Canada, the United Church, and the West Bank

A few days ago Canada, France, and Great Britain announced that they would be banning products from the West Bank, the supposedly Palestinian enclave within Israel. I say supposedly because there has been a relentless program of building Israeli settlements within the West Bank. These settlements are often populated by militant Jewish settlers who harass their Palestinian neighbours, sometimes forcing them to depart farms and properties owned for generations. Other Palestinians live on land they settled after being forcibly removed from villages at the time of Israel's formation. 

The United Nations has deemed these Israeli settlements illegal but they continue to be developed. Since the 2023 Hamas terrorist attack on Israel the settlers have become increasingly violent and the Israeli military literally stands by and watches. The United States has decried these attacks and Prime Minister Netanyahu says they are unacceptable but this concern is a lie. The IDF could stop this almost immediately.

While these decisions by the three countries made the news, including predictable condemnation on Israel's part, there are other countries which have taken similar steps. The Netherlands, Ireland, Belgium, Spain and Norway, which have either banned goods or are in the process of doing so. Other countries including Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Poland, Portugal and Sweden are considering their own actions.

This is all important but should have happened years ago. United Church members may recall that in 2012 the General Council of the UCC voted to boycott products made in Israeli settlements. Companies such as SodaStream and Ahava are situated in the West Bank. In 2013 the United Church undertook a program called Unsettling Goods: Choosing Peace in Palestine and Israel, specific to West Bank products. 

The United Church was criticized and even vilified by some here in Canada. I was still active in congregational ministry at the time and I was contacted in various ways by individuals and organizations who condemned our stance. I was more than willing to defend our actions. 

At times it seems as though the UCC could be renamed the Church of the Cheshire Cat as we shrink in membership and number of congregations, a ghost of our former presence. Yet we have been bold and courageous in so many areas including ordaining women in the 1930s, offering apologies to Indigenous peoples for residential schools, including LGBTQ2S persons in our life and work, and choosing to ban plastic products at denominational meetings. In every instance we were mocked or dismissed or condemned as heretics.

 Hmm. While I struggled with some of these decisions at the time I wouldn't change any of them now.