Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, January/February 2000, pages 52-54

Northeast News

Palestinian Christians Assess 50 Years of Diaspora

By David P. Johnson Jr.

A leading Palestinian Christian has called for one unified state comprising both Israel and Palestine. Speaking at a program called "Jubilee Justice, Today's Challenge—A Palestinian Christian Speaks Out," Rev. Dr. Naim Stifan Ateek, director of the Sabeel Center in Jerusalem, made a strong plea to unify the area into one nation.

"Not a life in a Jewish state, not a life in an Islamic state," he told a packed audience Oct. 30 at the Lexington United Methodist Church in the Boston suburb of Lexington. "We can call it Israel-Palestine, we can call it The Holy Land."

He added that while the Jews presently living in the area must be allowed to remain, the Palestinian refugees must have the right to return. If they can't return to their original homes, he said, they should be compensated.

A separate Palestinian state would be his second choice, he said, because such a state would be dominated by Israel. Furthermore, to force people to live in pockets based on their ethnic identity would be similar to the South African apartheid policy of forcing blacks into various "homelands." Ateek objected to what he called "the Bantustan, a homeland for Palestinians under the domination of IsraelÉan imposed peace that will be unjust."

Ateek also urged acceptance of Israel's existence. "The state of Israel should never have been established, but it was, we accept it," he stated. "If Jews want to live on the West Bank or Gaza, then they must become Palestinian citizens."

He also discussed three types of Zionism. First is the secular Zionism which established the state of Israel. Ateek explained that secular Zionism, with its roots in Europe, said that European Jews couldn't live among European Christians. Many Christians, including some influential members of the British government, said that with the Ottoman Empire falling apart, Europeans could help the Jews return to the Holy Land. This thinking influenced the Balfour Declaration, he explained.

On the other hand, religious Jews showed little support for Zionism, maintaining that, "The only one who is entitled to take the Jews back is the Messiah."

Describing how secular Zionism established Israel, Ateek said: "The Zionists bulldozed over 450 villages. They built up the country with the help of Western countries, especially the United States....In the name of anti-Semitism and the Holocaust, 77 percent of Palestine was robbed."

The second form of Zionism, he said, is religious and began after the 1967 war. "Religious Jews who had, up to then, not believed in Zionism, were won over. It was the final proof that God has come to the help of Israel, little David overcoming Goliath, the giant Arabs.

"In the name of God, religious Zionists oppress the Palestinians. Religious Zionists want to take the land of Palestine, the rest of it, in the name of God. They see the Palestinians as the Canaanites who are slated for destruction."

The third type of Zionism, Ateek said, is that of the peace process. "Because Israel is so strong and the Palestinians are so weakÉthe [Israelis] continue to Judaize JerusalemÉIn the name of peace, confiscation is going on."

The Palestinian Protestant minister went on to say that while he deplored Israel's existence, he accepted Israel's existence. "If justice had been achieved, there would never have been a state of Israel," he stated. "Palestinian Christians were very upset when the Zionists came in. Now Israel is there and I accept that they continue to be there."

Quoting from the Biblical prophet Ezekiel, Ateek added, "We don't own any part of this world, it really belongs to its creator."

Panel Grapples With Present Palestinian Plight

Following Ateek's talk, four panelists addressed the topic "How Did We Get Here?" Each speaker examined an aspect of the current Palestinian dilemma. The forum was moderated by Cambridge lawyer Donald McInnes.

Reviewing the history of Palestine, Thomas D. Mullins, executive director of the Harvard Center for Middle Eastern Studies, said the term "Palestine" is ancient and was used by the Romans and by the Greek historian Herodotus.

Tracing the story of the various rulers of Palestine, Mullins said, "The Zionist slogan 'a land without people for a people without land' is a total fabrication and the current situation is a time bomb."

The information packet given to conference participants included a sheet listing each ruler of the region starting with the Kingdom of David in 1050 BC. By adding up the total periods Palestine was under each group, the sheet indicated that Arab and Turkish Muslims ruled for 1,199 years. Jews ruled for 619 years, of which 90 percent was more than 2,000 years ago. Christians, including Romans, Crusaders and the British, controlled the area for 428 years.

The second speaker, lawyer Shawqi Issa, executive director of the Palestinian Society for the Protection of Human Rights and the Environment, described the current legal situation.

He noted that Jewish West Bank settlements are proceeding and Israel continues to arm itself. "They are preparing for war, not for peace," he stated. "Our life in the occupied territories is getting worse and worse. You [Americans] have a big role to play. America is the deciding factor there and we have the right to blame the American government for what is going on there."

Layla Farsakh, research affiliate at the Harvard Center for Middle Eastern Studies, said the Palestinian economic situation is deteriorating alarmingly under the so-called peace process. People cannot get to their jobs or to shop because Israeli checkpoints are routinely closed, she said. "Palestinians cannot exit or move within. It's a situation of paralysis.

"Over the past five years the situation has gotten much worse," she said. "There is a fragmentation of the West Bank and Gaza. Roads are controlled by the Israelis. In 1996, the roads were closed a total of three months."

The number of people at the poverty level, earning less than $2 per day, now has reached 40 percent in Gaza and 25 percent on the West Bank.

Ironically, one of the few ways Palestinians are able to earn a living is building houses on their own land for Zionists to live in, Farsakh said.

The final panelist, Jennifer Morehead, a human rights researcher and Shawqi Issa's wife, discussed an aspect of the problem that does not receive much attention: the strong support given Israel by certain fundamentalist Protestants.

"The impact of this politically motivated subgroup is particularly strong," she explained. "The belief in Biblical prophesies is a major force." According to Morehead, nearly one in four American voters is an evangelical or fundamentalist Protestant, many of whom believe that the establishment of Israel is in accordance with God's will.

Morehead said that such groups as Pat Robertson's 700 Club have 1.9 million members and his TV show draws 7 million viewers each week. The Christian Coalition, Focus on Family and other groups have millions of members and can raise huge sums of money. Taken as a whole, Protestant fundamentalists (not all of whom share Robertson's views on Israel) dominate the Republican Party in several states.

"This is a Christian lobby that is very, very powerful," Morehead asserted. "Clearly the most powerful religious force in the U.S. today."

Active U.S. Role Urged for Caspian Region

Although its oil potential may not be as large as once predicted, the stable development of the Caspian Sea area remains vital to the United States, according to participants in an Oct. 26 forum at Harvard University's John F. Kennedy School of Government. Panelists discussing "U.S. and the Caspian: Crossroads or Barricade?" included Araz Azimov, deputy minister of foreign affairs for Azerbaijan; Ashton B. Carter, a Kennedy School professor; Tim Cejka, vice president of exploration at Exxon Ventures; and MIT Professor (and former CIA director) John M. Deutch. All urged that the U.S. pay more attention to the Caspian region and work to strengthen both democracy and the sovereignty of the various nations in the region.

Moderator Graham T. Allison, director of the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, speculated that most Americans, including many politicians, could not locate the Caspian on the map, nor name the nations along its shores (Russia, Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan, Iran and Azerbaijan). Nevertheless, "Security in the region is of vital interest to the U.S.," Carter said.

He recommended that the U.S. provide strong support for the integrity of each country in the region. Carter said that because of the continued wars in the Caucasus, the adjacent nations of Georgia, Armenia and Azerbaijan need the greatest territorial support. In conjunction with that support, Carter said, security relationships, such as NATO's Partnership for Peace, should be maintained with various member states.

"The Caspian region has had a level of instability," he noted. "It easily rivals the Balkans, which has stolen the headlines."

Recent conflicts in the Caspian vicinity have included civil war in Tajikistan, attempts by Abkhazia and South Ossetia to secede from Georgia, Russian attempts to reimpose control on the breakaway republic of Chechnya and in Dagestan, fighting in North Oìsetia, which is part of the Russian Federation in Ingushetia, and Armenia's successful invasion of Azerbaijan to link up with the Armenian-populated region of Nagorno Karabakh, inside Azerbaijan's borders.

There was considerable discussion from the audience about the situation in Nagorno Karabakh, especially U.S. restrictions on aid to Azerbaijan. Resolution 907 prohibits economic or technological assistance to Azerbaijan until it lifts its blockade of Armenia. However, Azimov pointed out, since the 1994 cease-fire Armenia continues to occupy not only Nagorno Karabakh, but adjacent parts of his country.

Azimov also said his government is worried about the intensifying war in Chechnya. "We already feel some consequences of this war in Chechnya," he said. "There has been penetration and bombing in northern Azerbaijan." He added that if inter-racial strife grows in Russia it could affect many of his countrymen who work in Russia and send money home. "We are concerned about the ethnic tensions," he said. "The one million Azerbaijanis in Russia bring $1 billion back to Azerbaijan."

Carter said that because of the Caspian region's central location, events there concern nations in all directions. To the north, Russia deeply feels the loss of so much of its former territory and could be expected to take an aggressive stance if it felt threatened. "Russia is already suffering from a Vietnam syndrome and feels beaten down and misused, " he said.

To the east lies Turkey, the southern flank of NATO and a power with considerable interest in Central Asia, partly for geographic reasons and partly because of ethnic ties to its people. "The people [in Azerbaijan and other Central Asian republics] are Turkic and speak Turkish," Carter explained. "What happens there is of great importance to Turkey.

To the south and east, Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan, India and China all have potential interest in what happens in the Caspian, he continued. If the Taliban regime in Afghanistan were to increase its influence in Pakistan, the whole of Central and South Asia could feel the effects. "The specter of the Talibanization of Pakistan, a nuclear Pakistan," should greatly concern the U.S. and the other nations.

Oil Needs Huge Investments, Political Cooperation

The speakers also stressed that while the Caspian does contain considerable oil and mineral potential, the reserves are not as large as originally thought.

"Caspian oil is significant, but marginal," Carter said. "This is not a Saudi Arabia. This is not an alternative to the Middle East, but Caspian oil is crucial to the development of that region. Caspian oil will make up several percent of the world's supply of oil."

He said that the presence of oil under the Caspian Sea floor has increased the jockeying for position among the nations along the shores. Since the Caspian is landlocked, the oil and natural gas must be piped across considerable distances to reach an ocean port. Because the pipelines will be so extensive and vulnerable, any oil deal, Carter emphasized, must include all the relevant players, otherwise the potential to disrupt the oil flow is great.

"It's crucial that no one be left out," he said, "that there are no losers here. Everyone gets a cut. If someone doesn't get a cut, they'll disrupt the situation. Iran must be included."

Most of the Capsian oil is believed to be along the northern shore, near Russia and Kazakhstan, and along the southern coast, bounded by Azerbaijan, Iran and Turkmenistan. In addition to the conflicting national claims to oil pumped in international waters, it must be brought to an ocean port via several pipelines either through Russia, Turkey, the Caucasus or Iran.

At the European Summit held in mid-November in Istanbul, a deal for a 1,080-mile- long pipeline running from Turkmenistan, through the Caspian, across Azerbaijan and Georgia, ending at the Turkish port of Ceyhan, was discussed. Such a pipeline would benefit Turkey, but it will cost some $2.4 billion and will be ready in 2004. An additional 1,200-mile natural gas pipeline, also to terminate in Turkey, received similar European summit approval.

Cejka, a geologist and oil exploration specialist with Exxon, reminded the audience that those outside the oil industry fueled the intense speculation about the size of the Caspian oil finds. "Nobody in the oil industry actually said that it was [equal to Saudi Arabia], people in the government said it was," he said to laughter.

Cejka cautioned those expecting a sudden boom that the cost of extracting the oil from the Caspian will be astronomical. "The oil companies would have to have $300 billion to $500 billion in investment. It will take $5 billion to $30 billion just to build the infrastructure to build the platforms," he said.

In contrast, recent oil finds along the West African coast, in Nigeria, will be easy to reach. "We can float in construction equipment," Cejka explained.

As an added complication, he noted that "We are forbidden by U.S. policy to do business with Iran." Despite the difficulties, however, he said that 19 companies have signed production agreements for Caspian oil in the past year.

Deutch said the presence of Russia and Iran at opposite ends of the Caspian was significant. "Both Iran and Russia believe it is an internal lake," he said. "It draws Russia and Iran together and allows them to determine the pace of development in the region."

David P. Johnson Jr. is a Boston-based free-lance writer specializing in internatinal affairs.

---

< Prev		Next >