Middle East Committee recommends divestment from Caterpillar, H-P and Motorola

June 17, 2014

With a vote of 45-20, the Middle East Issues Committee of the 221st General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) is recommending that the denomination divest from Caterpillar, Inc.; Hewlett-Packard and Motorola Solutions — companies some say are engaged in “non-peaceful pursuits” in Israel-Palestine.

The vote came after a day and a half of testimonies from interested parties, debate among committee members and parliamentary twists and turns.

“It is the right and ripe time for us to take a prophetic stance,” said David Thornton, a commissioner from the Presbytery of Pittsburgh. He was speaking in favor of divestment but noted that he also supports positive investment in the region.

Although the financial impact of the PC(USA) divesting would be minuscule for all three companies, the church has the opportunity to make a spiritual impact that could serve as a wake-up call, Thornton said.

The recommendation is to divest from corporations, but Jews in his community will feel personally attacked if the PC(USA) proceeds, said Kenneth Macari, a commissioner from the Presbytery of Elizabeth. If the Assembly approves the committee’s recommendation, Macari said he’ll be a vocal conscientious objector.

Many commissioners expressed concern that supporting divestment from the three companies would align the denomination with the international boycott, divestment and sanction movement, also known as BDS— a stance they did not support.

But Christine Dickerson, a commissioner from the Presbytery of Riverside, said “divestment has nothing to do with BDS or finances and has to do with human rights.”

Calling divestment the wrong solution to the conflict in Israel-Palestine, Robert Opie, a commissioner from the Presbytery of Stockton, recalled his experiences in the Vietnam War. As a platoon leader, he used a Caterpillar bulldozer to destroy cemeteries used as firing points; although he abhorred the actions he was directed to take, he did not hold Caterpillar at fault.

“We’re missing the target,” he said. “We should be aiming at changing the policy of the Israelis and not directing our concerns toward a particular company.”

The committee approved a Commissioners’ Resolution stating that Zionism Unsettled, a study guide produced by the PC(USA)’s Israel Palestine Mission Network, does not represent the views of the denomination.

Released in January, the study guide is available for sale in the PC(USA)’s online store and has been accused of being one-sided propaganda by some Jewish groups. Citing censorship concerns, the committee voted to not remove the guide from the store.

With a vote of 52-12, the committee disapproved an overture calling for the PC(USA) to boycott all Hewlett-Packard products “until the company ceases to profit from all non-peaceful pursuits in the Occupied Palestinian Territories and the violation of Palestinian human rights.”

The committee also approved

  • an overture instructing the Advisory Committee on Social Witness Policy to provide a history of General Assembly policies favoring a two-state solution in Israel-Palestine and to prepare a report to the 222nd Assembly (2016);
  • an overture condemning the recent attack by the Israeli military on Tent of Nations, a peace project in the West Bank, and encouraging Presbyterians to visit the project and pursue legal efforts at protecting and rebuilding it;
  • an overture calling on the Stated Clerk to call on the interfaith community and PC(USA) partners to pray for justice and peace in Israel-Palestine;
  • an overture reaffirming the PC(USA)’s commitment to the human rights of all children, especially those in Israel-Palestine; and
  • an overture endorsing a paper written by the Ecumenical and Interreligious Work Group of the Presbytery of Chicago, “Perspectives on Presbyterian Church (USA) Support for a Just and Peaceful Compromise of the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict.” Cited as a third-way solution, the paper had not been read by many of the commissioners.

Read this article in Spanish.

Read this article in Korean.

  1. The two most divisive issues of the GA 221 are definition of marriage and divestment votes. Much misinformation is being disseminated. Yet it is near impossible to find on the PCUSA website, the actual wording of the motions voted by the commissioners. Please make it easy to find from the homepage.

    by Richard Wyatt

    July 21, 2014

  2. It seems that the "spiritual" approach to problems such as the Israel-Palestinian conflict is to first humble ourselves that there is no easy way to pick a winner, a loser, a responsible party, a victim, an aggressor. This is especially true when there is so much bias and dishonest reporting of what take places there, in particular against the Israelis. The Presbyterians need to spend more time helping the individuals stuck in the middle of this conflict and less time sitting in nice air-c0nditioned hotel rooms in the cozy US of A and pretending that they can decide who is right and who is wrong. The experts cannot and certainly they cannot. Go help these people instead of deciding whether to punish Caterpillar. Further, if they are looking to solve problem of international suffering - talk about Syria. Go find a way to save the thousands of people who die there each day, and what about all the Christians who are being denied their ability to worship and are being murdered because they are Christian?? It seems wrong to spend so much time and money on this Israeli - Palestinian question when there is so much more that a Christian can do elsewhere?!!

    by AJ Frank

    June 22, 2014

  3. The focus of the divestiture is on the incompatibility of church pension funding of military operations. Further, the focus is on 3 US Corporations that provide ample military resources to justify categorizing funding them as the church does other military companies which it has long since divested from.

    by Diana Noble

    June 20, 2014

  4. It seems that the PC has little understanding of the current Palestinian leaders. An Israeli cabinet minister described them as "terrorists in suits" and, with a US child currently being the subject of a kidnapping by Hamas, it seems crazy for a supposedly Christian denomination to support the aims of the kidnappers. Where is the justice in this? Is this reallly what the Jewish Jesus would have done?

    by Andy Smith

    June 18, 2014

  5. Agree with Mr. Opie, ineffective move with little to be accomplished. As someone who is pro-Israel, I think divesting the Church's holdings in these companies allegedly engaging in non-peaceful ventures in Palestine is 'over the top.' Perhaps divesting stocks of companies who left the United States factories silent to take their manufacture overseas makes more sense. This directly hurts Americans! And as the Church has chosen to involve itself in environmental matters, perhaps we should not own stock in companies who pollute the environments of non-regulated countries.

    by Marty Taylor

    June 18, 2014

  6. This position to divest and boycott is a feel-good, one-sided initiative that will have no impact on the principals - the Palestinians and Israel.

    by Dave Davis

    June 18, 2014

  7. We do need better understanding of the leadership of the Palestinian people and can they sustain a separate country. It seems that all of the area is under attack by the people that do not want to be governed.

    by Glenn White

    June 18, 2014

Leave a comment