219th GA: Midle East Peacemaking Issues Committee Reports to Plenary

Because I observed most of the deliberations and actions of Committee 14: Middle East Peacemaking Issues, I watched with interest, via live streaming over the internet, as the committee reported in this morning’s plenary. I tuned in a little late and so was not able to watch the whole report but was relieved during what I did watch that the Committee’s recommendations were being endorsed by GA Commissioners.

Prior to the Committee report, a letter from representatives of many, if not all, sides of the debate endorsing the Committee’s recommendations was released to the public. Here is a link to the letter, which was posted on the Presbyterian Outlook website.

219th GA: Middle East Peacemaking Issues, Committee 14, Completes its Work

Working throughout Tuesday morning and afternoon, (photo right) the General Assembly Committee on Middle East Peacemaking Issues surprised many observers, and perhaps themselves, by unanimously approving the Report of the Middle East Study Committee “Breaking Down the Walls” after having massaged, wordsmithed, and otherwise edited the report to make it more palatable to those who raised objections. With the Committee having unanimously approved their action, there will be no minority report and the likelihood of any attempt in Plenary to kill or change the report in any major way is nil.

Having observed this committee as it conducted most of its business, I observed the committee begin to gel early Tuesday morning and witnessed what appeared to be a sincere desire to bring to the plenary a balanced report that would likely not totally please anyone or totally alienate anyone.

When the committee acted unanimously I found myself thinking that if this committee, which seemed so divided and contentious Sunday and early Monday could reach a unanimous decision, perhaps there is hope the Israelis and Palestinians can someday do the same.

Once the major bulk of committee work was completed the final few items needing attention were acted on without undo haste or unnecessary delay and the committee adjourned for the last time around 4:30 PM, meaning there would be no need for a late night evening session or even an evening session.

During the Committee’s deliberations the Committee Moderator turned the chair over to the Moderator at least twice. I do not know if the Moderator simply wanted a break or wanted the Vice-Moderator to have a chance to Moderate, but the transitions back and forth between the two were seamless, a compliment to both.

219th GA: Update on the Committee on Middle East Peacemaking Issues

During Monday afternoon’s session the Committee dealt with several issues and generally adopted what came before it with little if any amendment, although there were several attempts to amend. To this observer it seemed that committee members are being given the opportunity to have their say but that generally the majority of Committee members were unswayed by counter arguments.

The evening’s session (photo right) began with prayer, followed by John Huffman, a member of the Middle East Study Committee, talking about his own personal journey and urging the Assembly Committee on Middle East Peacemaking Issues to approve the Study Committee’s report “Breaking Down the Walls”. Huffman was followed by several Overture Advocates speaking to particular overtures. After an evening of sitting and listening, the Committee 14 adjourned for the evening, closing with worship, at around 8:50 PM

As I have observed this committee, its debate and the presentations and testimony given to it, it has become apparent that the issues the Assembly committee is dealing with it cut across the usual liberal and conservative divide. I have witnessed those usually identified as Liberal and those usually identified as Conservative argue the same positions as other conservatives and liberals have argued the opposite position.

219th GA: Committee #14, Middle East Peacemaking Issues Hears Testimony

With 19 Assembly Committees, no one can follow the work of them all. I am following the work of Committee 14, the Middle East Peacemaking Issues Committee. The committee is handling one of the more contentious and emotion laden issues before the Assembly, the Report of the Middle East Study Committee, as well as related overtures and Commissioner Resolutions. Unlike other controversial issues such as Marriage of same sex couples and Ordination of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgendered Presbyterians, Middle East Peacemaking is more multi-faceted, complex, and nuanced issue.

The committee heard from representatives of the Middle East Study Committee and the Mission Responsibility Through Investment Committee Sunday afternoon. Monday morning the Committee heard testimony in an open hearing. Over 140 persons signed up to testify in open hearings, far too many than time would allow, so the Committee Leadership, as authorized by the committee, chose to select people to testify through a lottery system (photo top right).

At past Assemblies other committees have used a lottery to select people to testify but in a much more efficient way. A lottery was used well before the actual hearings to select those who would speak and then the names of those selected were listed in order of appearance so that they could be in the room, be prepared, and lined up to speak two, three or even four deep so that no time would be wasted waiting for people to come to the microphone, a fair and efficient process.

Even though I am only an observer I was frustrated by the process of selection employed by the leadership of Committee 14. The committee leadership used a lottery during the hearing process, picking names at random and then calling the person’s name to come to the microphone and testify (photo bottom right). Some whose names were called were not in the room and much time was wasted while it was determined that they were indeed not present. Because no one knew who the next speaker would be until the next name was called there was also significant lag time between speakers, lag time which could have been avoided if speakers had been lined up two or three deep. A more thoughtful and efficient process could have easily doubled the number of speakers who were able to address the committee. Overall it was a somewhat confusing and time consuming process that could have easily been avoided.

After a short break the committee reconvened to hear a presentation from Middle East Study Committee Chair Ron Shive, a presentation that focused on the Study Committee’s Recommendations, all 39 of them. After his presentation the committee divided up into small groups to process their time together.

219th GA: Riverside Conversations: Middle East Study Committee

There were several Riverside Conversations: Pre-assembly workshops for Commissioners and Advisory Delegates, to choose from. I chose to sit in on the second of two conversations about the Middle East Study Committee Report.

The Conversation began at 10: 30 AM when the Reverend Susan Andrews, a member of the nine member Middle East Study Committee, opened the conversation with a reading from scripture and a prayer. Soon after participants were welcomed, Victor Makari, Ph.D., coordinator for the Middle East Office of the GAMC, offered a background of the 200 year history of witness, support and presence in the Middle East.

After Victor’s fifteen minute background presentation, Susan Andrews narrated power point presentation (photo right) designed to summarize the Committee’s Report, which in her words is “172 pages of dense narrative” and which seeks to speak the truth in love. After the half-hour Power Point presentation the Reverend Brian Ellison, Chair of the Mission Responsibility Through Investment (MRTI) Committee, spoke for about ten minutes about the work of MRTI, especially as it relates to the Middle East, and more particularly MRTI’s conversations with the Caterpillar Corporation.

With about thirty minutes left in the Conversation, Middle East Study Committee members in attendance, Lucy Janjigian, Nahida Gordon, and Byron Shafer, along with Brian Ellison, were invited forward to answer questions from participants, Andrews directing that only Commissioners and Advisory Delegates should be asking questions.

The Reverend Byron Shaeffer, the only Committee member who declined to sign the report, was asked why he decided not to sign off. He replied that he was not convinced that the report reaffirms the right of Israel to exist and that he thinks the report needs to include a third narrative which includes identification of what is wrong with both the Israeli narrative and the Palestinian narrative.

Committee member Nahida Gordon, A Presbyterian born in Palestine, shared her concern over the use of the word “rights”. She noted that asking Palestinians to say that Israel has the “right” to exist is like asking Indigenous Americans to say that Europeans had a “right” to colonize the North American continent.

About two hundred people were in attendance, half sitting around tables in the front and half sitting in rows of chairs at the back of the room. Considering this was the second of two scheduled conversations, approximately four hundred Commissioners and others were able to hear from the Committee and peruse free copies of the report before the GA even officially convened. Given the attendance, this report, coming before Committee 14, promises to generate considerable debate and focused consideration.