An exclusive forum, an intolerant forum: 'World peace' gathering didn't want to hear other voices
By: Mark Weintraub and Michael Elterman
This week marks a disappointing milestone for the principles of pluralism, inclusion and participatory democracy.
As the World Peace Forum draws to a conclusion, regardless of what the organizers may claim, it is evident for those who believe in balance and openness that the event has not met the mark.
Instead of serving as a true forum for ideas, engagement and identifying shared values -- everything that such a forum ought to be -- this initiative determinedly excluded those who bring a different perspective to the table.
The organized Jewish community was one of those groups excluded from the proceedings, notwithstanding our best efforts over a period spanning more than a year to play a constructive and meaningful role.
For the record, our concern is specifically directed to the WPF board and directors and the Middle East Working Group. We applaud the hundreds of participants who engaged in activities and open discussions that aimed at promoting world peace. Indeed, many Jewish community members were active participants. However, those principals did not apply on the subject of the Middle East.
In essence, as Paul Tetrault, chair of the WPF Mideast Working Group, explained to the WPF executive in a letter written on behalf of his committee, our participation in the event would show "bad faith" to the other participants. The rationale for the call to exclude our organizations was our support for Israel. In further elaboration, Tetrault confessed that when it called for open participation, the WPF's Middle East Working Group did so "without the least expectation that the [organized Jewish community] would be a participating group in the forum." The arrogance of that attitude, shared by others around the WPF executive, is matched only by its hypocrisy.
Recognizing the potential maelstrom its Middle East subcommittee created, the WPF executive half-heartedly sought to resolve the situation. Our organizations were told "Take an 'oath of allegiance to the principles of the WPF' and we will support a parallel program or workshop in which you can participate."
Effectively, their solution amounted to blatant discrimination.
To our knowledge, not a single other prospective participant organization or individual was asked, let alone required, to swear fealty to a resolution.
The irony is that for the better part of a year we worked to organize and sponsor a series of programs and workshops at the WPF that spoke directly to interfaith dialogue and relationship building between Palestinians and Israelis.
Examples included potential workshops focusing on grassroots initiatives to build understanding and mutual respect, and the role of women and education in peace. Yet in the eyes of the "progressive" organizers, we were tainted because of our support for Israel. Although they professed that the content of our proposals was excellent, we could not be included in the conference program because of who we are.
Well, we don't apologize for our support for the only liberal democracy in the Middle East and the repatriation of a displaced indigenous people to their ancestral homeland after 2,000 years of exile. Indeed, the organizers of the WPF would have done well to take a lesson from the Jewish state.
In Israel, Jews and Arabs sit together in parliament -- in many cases as colleagues in the same political party. In Israel, Jews and Arabs sit together on the supreme court -- as colleagues and equals. In Israel, Jews and Arabs lie in adjoining hospital beds as they heal from the wounds of terrorist attacks.
Throughout this experience, we have held to the "high road," earnestly trying to find space for the contribution we felt we could offer to the discussion.
Each rebuff by the WPF was answered with another attempt to demonstrate our goodwill. However, prejudice is simply not responsive to reason, discrimination is unreceptive to inclusion.
For us in particular, our profound disappointment is threefold.
First, we truly believed we had a legitimate contribution to offer -- on interfaith dialogue toward peace in the Middle East as well as the dozens of conflicts raging in places like the Congo and Sudan.
Second, we truly believed others could benefit from hearing our perspective and discovering that we share more in common than they might otherwise think, and they were denied that opportunity.
And finally, we grieve that the best efforts of some noble individuals associated with the World Peace Forum, like the Reverend Dr. Barry Cooke, Executive Director of the BC Multifaith Action Society and WPF board member, who tried valiantly to work within the leadership of the WPF to shift their internal process to a positive and inclusive approach, but fell on deaf ears.
We, however, will not give up. We will look for partners across the entire political spectrum with whom we can collaborate in building momentum for peace.
We will search for voices that share our dream of a safe Israel living in peace alongside her neighbours. We will seek out those forums where all are welcome to contribute to the call for peace.
Mark Weintraub is chair of the Canadian Jewish Congress, Pacific Region; Dr. Michael Elterman is the chair of the Canada-Israel Committee, Pacific Region.
