider strategies to “move the two peoples toward reconciliation (including but not limited to economic boycott).”
At the 2012 General Council, the Israel/Palestine issue is on the agenda yet again. Delegates will decide whether to adopt the recommendations of the Church’s Working Group on Israel/Palestine Policy.
The report contains certain praiseworthy elements: an unqualified recognition of Israel’s right to exist; the recognition that criticism of that right to exist manifests a new strain of anti-Semitism; and recognition that Natan Sharansky’s famous “3D Test” is one way of gauging whether criticism of Israel has crossed that line.
However, the majority of the report contains deeply troubling elements that reflect a distorted narrative and a serious misunderstanding of history. Stated briefly, these elements include asserting a moral equivalence between the Holocaust and the challenges faced by Palestinians (since removed from the report); a bizarre section that expresses “regret” for the past policy of calling on the Palestinians to recognize Israel as a Jewish state; and the false assertion that Israel’s occupation of the West Bank and the presence of settlements are the root cause of the conflict.
Added to this is the fact that virtually no responsibilities are placed on the Palestinians to participate in or contribute to the peace process (other than a faint call for all parties to reject violence), and the implication that Israel’s existence stems from the Holocaust (rather than nearly one hundred years of legal recognition rooted in the Balfour Declaration).
The conclusion? The report sums up by stating that the United Church should give “high priority” to a Church-wide boycott of products from Israeli settlements. This is premised on the view that Israel’s presence in the West Bank is “the primary contributor to the injustice that underlies the violence of the region.”
For their part, Hamas and Hezbollah don’t seem to be decisive factors: the words simply do not appear in the report. Also omitted is Israel’s painful 2005 removal of some 8,500 settlers from Gaza, as well as the evacuation of approximately 3,000 settlers from the Sinai in 1982 (referred to by the report in passing, but with no mention of settlements).
It’s telling that these points didn’t make it into a report that mentions the term “settlements” 54 times.
These are not trivial points. Any report which considers the West Bank occupation the crux of regional violence and calls for a boycott of settlements cannot omit Israel’s record of withdrawing settlements for peace and remain a credible document. Moreover, doing so is to reject the essential lesson of history to be found in the two major withdrawals of settlements. While the Sinai withdrawal (the result of a signed treaty with Egypt) has led to peace, the Gaza withdrawal (with no signed agreement) has since seen thousands of missiles landing on southern Israel. Are the settlements an issue that needs to be addressed in a negotiated peace deal? Absolutely. But they are not the source of the conflict: when they are removed without a peace agreement in place, the conflict continues.
The overall tone of the report is destructive to the relationship between the United Church and the Jewish community in Canada (a Jewish community, I might add, that is not monolithic in its views on a range of issues — including settlements — but that is very much united in its opposition to such boycotts). Indeed, such a policy would damage the UCC’s reputation as a reasonable voice for peace, moderation, and fairness when it comes to this issue. To that end, many members of the UCC have spoken out against the report: the Reverend Andrew Love appeared on Sun News to speak on the issue; there are counter-petitions at sites such as Faithful Witness; and a group of nine Conservative and Liberal senators who are all UCC members have sent an open letter to the moderator of the UCC to denounce any boycott of Israel.
At a minimum, the Church should promote those passages of the report that offer the opportunity to invest for peace and to support the growth of the Palestinian economy, and remove those recommendations that attempt to impose punitive measures upon the Jewish state through economic coercion. Regardless of what it is called, such “economic action” amounts to nothing less than a boycott. Better still, the General Council should set aside the Report of the Working Group on Israel/Palestine Policy in the interest of continuing and enhancing the longstanding relationship that has existed between the United Church and the Canadian Jewish community.
Nothing like being more catholic than the Pope? Israels largest trading partner after the USA is the Palestinians some $6 billion dollars annually.
They hurt Israel they hurt their Pali pets even more but I don’t think they care much for their stinking pets, just a PC way of demonstating their Jew Hatred without having to own up.
Source: IMF
Israel’s trade in Middle Eastern markets is much larger than many imagine. Israeli exports to Middle Eastern markets in 2011 are estimated at above $6 billion, about 13 percent of overall Israeli exports (merchandise exports, excluding diamonds, including exports to the Palestinian
Authority). In comparison to other regions, exports to the Middle East region in 2011 were larger than Israeli exports to Eastern Europe, South and Central America, Africa (excluding Egypt), and Oceania combined. In comparison to Israel’s non-MENA leading export markets, exports to
MENA markets in 2011 were as large as total exports to China, India, Russia, Japan, and South Korea combined.
The Palestinian Authority (PA) is the most important market for Israeli exports in the MENA region, second only to the United States. It is a larger export market, for Israel, than any West European market; as large as China and India markets, combined; and four times as large as exports to Russia or Japan. Turkey is the second largest Israeli export market in MENA, and the GCC bloc comes third. All exports to the GCC market are indirect, through third countries, and recorded in official external trade statistics as exports to these third countries. Some Israeli exports to the GCC are channeled through Jordan or Turkey, but most go through various European and other non-MENA countries. Based on our analysis of partial and indicative data, we estimate the volume of Israeli indirect exports to the GCC bloc at
the magnitude of above $500 million a year. Exports to Jordan and Egypt, in 2011, amounted to about $200 million each.
The exceptionally large size of Israeli exports to the Palestinian Authority reflects the dominant role of Israel in the tiny Palestinian economy. Israel is the source of about three quarters of Palestinian imports, and the destination of 90 percent of Palestinian exports. Though almost half of Israeli exports to the Palestinian market are petroleum products and imported products with low Israeli added value, exports to the Palestinian economy are of primary importance to a wide range of industries as well as agricultural and service sectors.
Exports to Turkey grew more than fourfold over this period. Trade has shown continuous strong growth, widely spread among various industrial and other products, and reflecting the strong and deep economic relations that have developed between the industrial and other sectors of the two countries.
Israeli exports to Egypt grew to just below $200 million, double their volume in 2005. Israeli exports to Jordan grew strongly and continuously over most of the first decade of the 21st century; by 2008, at close to $300 million, its volume was seven times as large as in 2000. Most of this impressive growth was a result of the QIZ agreement between the USA, Israel, and Jordan, which was signed in 1997. In 2009-2010.
Imports from Turkey have been greater than Israeli exports. Both imports and exports registered a significant increase in 2011, in spite of the political tensions mounting between Israel and Turkey.
In summary, Israel’s export volume to MENA markets is significant, and the figures presented above demonstrate the economic importance of the region to the Israeli economy.
Ted my Israel economic status comment disappeared
As of 2010, Israel has the 24th largest economy in the world,( World Economic Forum Global Competitiveness report ) and ranks 15th among 169 world nations on the UN’s Human Development Index, which places it in the category of “Very Highly Developed”. Israel’s economy also ranks 17th among the world’s most economically developed nations, according to IMD’s World Competitiveness Yearbook rankings. The Israeli economy was ranked as the world’s most durable economy in the face of crises, and was also ranked first in the rate research and development center investments.
The Bank of Israel was ranked first among central banks for its efficient functioning, up from the 8th place in 2009. Israel was ranked first also in its supply of skilled manpower.
Israeli companies, particularly in the high-tech area, have enjoyed considerable success raising money on Wall Street and other world financial markets: as of 2010 Israel ranked second among foreign countries in the number of its companies listed on U.S. stock exchanges.
Having moved away from the socialist economic model since the mid-1980s and early 1990s, Israel has made dramatic moves toward the free-market paradigm. As of 2011, Israel’s economic freedom score is 68.5, compared to a world average of 59.7, making its economy the 43rd freest in the 2011 Index of Economic Freedom. Israel’s economic competitiveness is helped by strong protection of property rights, relatively low corruption levels, and high openness to global trade and investment. Income and corporate tax rates remain relatively high
@ keelie:
Good analogy
The boycott has impoverished the Muslim Arab world whose bread and sustenance is hate. Tks Allah and Mohamed!
Jews United against Israel and the woes of media deprived terrorists
Perhaps one could draw the attention of these worthies that unless they toss their cell phones, computers, any gadget with intel, motorola or Vishay products which are Israeli developed,and, also they should abjure from any product purchases which may have benefitted from the installation of israeli water preservation techniques and be sure to tell their MD that they prefer the usual form of endoscopic examination rather than swallow a small camera.
I feel sure ,lots more israeli inventions etc could be added so these worthies would not be accused of hypocrisy by just boycotting items they do not use themselves e.g. cosmetics.
@ yamit82:
Yamit – it’s like electricity; it does nothing until it encounters resistance.
Historical note: The best thing that ever happened to the State of Israel was the Arab Boycott.
It forced Israel to develop and modernize our own industries, raise the quality to international standards and forced Israel to be super inventive and innovative. It forced us to find niche markets for our goods and did not inhibit much our trade-relations with America and even the EU. Israeli friends in Congress helped to blunt the worst of the Arab boycotts effects. It forced Israel to develop both political and trade relations with countries out of the worlds mainstream of trading countries.
Israel works best under adversity and pressure.