"Evangelicals for a Two-state Solution": A Muslim Perspective
Tarek Ghanem Monday, 18 February 2008
From an intra-faith perspective, one of the most withering dispositions of a religion is the tendency to fixate on a dead and idealized history or, even worse, to fixate on the end of history itself. From an interfaith perspective, the perpetuation of religious stereotypes, particularly as they relate to sister religions, has proven to be an ever-unfolding calamity. Significant religious strides are only made when believers actively swim against all such tides.
It is in this light that an assessment should be made of the July 2007 open letter from U.S. Evangelical leaders to President George W. Bush. The statement, signed by 34 prominent Evangelicals, welcomes President Bush's reinvigoration of the Palestinian-Israeli peace process based on the Road Map (despite its meandering and winding course). Most significant is its unequivocal call to fairness and peace by demonstrating that the signatories not only welcome a two-state solution for the dire Middle Eastern conflict, but also are ready to call on Israel to conform to principals of justice.
Such a declaration is an intriguing challenge to the widespread presumption—even among intellectual and activists—that Evangelicals uncritically endorse Israel for sheer eschatological reasons. There is a common belief that Evangelicals place a great emphasis on literalist, prophecy-focused redemption. This perspective aims at maintaining Jewish control of Israel, which ultimately will lead to the revisiting of the Messiah as prophesized in the New Testament. Coupled with the self-evident reality that "the road to Jerusalem starts from Washington," the fact that such a document is endorsed by Americans Evangelical elites anchors U.S foreign policy ever more firmly to the Middle East conflict.
The Evangelicals' open letter is historic, and for Muslims it is especially momentous for several reasons. The first and most apparent reason is the call for of a two-state solution—a direct rebuttal to any uncompromising belief by Evangelicals in an ideological and strategic favoritism towards the Jewish state. The call for a two-state solution stands firm in the face of the false belief in an Evangelical support for the consolidation of Israel at any cost.
The second and perhaps more relevant reason is directly related to a shift in the language, and hence the perception of the Road Map for the Middle East peace process. Many concerned commentators and activists see the difference in objectives between the Palestinian and Israeli sides as foundational and potentially irresolvable in complexity. This difference translates into dissimilar and often conflicting modes, tactics, and visions for peace that determine how they deal with each other. Seen from this prism, the central focus of the Palestinian side has always been justice, and for the Israeli counterpart, it has been security.
For Evangelical Christians to call upon Israel to conform to justice is helpful and most welcome, especially from the Muslim perspective. Many critics, especially in Arab and Muslim circles, blame not only Jewish Zionist lobbies, but especially the evangelical Christian Zionist movement for playing a crucial backstage role in giving Israel a carte blanch to carry out collective punishment campaigns, continue its occupation, and outflank international resolutions. One of the most widespread and counterproductive assumptions held in the Muslim world is that all Evangelicals are unconditionally in favor of the Jewish state. The standpoint presented by the evangelical signatories that both sides, Israeli and Palestinian, have committed violent injustices to each other and are equally called to conform to fairness is a great moral, intellectual, and religiously-inspired ground on which to build an initiative for peace.
Nonetheless, again from a Muslim perspective, one of the shortcomings of the letter is the failure to clarify that Islam is indeed a part of the Abrahamic tradition. The Abrahamic linkage between Christianity, Islam, and Judaism is one of the most pivotal resources for dealing with this conflict. The current lack of interconnectedness between the three monotheistic religions gravely stifles any hope of a genuine and sustainable rapprochement. Emphasizing this key linkage would have made the letter a stronger voice for increased interfaith understanding and peace in the Middle East—a voice that is desired by Muslims, Christians, and Jews alike.
Recently an open letter, entitled "A Common Word between Us and You," was signed by a wide gamut of Muslim clerics, intellectuals, theologians, and community leaders. The statement called for a recognition of commonalties between the Muslim and Christian communities—namely the shared belief in love for God and love for one's neighbor. The letter was welcomed by many Christian leaders, which is a great sign of encouragement for interfaith understanding. Rev. Mark S. Hanson, President of the Lutheran World Federation, responded to the signatories of letter asserting that, "This common vision for Jews, Muslims, and Christians signifies fidelity and fellowship in a world where conflict offends our common heritage as children of God." Evangelicals who support a two-state solution will have the greatest chance of making a difference for peace when they appeal directly to Abrahamic commonalities. Such initiatives are meaningful steps in the long path of reconciliation between all three Abrahamic faiths.
Unfortunately, no due media coverage of the Evangelical letter has taken place in the Arab and Muslim worlds to date, despite its timely relevance. Ears of concerned religious leaders, activists, and critics worldwide must somehow receive the message of reconciliation and their minds must be forced to engage with it. Much work remains to be done by the signatories and their allies to spread the call for a peaceful two-state solution, and thus the call for justice in the Middle East. Concerned people of faith must not allow it to drown in the sea of mundane media distraction. The declaration, despite its flaws, is an exemplary undertaking, not just on the front of Christian-Muslim interfaith relations, but for religious groups worldwide in such uneasy times as ours.