Americans for Peace Now (APN) sent out a press release yesterday urging the Presbyterian Church not to divest from three companies doing business in the occupation because the measure serves those who seek “Israel’s destruction” and raises “very real and understandable worries about global anti-Semitism.”
APN’s press release says the Presbyterian divestment measure targets “Israel rather than the occupation,” but this language would seem to directly contradict the resolution itself, which is narrowly focused.
Below are excerpts of the APN press release and a response to the peace group from Noah T. Winer, a board member of Jewish Voice for Peace. First APN:
Washington, DC – Americans for Peace Now (APN) urges the plenary of the Presbyterian Church (USA) not to adopt the resolution approved yesterday by its Middle East and Peacemaking Issues Committee (Committee 15) to divest from companies, over Israel’s use of their products in ways that allegedly violate Palestinian human rights.
APN’s president and CEO Debra DeLee said: “We believe that divestment campaigns such as this are misguided and counterproductive. They use a blunt instrument to pressure global corporations to curtail their business with Israel because of objectionable Israeli government policies in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip.”
“By targeting Israel rather than the occupation, this divestment campaign creates the impression that PC (USA) is making common cause with historically virulently anti-Israel organizations and individuals, who are often not interested in Israeli security concerns or Palestinian behavior but in Israel’s destruction. Divestment campaigns such as this therefore raise very real and understandable worries about global anti-Semitism and the perception that the campaigns are not truly (or only) about Israeli policies but rather reflect a deep-seated hatred for and rejection of Israel.”
“Their impact, characteristically, is not Israel changing its policies but rather changing the subject. Divestment initiatives like this divert attention from the problem – the occupation – and help advocates of the status-quo frame things in ways that serve their goals.”
“Such campaigns, instead of making a distinction between Israel and its presence in the West Bank and Gaza, blur the Green line. A morally and rationally justified tactic would be to focus on the line that separates Israel from the West Bank, and, while buying goods made in Israel, to make a point of not purchasing products made in West Bank settlements.”
From Jewish Voice for Peace board member Winer, to APN official:
I’m just back from attending the PC(USA)’s General Assembly, and I was disturbed to see APN’s statement describe the PC(USA) as “targeting Israel rather than the occupation.”
This is factually incorrect. The PC(USA)’s Middle East and Peacemaking Issues Committee spent many hours working on precise language (arguing over meaning, intent, grammar, and punctuation). This follows a very detailed report from the [Presbyterian Church’s] Mission Responsibility Through Investment Committee. Nowhere in the overture does such targeting exist. Here is the language that passed. In fact, both MRTI and the Board of Pensions made it quite clear in Committee deliberations that the church still intends to hold stock in many companies doing business in Israel. The three companies being targeted for divestment are to be placed on that list as “companies profiting from non-peaceful pursuits in Israel-Palestine.” The exact nature of those “non-peaceful pursuits” is explained in detail in the link above — which is the language approved by committee.
What was APN’s justification for describing the PC(USA) overture as targeting Israel rather than the occupation? I hope you can issue a correction to prevent damage to the relationship between PC(USA) and the American Jewish peace community. Whatever disagreements APN may have with PC(USA)’s decision, this is an inaccurate representation.
The APN assault on divestment follows a warning by J Street’s president Jeremy Ben-Ami that divestment would end harmony between Christians and the “Jewish community.”
Who cares what ‘Americans for Peace Now’ say? Seriously, by cataloging every jewish groups objections to divestment, a casual reader or observer comes away thinking that maybe there is something to the charge. Is the goal here really to piss everybody off and make former friends enemies? Seems to me, MW should ignore more of this nonsense coming from these predominately “pro” israel jewish groups; “jewish group acccuses pro divestment group of anti-semitism” is about as newsworthy as “A plane has just landed at LaGuardia.”
You’re kind of indirectly lending weight to these people, and helping to perpetuate the notion that Jews deserve a privileged place in the discussion here in the US by publishing every response made by these hacks.
Glad to see Winer and JVP making the distinction so clear, that the moment calls for targeting the occupation specifically. Smart people making good choices that lead to victory. More evidence that the ‘all or nothing’ approach is extremist and counter productive. Which is why APN is trying to hard to conflate the two. Let’s not help them.
“The measure serves those who seek “Israel’s destruction” and raises “very real and understandable worries about global anti-Semitism.” ”
When Americans figure out
-that there is never going to be peace
and
-that the Jews in Israel were lying all along
and
-that Peace Now is a sick joke
and
-that building YESHA has been carried out all along the way under the threat of calling anyone who disagrees an antisemite.
how do people think they will react?
http://www.israelhayom.com/site/newsletter_opinion.php?id=2185
Levi’s report concludes that Israel has the right to settle Jews in Judea and Samaria, and that it is incorrect to say that building settlements is illegal according to international law: “According to international law Israelis have the legal right to settle in all of Judea and Samaria
That is the Government’s own arbitrator.
Israel is YESHA.
Suck on the consequences, Israel.
“”very real and understandable worries about global anti-Semitism.”
If they are worried about anti semitism they know how to stop it.
But they don’t stop what they’re doing do they?….so they must not really be worried.
65 years and counting….time to pull out all the stops.
The use of scare-quotes and sneer-quotes is an unattractive habit yet I do think the practice is justified in labeling APN not a peace groups but a “peace” groups. Given that A”P”N supports unconditional and lavish military aid to Israel (the meat and bone of the Washington’s client-state relationship with Israel) it does not surprise me too much that these soi-disant peaceniks are undermining this sensible and rather mild measure by the Presbyterians. The difference between the bottom-lines of A”P”N, J Street, AIPAC and Peter Beinart are not meaningless but they are really not large either. A little perspective please?