Amazon.com Widgets

Sunday, August 14, 2005

The Boston Globe comes out on the right side of the divestment issue.

Divestment's downside

CHRISTIAN CHURCHES have been strong advocates for social justice overseas in the past, whether it be Poland, South Africa, El Salvador, or the Philippines. But each situation required different tactics. The complexities of the Israeli-Palestinian dispute invite a patient, subtle engagement.

Instead, some churches are planning to threaten divestment of stock in businesses that assist the Israeli occupation of Palestinian territories. This is counterproductive.

The Presbyterian Church (USA) announced earlier this month that it would insist that four US companies stop doing business that it considers helpful to the Israeli occupation. (Another company was singled out for supposedly being a conduit for Arab terrorist money.) If the companies do not agree to stop the objectionable business, the church would consider divesting itself of their stock. Millions of dollars in pension funds are at stake. This initiative is reminiscent of the successful campaign to divest from companies that did business in apartheid South Africa, though the church denies it is drawing a parallel. Jewish groups in the United States are outraged, and understandably so. Rabbi Abraham Cooper of the Simon Wiesenthal Center in Los Angeles called the action ''functionally anti-Semitic."

The divestment campaign by the American churches isn't prejudiced, but it is naive...

There are measures of both.

[an error occurred while processing this directive]

[an error occurred while processing this directive]

Search


Archives
[an error occurred while processing this directive] [an error occurred while processing this directive]