1997 NCC General Assembly, Nov. 11-14, 1997, Washington, D.C.
1997 NCC General Assembly, Nov. 11-14, 1997, Washington, D.C.
May 5, 1998
Dear Member of Congress:
Increasingly it appears that the overseas consequences of religious persecution legislation may have been misunderstood. Its impact may well be to further empower religious extremists. I write to alert you to this possibility as you weigh your decision on this well-intended legislation.
This past week we invited religious leaders from several areas of the world to come to the United States to describe conditions in their countries: Pakistan, Russia, Indonesia, the Middle East and Africa. A list briefly identifying our distinguished guests is attached.
Many of you and many congressional staff members responded to our invitation to meet with them. Many could not. Let me summarize the recurring themes in their reports.
First, each overseas guest indicated that U.S. intervention in the internal life of their countries as a self-appointed monitor of religious persecution would be strongly questioned and could be broadly resented. It would have negative impact on other aspects of international relationships. Most importantly our guests felt that except in extreme cases, a sanctions-based approach would hurt the very people it is intended to help.
Second, such U.S. intervention will have little capacity to check or alleviate whatever religious tensions exist or whatever religious persecution may occur: such acts tend to be non-governmental, actively opposed by governmental leadership, often precipitated by fundamentalist elements and best resolved by those who live in the setting or country where there are such occurrences.
Third, what is reported as religious persecution is often understood locally as something quite different.
In Sudan, civil war and racial hostility play a far larger role in what are acknowledged to be tragic abuses of human life including physical maiming and even assassination and murder. U.S. sanctions invite alternative suppliers; only multilateral sanctions have the capacity to be effective. Also, such actions block aid from U.S. churches.
In Pakistan where a Christian was condemned for execution, it was broadly recognized that he was mentally unstable and his sentence was stayed while extradition was arranged through the Christian community there. Incidentally, the USA refused to accept him; Germany did, through church connections.
In Indonesia the extensive burnings of churches has a fundamentalist history related to economic and political tensions. However, local Muslims have regretted the burnings and in the vast majority of instances have assisted the Christian community in rebuilding, a fact hardly ever reported. Further, U.S. intervention will tend to fracture the Muslim/Christian cooperation that is developing.
In Russia the fundamentalist factor is actively present on both sides of some conflicts, and it occurs between Christians. Even the questionable new law on religion when placed in the context of Russia's long-term religious history has at least the positive value of giving official standing to a plurality of religious groups. Numerous such groups are now recognized and there is broad agreement that the most egregious aspects of the law will need both tempered administration and future change. It is important to recall that for 900 years Russia had only one recognized religion (Orthodox Christianity) and for most of the last 100 years was officially atheist. Religious openness is a new experience in Russia and has existed now for only seven years.
Without recounting all of the descriptions given by our guests, it is clear that they presented a far different picture of religious persecution than we have seen thus far. The recent report from the three clergy officially traveling in China reflects a similar condition in that country. Our overseas guests affirmed that local religious leaders and government officials are in most instances addressing local situations. Further they underscored that where U.S. sanctions in any form or even governmental reprimands are called for, only multilateral efforts will succeed.
It was clear that energy for the religious persecution legislation is not coming from religious communities overseas. This opens the possibility that victims of religious persecution when it does occur may find themselves caught up in a cause more than being listened to or actually helped.
Several Members of Congress questioned our overseas guests directly as to whether religious communities in their countries were requesting this legislation. None were.
As to what the United States could do to further religious liberty, each guest spoke appreciatively of the U.S. commitment to religious liberty. Then they asked that their religious liberty be respected and allowed to grow indigenously without U.S. intervention. They spoke instead of the need for U.S. help to build up opportunities for the poor and the disadvantaged as a way to dispel hostilities between religious groups. They suggested attention to the need for good health care, education, economic development and job opportunities. These would encourage religious liberty for all people and reduce the possibility of group conflicts and human abuse. They indicated that the need is for a positive response, not a punitive one.
Additionally, I have included a statement from Dr. Youssef Boutros-Ghali, Egyptian Minister of Economy and a member of a distinguished and respected Coptic Christian family. He spoke at a briefing held here at our invitation a few weeks ago while Congress was in recess. I think you will find his comments very helpful. Also, a brief set of statements made here by our guests is included. You may wish to review their own words. Our providing the opportunity for religious leaders from overseas to be heard here is meant to be a contribution to your thoughtful consideration of the proposed legislation. Their voices have not previously been heard.
We would have invited such religious leaders earlier had we been included in providing public testimony. Perhaps even now their views will be useful.
Please feel welcome to contact me at the National Council's Washington Office if you wish to pursue this issue further or if I can be of help in any other way.
Cordially,
(Rev. Dr.) Albert M. Pennybacker
Associate General Secretary for Public Policy
Attachments
List of Participants in the Religious
Leaders Delegation
Excerpts from April 28, 1998, News Conference
April 16, 1998, Statement by Dr. Youssef Boutros-Ghali, Egypt's
Minister of Economy