Today there is much dispute over Israel's borders and her settlements. Backed by numerous UN Resolutions, most governments outside Israel claim Israel has occupied land illegally. The institutionalised churches are also adopting this view and advocating peaceful protest, such as a goods boycott. But are they right? You might also like to consider the implications of boycotting Israel. It will adversely affect you (for details watch the video).
Today Israel is under international pressure to withdraw from 'illegal territories' gained in the 1967 Arab-Israeli war. In particular, it is requested by the UN that Israel refrain from further settlement in such territories.
The World Council of Churches (WCC) has taken up the UN legal argument and made a strong condemnation of Israel's current position. The argument, quite understandably, centres on humanitarian grounds and the suffering of Palestinian Arabs. The 2009 WCC Statement on Israeli settlements lays great stress on the concept of 'illegal settlements' and encourages churches to engage in legal, non-violent action to resist settlements. Regarding a boycott, the Statement says:
"(The WCC is) convinced of the need for an international boycott of goods produced in the illegal Israeli settlements in the occupied territories and for member churches and faithful to join in non-violent acts of resistance to the destruction of Palestinian properties and to forced evictions of people from their homes and lands"
"(The WCC) reiterates the need for an international boycott of settlement products and services, for member churches to inform themselves about settlement products imported into their countries and for churches to practice morally responsible investment in order to influence businesses linked to the Israeli occupation and its illegal settlements."
The legality of international statements upon which this boycott rests is very much debated. In June 2011, Dr. Jaques Gauthier, an international human rights lawyer from Toronto addressed the European Parliament in Brussels on the legal issues regarding Jerusalem and Israel. Referring to the 1922 British Mandate for Palestine and to Article 80 of the UN Charter he said:
"For anyone who is interested in justice, these are issues which we have to study carefully ... the rights vested in the Jewish people stand on very solid legal ground and are valid to this day."
For a detailed look at the historical and legal case against the UN's position, see Israel's Borders.
The position on Israel taken by much of the institutionalised church e.g. many Anglican and Methodist churches seems to be coloured by forms of Replacement Theology and arguments over the Abrahamic Covenant. Essentially, 'covenant theologians' see no future for national Israel and no special people with no special blessings. Unfortunately, the UK Methodist Church appears to lean towards some aspects of this theology and has chosen to adopt the 2009 WCC position on Israel. The 2010 report of the Methodist Israel-Palestine Working Group (also found at 2010 Conference) makes the following call to Methodists:
"The Methodist Conference noted the call of the World Council of Churches in 2009 for an international boycott of settlement produce and services and the support given for such a boycott by Christian leaders in Palestine in the "Kairos" document, Palestinian civil society and a growing number of Jewish organisations both inside Israel and worldwide and called on the Methodist people to support and engage with this boycott of Israeli goods emanating from illegal settlements." (Resolution 14/9).
Methodists do not have to accept this. Those who support Israel and see the covenant promises being worked out before their eyes e.g. the return of Israel to their 'promised land' see things differently. A strong rebuttal of the boycott call can be found at Reply to Methodist boycott.
Related topics: Israel ; Israel's Borders ; Palestinian Problem