In a move that has disappointed some American Jewish groups, the country’s Catholic bishops Thursday unanimously adopted a statement on the Middle East that affirms the right of Palestinians to “territorial and political sovereignty.”
The statement, which also recognizes Israel’s security needs, was approved by the National Conference of Catholic Bishops on the final day of-its four-day assembly here.
The approved document came under immediate criticism from a number of Jewish organizations, including the Synagogue Council of America, American Jewish Committee, American Jewish Congress and the Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith.
The SCA, representing the main religious streams of American Jewry, voiced “great concern for the document’s apparent call for an independent, sovereign Palestinian state,” and charged that the statement goes far beyond Pope John Paul II’s previous calls for an independent Palestinian “homeland.”
AJCommittee issued a statement saying the group’s leaders “profoundly regret that the resolution has retained the call for Palestinian ‘sovereign status.’ “
The bishops’ 50-page document, their first on the Middle East in 11 years, is the product of more than a year of consultations between a committee of Catholic leaders and representatives of the Jewish and Moslem communities.
When a first draft of the statement was released last month, criticism of the document by Jewish organizations focused on the statement’s approach to questions of statehood, security and negotiations.
Even Jewish groups that support the Palestinians’ right to self-determination said that including the word “sovereignty” would prescribe a political solution to the peace process before negotiations had begun.
OBJECTIONS OVER ‘SOVEREIGNTY’ CALL
Last December, the Vatican reiterated the pope’s call that the Israelis and Palestinians “have an identical, fundamental right to have their own homeland.”
The bishops’ document, by contrast, says that a peace settlement “should formalize Israel’s existence as a sovereign state in the eyes of the Arab states and the Palestinians,” while at the same time establishing “an independent Palestinian homeland, with its sovereign status recognized by Israel.”
Jewish groups objected, in particular, to the first draft’s evenhanded use of the word “sovereignty.” Apparently in response to those concerns, the bishops added a paragraph in the final document, saying “there must be negotiated limits to the exercise of Palestinian sovereignty, so that it is clear that Israel’s security is protected.”
At a news conference following the assembly, Archbishop Roger Mahony of Los Angeles acknowledged that there is little agreement on a definition for the term “sovereignty.”
“Our focus is on defined territory, autonomy, self-rule, the ability for Palestinians to elect their own leadership and to pursue their future together as a people,” said Mahony, who chaired the committee that drafted the statement. “However, some will assign more meaning than we do to the term.”
Serving on the committee with Mahony were Cardinal John O’Connor of New York and Archbishop William Keeler of Baltimore.
In a brief floor debate on the final draft Thursday, Archbishop William Levada of Portland, Ore., addressed Jewish concerns directly by urging priests, in their consultations with Jews, to stress the fact that the document includes a call for limits on Palestinian sovereignty.
Nevertheless, the SCA contended that the repeated use of such terms as “territorial rights” and “Palestinian sovereignty” is damaging, because it “leaves open to interpretation that the Catholic bishops seem to be calling for an independent sovereign state — something that the U.S. government has carefully not advocated.”
DISAGREEMENT BETWEEN ‘FRIENDS’
“The Synagogue Council believes that this statement prejudges what can only be achieved through the process of negotiations, which is the domain of the political entities involved, rather than religious bodies.”
The SCA statement also objected to the bishops’ calls that the Palestinians be allowed to select their own representatives in all negotiations.
The SCA said that the bishops did not address the Palestine Liberation Organization’s “interference in Palestinian self-determination and Arab intimidation of those Palestinians who have stepped forward to try to work with the Israelis towards a solution.”
Despite its critically worded statement, however, an SCA spokesman sought to soften the council’s objections.
“This is a disagreement between close friends, where the many hours of consultation by the drafting committee were deeply appreciated,” said Gunther Lawrence, who appeared to be the only representative of a Jewish organization present at the assembly’s closing session.
Lawrence said the SCA’s prepared reaction statement was drafted before the bishops’ final debate on the Middle East and should have reflected the umbrella group’s satisfaction with two additional amendments adopted by the bishops.
In the key passage of suggested solutions, the drafting committee added a paragraph stressing that its suggestions were made not to “limit or predetermine” the negotiation process, but to lay out “the needs and requirements” that ought to be considered in such negotiations.
‘FUNDAMENTALLY FLAWED’
Lawrence said the bishops’ Middle East statement “should not in any way ignite Jews to anger against Catholics. This is not a rift, but a disagreement,” he said.
AJCommittee’s statement “welcomed” several elements of the document, including its call for continued support of Israel by both the Catholic Church and the United States, as well as its “demands that the Arab states enter into full diplomatic relations with Israel.”
It was issued in New York by Rabbi A. James Rudin and Judith Banki, respectively the group’s director and associate director for inter-religious affairs.
Henry Siegman, executive vice president of AJCongress, called the document “an improvement over earlier statements on the Middle East” issued by the bishops.
But he expressed disappointment that the statement “still refers to Palestinian sovereignty as a requirement.”
An even sharper reaction was issued by Kenneth Jacobson, director of ADL’s international affairs division, who said the statement “contain a fundamentally flawed recommendation in its call for a Palestinian homeland with territory and sovereignty.”
That recommendation, he said, “runs counter to American policy and, by pre-empting options, is unhelpful to progress toward peace.”
Nevertheless, he said there is “much that is positive in the document. He specifically cited the bishops’ recognition that “progress on the Palestinian issue cannot be made while the Arab states continue their policy of war against and rejection of Israel.”
Asked if the statement will help or hinder Catholic-Jewish relations, Mahony said it would be “very helpful.”
“We urge Arab Americans and Jewish Americans to examine the totality of the document,” said Mahony.
“We look forward to very fruitful study with the Arab and Jewish communities together, to see what we can do together to bring about peace,” he said.
(Contributing to this report were Andrew Silow Carroll of the Washington Jewish Week and JTA staff writer Allison Kaplan in New York.)
JTA has documented Jewish history in real-time for over a century. Keep our journalism strong by joining us in supporting independent, award-winning reporting.
The Archive of the Jewish Telegraphic Agency includes articles published from 1923 to 2008. Archive stories reflect the journalistic standards and practices of the time they were published.
