The National Executive Council of the Episcopal Peace Fellowship (EPF) has called for economic sanctions for Middle East Peace, but at least one member of the EPF, Bishop John Chane of Washington thinks sanctions would be “dangerously unhelpful.” What is the best and most effective approach to take? Comments welcome, as always..
Peace fellowship supports economic sanctions for Middle East peace
The National Executive Council of Episcopal Peace Fellowship has issued a statement in support of economic sanctions and divestment strategies that it believes “can inspire a more useful dialog and negotiation towards a just and lasting peace in the Middle East.”
But Bishop John Bryson Chane of Washington, a member of EPF since 1969, told ENS May 12 that such a strategy is “flawed and dangerously unhelpful at this particular time in history” and would “further hurt the critical development of the economy of Palestine and increase the marginalization of the Palestinian people.”
As an independent association of Episcopalians committed to nonviolence, EPF’s position does not represent the official policy of the Episcopal Church, which supports “corporate engagement” and “positive investment” practices when dealing with companies in which it owns assets and shares.
The Social Responsibility in Investments Committee of the Episcopal Church, in a 2005 report on the subject, wrote, “Companies can and should operate in Israel proper.” The report was commended by the Episcopal Church’s Executive Council.
Read the Episcopal Peace Fellowship’s National Executive Council’s statement HERE
Read the entire Episcopal News Service article (with other links) HERE