I am disappointed, very disappointed. And once again by the churches, this time by the World Council of Churches. At its last meeting in June, it issued a statement on Palestine and Israel that not only sharply condemns Israeli actions in the Gaza Strip and the occupation of the West Bank, but also calls for very far-reaching punitive measures against the Jewish state. Furthermore, Israel is accused of apartheid.
I share the horror at the high number of civilian casualties in Gaza. I understand the criticism of Israeli policy in the occupied territories. Nevertheless, I have no understanding at all for this statement. The authors forget: this war was imposed on Israel by Hamas, which refuses to surrender, sacrifices more and more Palestinians, and increasingly blackmails the Israeli government. But not a word about that. Not even the attack of October 7, 2023, or the hostages still held in Gaza to this day are mentioned.
I am not concerned with “whataboutism,” trying to deflect criticism of Israel by pointing to the misdeeds of “the other side.” Rather, I am disappointed by the cold-heartedness expressed here. Especially the churches would do well to stand on the side of all victims, instead of dividing them into national groups and thus first- and second-class victims—or even victims of a zero category, since apparently Israelis do not deserve mention.
Do the churches not care that Israel has been shelled with rockets almost daily since autumn 2023? That a terror state like Iran and terrorist armies like Hezbollah want to wipe the country off the map? The aggressors say so openly. The churches remain silent. Why?
I suspect: they do not want to engage with the complexity of the situation. Despite all the, including justified, criticism of Israel: the conflict is not between good Palestinians and evil Israelis, and even an immediate end to the occupation of the West Bank would bring neither peace nor a two-state solution. For over a hundred years, two peoples have claimed the same land, and both have good arguments for their claims. Above all, both now live there. The Jewish state has existed for nearly 80 years; its more than seven million Jewish inhabitants will not leave simply because their connection to the region is questioned with historically dubious arguments. Just as little can the Palestinian residents of the West Bank or Gaza be denied the right to their ancestral homeland by equally dubious arguments. The only path to peace therefore lies in a willingness to compromise and in recognizing the traumas of the respective other side.
October 7 is a huge trauma for Israelis because they had to learn that they are not safe in their own country from kidnappings and mass violence; and that their enemies do not shy away from the greatest brutality against children. Anyone who condemns Israel’s military actions should take this into account. Especially since the war in Gaza would be over if Hamas would just release all hostages.
Anyone who wants peace should call for understanding and compromise, instead of, like the statement from South Africa, one-sidedly supporting the claims of one side and condemning the other with slogans. The loss of homeland for 750,000 Palestinians during the War of Independence was a tragedy; their expulsion was a crime. But eight decades later, this cannot be taken to imply an unrestricted right of return for all their descendants, as the present paper does. International lawyers may debate which aspects of the definition of “apartheid” might apply in the West Bank, but Israel is anything but an “apartheid system.”
The state is multi-religious and multicultural; it guarantees equal rights for all, including the large minority of Arab citizens (21 percent of the population). What is the purpose of the undifferentiated accusation of apartheid? It leads only to the one-sided condemnation of Israel, from which no return to understanding is possible.
Last but not least, I would have wished for compassion from the churches toward Jews worldwide. Since October 7, the number of antisemitic insults and violent attacks has massively increased. Antisemitism has become socially acceptable again. Almost all Jews I speak to are afraid. We know: whenever the Israeli-Palestinian conflict intensifies, the number of attacks on Jews everywhere rises. And prejudices grow. Even I, an intelligent and educated person, am constantly identified with Israel simply because I am Jewish. I have neither an Israeli passport nor have I ever lived there for more than a few weeks. Apparently, the idea does not die that all Jews are actually Israelis, personally responsible for the actions of the Israeli government.
In fact, most Jews have a special relationship to the only Jewish state in the world. It is our life insurance. If it becomes impossible for us to live where we are because hatred of Jews grows too strong, we can pack our bags and seek refuge in Israel. This certainty has been invaluable.
Now it is shaken. Eighty years after the Shoah, we sense that antisemitism will never disappear. Our security compared to then is primarily due to the existence of Israel. We may reject Netanyahu or settlement building; we may demand an immediate end to the war in Gaza. But when it comes down to it, we will head to the safe haven of the Jewish state. But is it still safe? We have doubts.
Anyone who criticizes Israel should keep this in mind and weigh their words so as not to give rise to even more Jew-hatred. The World Council of Churches has failed at this task. I am disappointed, very disappointed.
