Overture 57

On Directing ACSWP to Constitute a Task Force to Draft a New Statement on Middle East Policy—From the Presbytery of Eastern Virginia.

The Presbytery of Eastern Virginia overtures the 217th General Assembly (2006) to do the following:

1. Direct the Advisory Committee on Social Witness Policy (ACSWP) to constitute a task force to draft a new and comprehensive statement of General Assembly policy regarding the Middle East for consideration by the 218th General Assembly (2008), using the procedures outlined in “Forming Social Policy” (in the Manual of the General Assembly)—except as provided otherwise below.

2. Direct that the membership of the task force shall be comprised as follows: One member shall be designated by each presbytery that has sent an overture relating to the Middle East to at least one of the two most recent General Assemblies (the 216 [2004] and 217 [2006]), or that concurred with such an overture. Among those presbyteries not having sent or concurred with such overtures, each presbytery that has an official mission partnership with a partner church body in the region shall designate one member. The ACSWP shall designate four other members of the task force, two from among the elected members of the ACSWP and two from other nominees received from the church. The ACSWP shall take care to see that members of the task force reflect the diversity of theological and political convictions within the Reformed tradition as it relates to the Middle East.

3. Direct that two additional persons shall be invited to participate in all task force meetings with voice but no vote. One shall come from a mainstream Jewish organization that has criticized past General Assembly resolutions relating to the Middle East, but recognizes the right of self-determination for Palestinians. The other shall come from a mainstream Muslim organization that has criticized the state of Israel, but does not favor its destruction. The Stated Clerk, in consultation with the Worldwide Ministries Division, shall designate these two persons.

4. Direct that the task force shall compile an on-line bibliography related to the Middle East, providing information and various viewpoints on a range of countries and topics in the region. Among the topics to be considered are: the theological basis for Christian engagement in the Middle East; the state of partner churches in the region; the challenges to Christian evangelism in word and deed there; violations of religious freedom and other human rights; the fomenting of hatred and discrimination against minority ethnic and religious groups; poverty and its causes in the region; lack of education and health care; the rights of women and children and other vulnerable persons; military occupations and other impositions of government without the consent of the governed; nuclear proliferation and other threats by states to destroy their neighbors; terrorist acts against non-combatants and the states and organizations that sponsor such attacks; threats of environmental degradation; visions for how conflicts within and between nations in the region might be reconciled and a greater measure of justice and peace might be achieved; examples of how the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) and its mission partners might make steps in those directions.

5. Direct that the task force shall solicit input from members of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) ecumenical partners in the Middle East and a range of Muslim and Jewish groups concerned about the region.

6. Direct that the task force shall prepare a proposed policy statement with recommendations and background information addressing concerns such as those raised in Recommendation 4. above.

7. Direct that the work of the task force shall be funded and staffed with resources already allocated to the Advisory Committee on Social Witness Policy and the Worldwide Ministries Division.

8. Direct that, pending approval of a new policy statement on the Middle East, the “process of phased selective divestment in multinational corporations doing business in Israel” initiated by the 216th General Assembly (2004) be suspended.

The standards for “forming social policy” in the Manual of the General Assembly specify: “A ‘policy statement’ establishes the fundamental principles that guide the denomination’s social witness. From this policy base a strategy is developed, a program is defined, and personal social witness is empowered. The most current policy document produced in conformance with the requirements 2.a.-g. of this document and adopted by a General Assembly shall be the policy in force” (Manual of the General Assembly, 2006, Forming Social Policy, p. 77).

The Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) has not approved a comprehensive policy statement on the Middle East since the former United Presbyterian Church in the U.S.A. did so in 1974.

It appears that this 1974 statement remains the “policy in force” that should “guide the denomination’s social witness” on the Middle East today.

It is self-evident that vast changes have occurred in the state of the Middle East since 1974.

Since 1974, General Assemblies have approved a long series of resolutions on the Middle East, most of which have been narrowly focused on a few nations and a few problems in the region, particularly the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians and the two wars with Iraq.

Few of these resolutions identify any basis in the broader 1974 policy statement.

It is not clear that the current Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) strategy for the Middle East is, in fact, developed from the policy base of 1974, nor that programs are defined or personal social witness empowered on the basis of that thirty-year-old statement.

There is need for a fresh and relevant policy statement that will guide a mission strategy for the 21st century.

The most recent resolutions of a General Assembly (the 216th General Assembly (2004)) relating to the Middle East were approved after relatively brief debate, yet these same resolutions then generated unexpected controversy and division with the denomination and in its interfaith relations.

The majority of commissioners did not seem to understand that these resolutions were venturing into new political territory nor did they appreciate that their actions would be perceived as “unbalanced” by some.

This is an appropriate moment to take a broader view of a range of issues in the entire region and to study the extent that the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) is taking steps in particular situations that fit into a larger vision of peace, justice, and freedom, and the exhibition of the Kingdom of Heaven throughout the Middle East.