Membership

Commission Representatives at General Convention

Bishop J. Gary Gloster and Ms. Jacqueline B. Scott are authorized to receive non-substantive amendments to this report.

Summary of Work

The Standing Commission on Anglican and International Peace with Justice Concerns (SCAIPJC or Commission) develops recommendations and strategies for the Presiding Bishop, the Executive Council, and the General Convention regarding ministry opportunities and concerns on issues of international peace with justice [Canon I.1.2(n)(1)].

Introduction

The attacks of September 11, 2001, revealed the susceptibility of American society to large-scale destruction by terrorists. Since then, the world’s view of the United States’ role in promoting peace with justice has shifted dramatically. Peoples and nations rallied in support of those slaughtered at the symbolic centers of U.S. military and economic might. When the United States led armed forces into Afghanistan to destroy the training ground for such terrorist attacks, there was widespread support around the world.

That support has shifted since the United States led a coalition of nations in the invasion of Iraq. Prior to the conflict, the administration set forth several arguments to justify this preemptive war, focusing primarily on the security threat posed by Iraq’s alleged possession of weapons of mass destruction and its supposed support of terrorist groups such as al Qaeda, concluding that a reactive posture could no longer ensure American security. The validity of these rationales for the invasion of Iraq remains the subject of intense disagreement.

The United States’ reputation has been damaged by accusations of detainee abuse, by its use of so-called “enhanced interrogation techniques,” by sending detainees to prisons in foreign countries and by its use of domestic surveillance. These actions created a backlash of worldwide opinion, a domestic debate on possible constitutional abuses, and highlighted the fragility of American democracy and the imperative to “respect the dignity of every human being.” It was in this context that the Commission sought unsuccessfully to travel to Iraq.

The Commission has regularly reported on U.S. foreign policy to the Executive Council’s Standing Committee on International Concerns on. While the United States expends vast human and financial resources on waging war and protecting U.S. security, the voice of the Church demands that primary energies be directed toward waging peace and ministering with the sick, the poor, and the disenfranchised. The mission of the Church “to restore all people to unity with God and each other in Christ” (BCP 855) necessitates a call for reordering of public policy and national priorities.

During the triennium, the Commission focused on:

• World poverty: The Commission met with the Most Rev. Njongonkulu Ndungane, Archbishop of Southern Africa and four members went to Africa (Jelinek, Kenya; Lipscomb, East Africa; Kinman, Ghana and Sudan; Dales, South Africa). The chair participated with the Presiding Bishop in the 2005 Consultation of Religious Leaders on Global Poverty. The Commission, in collaboration with Episcopalians for Global Reconciliation, has monitored diocesan responses to Resolution 2003–D006, which urges all dioceses to give 0.7% of their income toward fulfillment of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs);
• Peace in Palestine/Israel: The Commission met with former Ambassadors Samuel Lewis and Philip Wilcox Jr. and former White House policy adviser Toni Verstandig to consider the ongoing efforts toward peace between Israelis and Palestinians, and four members (Gloster, M. Miller, Scott, Spike) traveled to the Holy Land;
• Cuba, Liberia and Haita: Three Commission members (Moriel-Guillen, Farabee, Dales) traveled to Cuba, while other members monitored developments in Liberia (Jelinek, Brooks) and Haiti (Godden, Case); and
• Issues of immigration (Farabee), Temporary Protective Status (Farabee, Brooks), and nuclear proliferation (T. Miller, M. Miller): Related resolutions were sent to the Executive Council on Preemptive Use of Nuclear Weapons and Temporary Protective Status for Haitans.

The Commission extends its gratitude to Episcopal Church staff who have assisted so ably during the triennium: Brian Grieves, Director, Peace and Justice Ministries; Maureen Shea, Director, and Alex Baumgarten, International Policy Analyst, Office of Government Relations; and Richard Parkins, Director, Episcopal Migration Ministries.

The Millennium Development Goals and Call to Partnership

We are not an island church but part of a worldwide Anglican Communion. Our mission is “to restore all people to unity with God and each other in Christ.” (BCP 855) The past triennium has been an awakening. As tensions have risen in the Communion, we have become more aware of the Communion and have been compelled to wrestle with our connectedness in it. From the activist/entertainer Bono came echoes of our theology, “In the global village, distance no longer decides who is your neighbor, and ‘Love thy neighbor’ is not advice, it’s a command.” The Church has taken a fresh look at what being a loving neighbor means in a global village and how to join anew in God’s mission of global reconciliation.

The MDGs give the world a framework for healing and reconciliation. These tangible, achievable goals agreed to by the nations of the world in 2000 represent the most profound physical brokenness in the world today: 1) Eradicate extreme poverty and hunger; 2) Achieve universal primary education; 3) Promote gender equality and empower women; 4) Reduce child mortality; 5) Improve maternal health; 6) Combat HIV/AIDS, malaria and other diseases; 7) Ensure environmental sustainability; and 8) Develop a global partnership for development. The 73^rd and 74^th General Convention and the Primates of the Anglican Communion have endorsed the MDGs.

The physical sign of our commitment is giving 0.7% of income at every level—personal, congregational, and diocesan—toward work supporting the MDGs. 0.7% is the portion of the rich nations Gross National Product (GNP) that it would take to accomplish goals by 2015. 0.7% giving signifies the Church’s commitment and lets it speak with moral authority in urging the same of the U.S. government.

At this writing, 41 dioceses have pledged 0.7% of their budgets to ministries working toward the MDGs. Work toward that commitment happening in an additional 24 dioceses. A report on participation of all dioceses will be distributed to bishops and deputies at the 75^th General Convention.

Several major church bodies—including Episcopal Relief and Development and the Office of Government Relations—have adopted the MDGs as a structure for their work. The grassroots nature of this movement in the Church has taken shape in Episcopalians for Global Reconciliation, which helps resource and mobilize the church in making the MDGs reality. The Episcopal Church has affiliated with the ONE Campaign, a grassroots advocacy effort to move the U.S. government to forgive developing world debt and give aid at the 0.7% level—current U.S. giving is approximately 0.16% of GNP.

The Commission has used the MDGs as a framework for its work, searching for opportunities for the Church to build global partnerships that seek and serve Christ in one another and respect the autonomy and dignity of all people. The Commission commends the dioceses, congregations and people of the Church who have engaged this work and celebrates the joy they have found in doing so.

The Commission believes this is a unique moment for the Church because it has the opportunity “to let the whole world see and know that things which were being cast down are being raised up, and things which had grown old are being made new” (BCP 280).

Resolved, the House of ______concurring, That the 75^th General Convention of the Episcopal Church:

Call to Partnership—Consultation of Religious Leaders on Global Poverty

In September 2005, more than 30 representatives of the world’s Christian denominations, representing one-third of the earth’s population, met at Washington National Cathedral to discuss the church’s role in ending extreme global poverty. This Consultation of Religious Leaders on Global Poverty produced a communiqué calling churches and governments to pursue partnerships in support of the MDGs. The Consultation delivered the communiqué to the World Summit in New York City that coincided with the opening of the 60th General Assembly of the United Nations, a meeting that was also a first opportunity to gauge progress toward the MDGs. The Commission proposes that the 75^th General Convention receive and adopt this communiqué and encourages other denominations to take similar action.

"CALL TO PARTNERSHIP"

Communiqué from the Consultation of Religious Leaders on Global Poverty September 13, 2005

At the urgent call of Church leaders in the southern hemisphere, we came together at Washington National Cathedral as Christian leaders from diverse traditions and places, both rich and poor, South and North, united in a common concern for those of us living in poverty. We see their faces; we hear their voices; they are a part of us, and we are a part of them. As the United Nations reaches its 60th anniversary, we give thanks for its work in peacemaking and global reconciliation, particularly the historic commitment to eradicate poverty in the Millennium Declaration of 2000. Five years have passed, and despite this triumph of principle, there has been a failure in practice. In this communiqué, we offer our partnership to the leaders gathered at the World Summit at the United Nations in building a global movement to make real the promises of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) as a crucial step toward a more just world for all God's children.

DECLARATION

We believe that God calls us to place people struggling with poverty at the center of our concern. Globalization has brought unprecedented economic growth. At the same time, one-sixth of the world's people still fight daily for survival under the crushing burden of extreme poverty. The increasing concentration of wealth in our world, while so many suffer, is a scandal that impoverishes us all. We believe that the spirit of partnership between rich and poor, exemplified in the MDGs, is a way the world can address poverty in all its dimensions. In particular, we support the Goal of a "global partnership for development" and believe that the Churches can make a unique contribution to that partnership. We believe that our communities of faith, representing millions of people and sponsoring numerous human-development initiatives, can provide new models for advancing a global movement against poverty. The Churches have a vast network of institutions, trusted relationships with millions of people, and access to countless local communities, all rich resources for development.

CALL TO GOVERNMENTS

In light of the urgency of the needs of the most vulnerable, we call upon governments to take the following actions:

• Create a Just Society: We recognize that poverty cannot be uncoupled from structures of injustice in the world. We call upon governments to protect human life, defend human rights, foster just economies, and create conditions in which all people can fulfill their human potential.
• Build Partnerships: In many countries productive partnerships have been established between government and Churches, but more possibilities lie ahead. We call on governments to facilitate partnerships with Churches and religious organizations so that the poor become protagonists in their own destinies.
• Promote accountability and transparency. Corruption and a lack of transparency and accountability rob the poor of significant resources and pose an obstacle to development in many countries. We know that nations and international institutions have undertaken anti-corruption initiatives; we commend these and urge that far greater resources be devoted to their implementation.
• Cancel Debt: We commend this summer's debt cancellation agreement of the G-8 as a significant advance, and urge world leaders to build upon this agreement. Too many nations still labor under a burden of debt that does not allow them to invest in the health, education, and economic development of their peoples. We call upon creditor nations and international institutions to cancel the remaining debt of all nations struggling with extreme poverty.
• Increase Development Assistance: We commend those countries that have increased development assistance in response to the Millennium Declaration and the Monterrey Consensus. We challenge all nations to fulfill the commitments they have made to increase development assistance dramatically.
• Promote Trade Justice: Too little progress has been made in making the world's trade systems fair and just for developing countries and peoples. We call upon the nations of the world to level the playing field for trade.
• Security: In too many regions and countries, armed conflict exacerbates extreme poverty, which in turn sows the seeds of future conflicts. We call upon the leaders of nations to protect innocent populations, reduce the flow of arms, and support peace building.

A CALL TO THE CHURCH

In making these calls to governments, we know that the Churches themselves must be active partners in the work of development and building a just world economy. We affirm the work of countless Church communities and faith-based relief and development agencies that work for and with those living in extreme poverty. At its best, this work acknowledges the leadership of persons in poverty, engages poor communities as partners in human development, moves us to work across denominational and faith lines, and brings us into productive partnerships with governments and the private sector. Our call to the churches builds upon our strengths. At the same time, we humbly recognize our weaknesses. As Christian leaders we challenge our own Churches to pursue partnerships with governments, international organizations, civil society, and across confessional lines. Without new strategic partnerships, the world will fail to fulfill the aspirations of the Millennium Declaration. We encourage the Churches to deepen and intensify efforts to promote transparency and accountability, both in their own development work and in the work of their governments. Locally rooted church communities, in collaboration with civil society, can help governments monitor distribution of resources and evaluate results.

OUR HOPE AND COMMITMENT

In faith and obedience to God, and in humility, we are compelled to be agents of hope, doers of justice, and lovers of kindness. We believe the Millennium Development Goals can be achieved by 2015. These targets of basic material well-being can only be reached in the context of peace, human rights, environmental sustainability, and gender equity. Building a just society involves costs and risks. We will stand with courageous political, religious, and community leaders. We commit ourselves to work as partners with all who work to achieve a more just and peaceful world.

In faith and obedience to God, and in humility, we are compelled to be agents of hope, doers of justice, and lovers of kindness. We believe the Millennium Development Goals can be achieved by 2015. These targets of basic material well-being can only be reached in the context of peace, human rights, environmental sustainability, and gender equity. Building a just society involves costs and risks. We will stand with courageous political, religious, and community leaders. We commit ourselves to work as partners with all who work to achieve a more just and peaceful world.

Resolved, the House of _____ concurring, That the 75^th General Convention of the Episcopal Church receive and affirm "Call to Partnership," the communiqué presented to the United Nations Summit on Sept. 13, 2005, by Anglican, Evangelical, Greek Orthodox, Lutheran, Reform, Roman Catholic, Seventh Day Adventist and United Methodist participants in the Consultation of Religious Leaders on Global Poverty; and be it further

Resolved, That the Episcopal Church acknowledge the leadership of persons in poverty and local leaders in poor communities as equal partners and not simply recipients in the global effort to alleviate the crushing burden of extreme poverty; and be it further

Resolved, That the 75^th General Convention urge our ecumenical and interfaith partners to affirm "Call to Partnership" and join the Episcopal Church in working across confessional lines and in partnership with governments and international organizations to address the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) with all available human and financial resources; and be it further

Resolved, That in receiving and affirming the communiqué, the Episcopal Church call upon governments to pursue the MDGs through:

Resolved, That in receiving and affirming the communiqué, the General Convention affirm the work of the Church's officers, dioceses, congregations, baptized members, and Episcopal Relief and Development in undertaking and supporting partnerships for global development in impoverished countries and calls for the expansion of this work through:

Report on Palestine/Israel

Hannah Barak, a spry, elderly Israeli woman, spends two hours at the Bethlehem checkpoint. She observes with horror as young, frightened Israeli border guards, armed with guns, verbally and physically abuse equally frightened, unarmed Palestinians. Her horror and her “fear for the soul of Israel” lead her to form Machsom Watch (www.machsomwatch.org)—a group of Israeli women of all ages and walks of life, who volunteer to stand at checkpoints “so that the Israeli people cannot say, ‘We didn’t know.’”

Two fathers, an Israeli who lost a child and a Palestinian who lost seven, meet as representatives of The Parents Circle-Bereaved Families with a group of Episcopal bishops and spouses. They express utter frustration at the inability of faith communities to do anything to stop the senseless killing because doctrine and faith positions seem more important than life itself.

A group of American Episcopalians stands in enclosed Bethlehem looking out at the Wall between it and growing Israeli settlements. In some places it is a fence topped with barbed wire and ground cleared on either side. Elsewhere it is a real wall, 26-feet high or more, made of solid concrete, with heavily secured gates and permanent checkpoints. Wherever the Wall exists, it fragments neighborhoods, divides students from schools, the sick from medical care, and people from their jobs.

The Wall grows daily as a visible sign of oppression and division between Israelis and Palestinians, strangling life from people on both sides and giving no mercy or openness to new life beyond the conflict. At its completion, the Wall is expected to be 450 miles in length.

The Israeli settlements in Occupied Palestinian Territories, which are illegal under international law, continue to expand. Israeli settlements, combined with the Wall and the settler roads, access to which is denied to Palestinians, threaten the possibility of a two-state solution because they carve up the West Bank into small, noncontiguous sections.

Israel receives more U.S. foreign aid, both military and development, than any other country. It has received $3.5 billion per year since 1985. The next highest is Egypt; together they account for one-third of all U.S. foreign aid. The Wall, settlement expansion, and military support are all assisted indirectly by U.S. taxpayers. From a Christian perspective, funding oppression is unacceptable. The Church, therefore, must work to influence foreign policy priorities in the government and national life so that freedom, peace and justice are a reality for all of God’s people.

This Commission can no longer say, “We didn’t know.” What we must say to the Church is, “What can we do?”

There were two visits by individual members of the Commission and Church Center staff, including participation in the 5^th International Sabeel Conference, April 2004, and the Anglican Peace and Justice Network meeting in Jerusalem in September 2004, which updated the Commission’s understanding of the current situation in Palestine/Israel. In addition, The Rt. Rev. Riah Abu El-Assal, Anglican Bishop of Jerusalem and the Middle East, hosted a joint visit by Commission members (M. Miller, Scott and Spike) and the Council’s Social Responsibility in Investments Committee in late spring 2005. Mrs. Phoebe Griswold and the Rev. Charles Cloughen of American Friends of the Diocese of Jerusalem joined for the first three days of the visit.

The goal for the visit was to hear from groups working for peace and justice in Palestine/Israel, to visit Christian congregations, and to learn what U.S. Episcopalians can do. The group met for presentations and discussions with Bishop Riah; with organizations that are working to identify, monitor and heal the personal and material wounds of the struggle in the Holy Land. The Commission had hoped to meet with Israeli government officials, but that was not possible.

Commission members crossed through the Erez checkpoint between Gaza and Israel, as well as through "flying" (moveable) and permanent checkpoints in the West Bank where they witnessed the difficulty Palestinians experience as they move about in their daily lives.

The unilateral "disengagement" from Gaza and four small Israeli settlements in the West Bank during the summer 2005 removed some Israeli settlers from some Palestinian lands. As of this writing, the "disengagement" has not removed Israeli troops surrounding Gaza nor loosened the travel restrictions for most Palestinians.

Israeli society is heavily militarized with particular impact on children. Israel is squarely in the middle of the U.S. military and industrial enterprise, training each others' military, police and security forces regularly. The impact of violence on both Israelis and Palestinians is enormous. It is not only the traumatic effects of Palestinian suicide bombers or Israeli Defense Force-led evictions and demolitions of Palestinian homes or assassinations of Palestinian leaders or the battle of violent language. It is also the daily violence of arbitrary closures, constant suspicion, the Wall, the uprooting of olive trees and destruction of other crops, the attacks on innocent people on both sides. Both societies suffer, both are victims of what has been called chronic traumatic stress syndrome.

Peacemakers on all sides asked that Episcopalians stay in touch with them in Palestine/Israel. Christians in the Land of the Holy One have felt forgotten by their Christian brothers and sisters in the "outside world." Solidarity visits to Palestine/Israel are vital in this regard. Networking with and supporting nonviolent solidarity campaigns and organizations working for justice and peace in the Middle East are other very important opportunities.

Both Israelis and Palestinians see the United States as playing a key role in the achievement of their goals for justice and peace. A commitment to continuing political action is needed. This includes consistent lobbying of Congress and the administration by individuals and continuing work by the Office of Government Relations in coalition with others, especially Churches for Middle East Peace (www.cmep.org).

Equally important is the monitoring and calling to account of the media for their reporting on Palestine/Israel. Scapegoating and stereotyping, as well as inequalities in the reporting of who is being hurt or killed, whose homes and livelihoods are being endangered, continue to mislead.

Despite everything, there is hope, seen most evidently in the courageous peacemakers on all sides. The Commission proposes the following resolutions as the Church's reaffirmation of its continuing commitment to the right of both Israel and Palestine to exist in safety, self-determination and peace in the Land of the Holy One.

Resolved, the House of _____ concurring, That the 75^th General Convention reaffirm the Episcopal Church's commitment to:

Resolved, the House of _____ concurring, That the 75^th General Convention declare that the following positions constitute policies of the Episcopal Church and direct the Episcopal Church’s Office of Peace and Justice Ministries to advocate:

Resolved, the House of _____concurring, That the 75^th General Convention request Executive Council to consider investments in support of an economically viable Palestine.

Resolved, the House of _____concurring, That the 75^th General Convention request the Ecumenical and Interfaith Officer to continue in dialogue with Jewish, Muslim and Christian partners, working for support of nonviolent resolution of conflict; and to keep these matters before the Church.

Resolved, the House of ______concurring, That the 75^th General Convention encourage the dioceses of the Episcopal Church to urge their congregations and institutions to pray for our sisters and brothers in the Diocese of Jerusalem and the Middle East; to visit the Christian congregations in the Holy Land; to work for justice, peace, and reconciliation in the Holy Land; and to urge elected officials and policy makers to seek solutions that will realize these goals for both peoples.

Report on Cuba

During the past triennium, the Commission’s attention again has been drawn to Cuba. The United States economic embargo and travel ban have been made significantly stricter by the current administration with devastating humanitarian consequences. Commission members traveled to Cuba from June 28 to July 5, 2005, under one of the few remaining special travel licenses, and witnessed firsthand the embargo’s impact on the life of The Episcopal Church of Cuba (La Iglesia Episcopal de Cuba or IEC). General Convention has called for the lifting of U.S. economic sanctions against Cuba for more than a decade. Sadly, U.S. policy continues to impoverish a people and a Church.

The problems confronting Cuba are complex. The embargo contributes to nearly every hardship faced by the Cuban people. It has closed nearly all channels of diplomatic, educational and person-to-person contact between the U.S. and Cuba. After more than four decades, it seems clear that such mutual engagement is the best hope for changes in the policies of either government. Absent dialogue, the people of each nation become functionally limited to working to change the policies of their own government, without the benefits of collaboration. Thus, the Commission limits its report here to the policies and the impact of the U.S. embargo and the changes in U.S. policy it believes necessary for reconciliation.

Background on the U.S. Embargo

Known to the Cuban people as el bloqueo, “The Blockade” has existed in various forms for more than 45 years, beginning in the Eisenhower administration. A comprehensive trade embargo, limitations on most American travel to Cuba, and the ban on all financial transactions between U.S. citizens and Cuba, has done little to harm the Castro government. Unfortunately, ordinary Cubans have been harmed because of the limits on financial transactions from U.S. citizens.

By 1994, world opinion had crystallized solidly against the U.S. embargo, with the General Assembly of the United Nations voting to condemn the U.S. embargo, by a vote of 101-2. In 2004, the current U.S. administration implemented the most restrictive version of the embargo. Personal financial remittances to Cuban family members were further restricted, as were the limits on food parcels, medicine and humanitarian goods sent to Cuba. The travel ban was expanded to drastically curtail travel by U.S. citizens visiting family members in Cuba and to prohibit most scientific, medical, educational and journalistic travel to Cuba. Even those travelers still eligible for U.S. licenses (such as religious delegations) were banned from spending any money while in Cuba.

Punitive measures against U.S. citizens who violate the economic embargo and travel ban have been increased. By 2004, the U.S. Office of Foreign Assets Control employed more than two dozen staff dedicated to investigating Cuban-embargo violations—compared with a total of four dedicated to investigating similar violations of sanctions against Saddam Hussein and Osama Bin Laden.

Over the past five years, there has been growing bipartisan support in the U.S. Congress for easing the embargo’s most severe restrictions. Additionally, support for the embargo in the Cuban-American community in the U.S.—long a bastion of pro-embargo sentiment—appears to be waning. Recent polls show that among Cuban Americans under 50, a solid majority supports the embargo reform. Opposition to the embargo is growing even among older Cuban Americans.

The Episcopal Church of Cuba

The Diocese of Cuba was a member of the Episcopal Church until 1967 when the pressures of the embargo made it too difficult for the IEC to maintain meaningful relations with its mother Church. The Diocese of Cuba became an independent member of the Anglican Communion, and its first Cuban-born bishop, the Rt. Rev. Jose A. Gonzalez, was consecrated. To this day, the IEC is not a member of any province of the Communion. It affiliates with a “metropolitan council” composed of the Primate of the Anglican Church of Canada, the Primate of the Church in the Province of the West Indies, and a bishop appointed by the Presiding Bishop of the Episcopal Church. A vote by the IEC to rejoin the Episcopal Church failed narrowly in 2003.

The Cuban Church today has 10,000 members in more than 40 missions served by more than 25 male and female clergy. Two full-time faculty of the ecumenical Evangelical and Theological Seminary at Matanzas are members of IEC. Though poor, the Church is growing in membership and is flourishing throughout Cuba. The IEC currently does not have a diocesan bishop (clergy and laity having deadlocked in their most recent episcopal election). It is overseen on a half-time basis by the Rt. Rev. Miguel Tamayo, the Cuban-born Bishop of Uruguay in the Province of the Southern Cone.

The Effects of the U.S. Embargo on the Episcopal Church of Cuba

Commission members met collectively and individually with nearly all clergy in the IEC. While the clergy, like Cuban society as a whole, hold varying political views, all with whom the Commission met were unanimous in their condemnation of the U.S. embargo and its effects on the Church in Cuba.

The embargo and its exacerbation of the economic poverty gripping Cuba has had a particularly devastating effect on the IEC: Clergy salaries are woefully inadequate; access to automobiles and gasoline for the clergy—many of whom serve multiple congregations—is nearly nonexistent; the Church is unable to provide a pension fund for its clergy who were ordained after the split with the Episcopal Church in 1967; and financial support from the United States is all but impossible under the tightened embargo.

Most regrettably at present, the Episcopal Church has been significantly restricted in its ability to pay pensions legally owed to priests in Cuba ordained before 1967. This pension situation is grave. Lifelong clergy are being impoverished by the legal force of the U.S. embargo. The son of one such priest who is now very sick and yet still unable to receive his full Episcopal Church pension told Commission members of his father’s decision not to flee to the United States at the time of the Revolution and abandon his flock. In tears, the son said his father was now being punished to the point of death, not by the Cuban government, but by the U.S. government that purports to favor freedom in Cuba.

Since the IEC has never been able to afford a pension plan, clergy who are now reaching or approaching retirement age will not have any pension benefits. When the embargo is lifted, it is the Commission's hope that the Episcopal Church will find a solution to this problem. The Commission expresses its gratitude to the Church Pension Group (CPG) for its efforts to make full payments of the pensions owed to former Episcopal clergy living in Cuba. The Commission encourages the CPG to find further avenues to correct this injustice.

The Role of the Cuban State

Supporters of the U.S. embargo frequently cite the Cuban government’s abuse of the human and civil rights of its citizens as a reason against reform of U.S. policies. Indeed, Commission members did witness a culture where dissent is at times viewed suspiciously, where people may speak cautiously in open discussion and where the press is controlled by the Cuban government. It seems, however, that the severe repression of alternative ideas—particularly religious exercise—is largely a thing of the past. Moreover, some Cubans with whom the Commission met were indignant at U.S. criticism of the rights of Cuban people, citing the fact that while Cubans may lack certain civil rights, such as the right to unfettered assembly, free speech, or a free press, they possess certain essential human rights that U.S. citizens lack, such as the right to universal health care and free education at all levels.

Access to basic quality-of-life measures is complicated at best. While the provision of universal education and health care are policies of the Cuban government, the effectiveness of those services is severely diminished by a lack of medical supplies and educational materials, a consequence of the embargo. It is difficult for anyone who has not traveled in Cuba to comprehend the many ways the embargo burdens the Cuban people in their everyday lives—the lack of chlorinated water, poor nutrition, deteriorating housing, inadequate public transportation, and generally unsanitary conditions. This is especially true in concentrated urban areas like Havana. During its stay, the Commission witnessed hours-long power blackouts almost daily throughout Havana.

Visit of the Standing Commission

Commission members met with IEC clergy and members of their Standing Committee, a representative of the Cuban government’s Bureau of Religious Affairs, the head of the Cuba Council of Churches, staff of Havana’s largest hospital, a government economist hosted by the IEC, Cuban citizens of other faith backgrounds, and the community of the Havana Cathedral. Additionally, members traveled to Matanzas to tour the ecumenical seminary and meet with faculty and local parishioners. Commission members observed a country whose infrastructure and economy have been crippled by the effects of the U.S. blockade and the policies of the Cuban government. They witnessed the IEC thriving spiritually despite economic hardship. They heard that Church say, "We feel abandoned by our founding Church in the U.S." They experienced a people who long for the exchange of ideas and the sharing of cultures that would be possible with a lifting of the U.S. embargo and the travel ban.

The Commission was particularly touched by the stories of average Cubans, in and outside of the IEC, stories of the young who have grown up in poverty and accept it as their lot but hope for a better future; stories of older Cubans who recall living in a land where prosperity was once attainable for many; and parents’ pleas for accessing medication for their children.

Most of all, the Commission was moved by the witness of the IEC, its laity and clergy, who, despite enormous economic hardship, lovingly and enthusiastically carry forward Christ’s ministry of reconciliation in their own parishes and throughout the country.

Resolved, the House of _____ concurring, That the 75^th General Convention of the Episcopal Church call for an immediate end to all portions of the United States economic embargo against the Republic of Cuba, particularly revisions to the embargo implemented by the U.S. Department of State in 2004; and be it further

Resolved, That dioceses and parishes in the Episcopal Church consider the establishment of companion relationships with the Episcopal Church of Cuba in order to help support the IEC spiritually and, where possible, financially; and be it further

Resolved, That, in order to promote the exchange of religious and political ideals, all members of the Episcopal Church are encouraged to travel to Cuba subject to the availability of licenses from the U.S. government; and receive delegations from the Episcopal Church of Cuba subject to approval by the U.S. government; and be it further

Resolved, That the Episcopal Church recommit itself at all levels to pray for the reconciliation of the United States and the Republic of Cuba, in the Name of the Prince of Peace whose most passionate desire for the Church is the ministry of reconciliation.

Report on Haiti

In 2004, a worsening political crisis and a drastic deterioration of civil peace and order delayed indefinitely a Commission visit to Haiti. Armed, roving gangs, pitted against each other by their embrace of or opposition to the removal of President Jean-Bertnand Aristide, became responsible for a large increase in fleeing refugees, the almost total regional breakdowns of the distribution of food, medicine and gasoline, and the virtual closure of a number of hospitals.

By February 2004 insurgents controlled 50% of the country, and between March and May 450 persons had been kidnapped. The Bishop of Haiti advised that the visit be postponed until after new national elections and a reassessment of conditions. In 2005, the elections were twice postponed. At this writing, there is still unrest and uncertainty surrounding the elections, including a threatened election boycott by one of the major political parties and controversies over candidacy qualifications.

Even before the most recent political crisis, the Episcopal Church called for a change in Haitian refugee policy and the extension of Temporary Protected Status (TPS). TPS is intended to prevent the forced return of persons to their country of origin when the circumstances of that country are too dangerous or otherwise untenable to permit their safe return. Nevertheless, several hundred Haitians fled the violence, only to be intercepted by U.S. vessels and returned to Haiti, even after the U.S. government had called on all its personnel to leave the country on account of the same widespread lawlessness, chaos and violence. Episcopal Migration Ministries (EMM), with ecumenical partners and Church World Service, has long advocated for justice for Haitian refugees. EMM co-sponsored a Conference on the Haiti Crisis on Capitol Hill in June 2005 to bring together interested parties to lobby for extension of TPS.

Executive Council responded to the deepening crisis in Haiti with two resolutions:

• “Justice for Haitians” passed in June 2004, urged the Secretary for Homeland Security to extend TPS to Haitians residing in the United States, urged Congress to pass The Haitian Refugee Immigration Act to prevent deportation of Haitians now in the United States without legal status and urged the administration to end its policy of interdicting Haitians fleeing from violence and persecution.
• “Haiti Crisis” passed in June 2005, asked the Presiding Bishop to intercede, stipulated relief funds for refugees who made their way from Haiti to the Dominican Republic and invited the Bishop of Haiti and other representatives to the next meeting.

The people of Haiti also suffered hurricane devastation in 2005. Widespread deforestation of the country, caused by poverty, makes it particularly vulnerable to mudslides. Episcopal Relief and Development (ERD) responded with food and blanket distributions, temporary shelters and local clean water system installations. ERD continues development work at the Bishop Tharp Business and Technology Institute in Les Cayes, which opened in October 2005 and throughout the country.

Bishop Jean Zaché Duracin has served as a mediator in government and insurgent negotiations and has continued to labor for development aid for capacity building and microfinance. A priest of the diocese, the Rev. MacDonald Jean, was appointed to the ‘Conseil des Sages’ (Council of the Wise Ones) in the formation of the new government. The Diocese of Haiti has continued to minister and to encourage hope in the most trying of circumstances.

Report on Liberia

The 74th General Convention passed Resolution 2003–D023, “Support the People of Liberia,” urging the President of the United States to intervene with a peace-keeping force in Liberia to achieve a ceasefire and work for an orderly transition to a legitimate and stable government. Within the month, under intense pressure from the United States and the international community, President Charles Taylor resigned and went into exile. With the aid of a peace-keeping mission under the aegis of the United Nations, a two-year National Transitional Government of Liberia (NTGL) was formed, taking office in October 2003, under the chairmanship of Gyude Bryant. This government served until January 16, 2006, when the new, freely-elected president, Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf, was inaugurated, and the other newly elected members of the legislature were sworn into office.

Between 1989 and 2003, approximately 250,000 Liberians were killed in a civil war, over a million people were displaced and many thousands fled the country, which is overrun with weapons and faces economic ruin. The country has been broken by ethnic rivalries, class struggle, factional politics and corruption. Fears exist, at this writing, that the defeated candidate for president might be party to yet another insurrection in order to destabilize the country. Current needs are economic development; adequate health care and sanitation; restoration of basic services like electricity and pipe water, even in the capital; economic justice; and an end to unemployment and illiteracy, all of which have been at record levels. The legislature of Ghana, working with the NTGL, invited the new Liberian legislature for a week of training and capacity-building so that it could be effective in governing Liberia and bringing it to real health.

Liberians and people all over the world have been moved by the sight of Liberians exercising their franchise without fear of intimidation. While the new president and her government face the twin challenges of rebuilding the country and fostering reconciliation between alienated groups, there is a cautious optimism that they will be up to the task and the country will become more peaceful and stable than it has been for a very long time.

At the time of this writing, Liberians within the country and those elsewhere, including the United States, are pleased with the president's zero-tolerance for corruption and her determination to have all participating in the governance of the country with a new openness and transparency. Many expatriates are planning visits to Liberia in the next year to get a "feel" of the country now. The Episcopal Church in Liberia has suffered greatly, yet it is also rebuilding and is stronger. It has been a forthright witness for peace within the country. American partners are encouraged to continue their relationships and contributions.

Report on Darfur, Sudan

Over the past three years, more than 400,000 people were killed in the Darfur region of Sudan and more than a million others have been driven from their homes amidst widespread government-instigated violence and ethnic cleansing. The tragedy is amplified by the fact that it comes just as peace in Sudan’s longest running conflict, the national civil war, appears finally to be taking hold. The long-suffering people of Sudan deserve a just and lasting peace across their nation.

The Commission notes with appreciation that in 2004 the Presiding Bishop was among the first U.S. religious leaders to condemn publicly the crisis in Darfur as genocide. Additionally, Commission members deeply appreciate Executive Council’s passing of two resolutions urging the U.S. government to work toward ending the violence in Sudan, condemning the Sudanese government’s primary role in the crisis, and giving thanks for the peacemaking work of the Episcopal Church of Sudan.

The Commission notes with deep regret, however, that while more than a year has elapsed since the U.S. Congress and president described the situation in Darfur as genocide, effective leadership to stop the violence has not been forthcoming. Funds for African Union peacekeeping forces in Darfur were cut from final Fiscal Year 2006 congressional appropriations bills, and, at this writing, key legislation to frame a U.S. response to the crisis, The Darfur Peace and Accountability Act, remains stalled by opposition in the U.S. Senate.

It is the Commission’s hope and prayer that Episcopalians and other people of faith continue to witness to the U.S. government in favor of strong and principled leadership to end the crisis in Darfur.

The Alien Among You

When an alien resides with you in your land, you shall not oppress the alien The alien who resides with you shall be to you as the citizen among you; you shall love the alien as yourself, for you were aliens in the land of Egypt; I am the Lord your God.

Leviticus 19: 33-34

So then you are no longer strangers and aliens, but you are citizens with the saints and also members of the household of God, built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Jesus Christ himself as the cornerstone.

Ephesians 2: 19

Along with every other country in the world, the United States has a vision of what it means to be a citizen, and how “aliens” may become citizens and enjoy the fullness of our national life. Ironically, given the current debate over immigration policies and the added restrictive context after September 11, 2001, the United States has been, from the beginning, a country of immigrants.

Most Americans, or our ancestors, were once aliens. For generations people have come to the United States seeking refuge from oppression, economic opportunity, religious freedom, family reunion, and hope. Gradually we have developed immigration and refugee policies that have become more deliberate over the generations, at times glaringly racist and exclusionary, at other times more inclusive and hospitable.

Hospitality to the stranger

For Christian people, welcoming the stranger is not merely a policy, it is our vocation. We are called to offer hospitality to those who come to us and to make room for them at the table. An integral part of the work of the Episcopal Church has been its 60-year history of serving refugees from all parts of the world, inviting parishes to partner with Episcopal Migration Ministries (EMM), the refugee assistance arm of the Church, in a ministry of resettlement. Consistent with this history, the Church has adopted resolutions supporting a generous policy of admitting refugees to the United States.

The Episcopal Church joined other faith-based and refugee-rights communities pressing for the reinvigoration of the U.S. resettlement program when security concerns following the tragedy of Septemberr 11 reduced the number of refugees being admitted to the United States by half. Those who arrive as refugees are generally victims rather than perpetrators of terror, and the lack of evidence associating refugees with terrorism supports maintaining an admissions policy of open and responsible resettlement.

Comprehensive immigration reform

The overall U.S. immigration system is not working well, and there is a growing consensus about the need for change. Immigration law that was intended to reunite families has resulted in the delay of several years before some spouses and other relatives can receive visas to immigrate to the United States. The presence of millions of undocumented aliens—especially agricultural workers and others who perform unskilled or low skilled jobs that are critical to the American economy—encourages an “underground” world, creates an environment of constant anxiety for the aliens and the communities in which they work, engenders inhospitable and cruel separation of families, and makes it nearly impossible for the undocumented workers to achieve regular and permanent status in the United States.

The political climate after September 11 and the security challenges faced by all countries have contributed to worrisome reductions in some protections of civil liberties. For immigrants, especially for those who violate immigration law, due process is often more rhetoric than reality.

While there is widespread frustration with current immigration law and policy, various proposed changes represent radically different views of immigrants and their place in the U.S. community. Some proposed changes would increase the restrictions on immigrants and those seeking refuge here, returning undocumented workers to their countries of origin, reducing civil liberties for the most vulnerable and shrinking economic immigration even further.

The Standing Commission on Anglican and International Peace with with Justice Concerns recommends that the Episcopal Church continue to support immigration reform that is rooted in the Biblical vision of “hospitality to the stranger,” recognizing a nation’s right to protect itself and the deeper human right to migrate to places of safety and wellbeing. The Commission commends Executive Council’s adoption of Council Resolution NAC 032 at its June 2005 meeting that urges the Episcopal Church to support comprehensive immigration reform that will balance the legitimate need to “patrol our borders” with a responsible and humane process for inclusion of people who come to the United States seeking economic opportunity, refuge from persecution and family reunification.

It is for us who no longer are strangers and aliens, but citizens of the household of God and beneficiaries of the kindness of strangers, to advocate for fair and hospitable immigration policies. We have more to fear from restrictive and punitive policies than from those who seek hope and opportunity in the United States. Let us not fear being agents of generosity and abundance. Let us not oppress the aliens among us. And let us advocate for immigration policies that offer fair and just access to American life and the reasonable possibility of entrance into the community of citizenship.

The Standing Commission on Anglican and International Peace with Justice Concerns supports the following principles of just and fair immigration policies:

Resolved, the House of _____ concurring, the 75^th General Convention of the Episcopal Church receive “The Alien Among You” in the Blue Book Report of the Standing Commission on Anglican and International Peace with Justice Concerns and adopt the fundamental principles included in “The Alien Among You” as the policy of the Episcopal Church.

Nuclear Proliferation

The 1925 General Convention of the Episcopal Church resolved, “That this Convention register its conviction that unless civilization can destroy war, war will destroy civilization. We believe that a warless world is a possibility; that life based on the spirit and principles of the Prince of Peace, so far from being visionary, contains the only practical method of security for the future.”

These words have a special poignancy now that we really do have a weapon that will destroy life as we know it, with that very great power comes a moral responsibility. Jesus’ words, “Blessed are the peacemakers …” (Matthew 5:9), are a call to earnestly make peace if we want to live as children of God. Later Jesus provides us with some guidance on how we might go about the difficult task of peacemaking: “But I say to you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be children of your Father in heaven.” (Matthew 5:44). We start with the simple act of loving and praying for our “enemies.” But we cannot love and pray with our fingers on the button that might detonate a nuclear bomb.

Global Nuclear Proliferation

According to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT) of 1970, only the five nuclear powers–– the United States, Russia, Great Britain, France, and China––may possess nuclear weapons. India, Israel, and Pakistan possess nuclear weapons; none of these three countries have signed the NPT. The United States is supporting India’s efforts to bypass the NPT by allowing India to buy nuclear technology for peaceful use. Ten countries had nuclear weapons in the past and have discontinued their nuclear programs: Argentina, Belarus, Brazil, Iraq, Kazakhstan, Libya, South Africa, South Korea, Taiwan and Ukraine.

North Korea withdrew from the NPT in 2003 and claims to have nuclear weapons. A nuclear program in Pyongyang has extracted weapons-grade plutonium. At this writing, North Korea had not tested a nuclear weapon, and there has been no conclusive demonstration that they possess nuclear weapons. On September 19, 2005, China announced that a preliminary agreement was reached under which North Korea would dismantle its nuclear weapons production facilities in return for aid and recognition from the United States. Iran has resumed uranium enrichment for the stated reason of peaceful use for nuclear power. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), charged by the United Nations to see that states do not have nuclear weapons programs, has no evidence of such programs in Syria. The CIA is concerned that Syria could avail itself of growing opportunities to acquire nuclear weapons technology.

The United States has 480 nuclear warheads deployed in Europe. The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) oversees the domestic nuclear weapons complex which has 480 nuclear warheads deployed in Europe. At least eight facilities are actively engaged in research and maintenance of the current stockpile of nuclear weapons.

Arms Control

Under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, the five nuclear states noted earlier must work toward reducing and eliminating their stockpiles. Member nations that are not nuclear states agree not to pursue the development of nuclear weapons.

The original 25-year term was indefinitely extended in 1995 with a formal review process every five years. The last review was held at the United Nations in May 2005. In order for any agreement discussed at this review conference to be binding, all participating countries must agree. One country can block an agreement. The 2005 conference ended with no consensus on measures leading to nuclear disarmament.

The 2000 review produced an important step toward nonproliferation, the agreement to engage in “13 steps toward nonproliferation,” with the goal of complete disarmament. In addition to steps dealing with various aspects of disarmament, including the total elimination of nuclear arsenals, other steps deal with related issues, including a call for the ratification and quick implementation of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, security measures for excess fissile materials (for bomb making), the beginning of negotiations for a treaty banning the production of fissile materials, and verification and reporting procedures.

According to the Arms Control Association, by early 2002, President George W. Bush took the U.S. nuclear weapons policy in a different direction through “policies, such as withdrawing from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, [and] shelving—at least for now—the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty….” U.S. nuclear policy has continued on the course set by President Bush early in his presidency. The Friends Committee on National Legislation wrote in its May 2005 newsletter: “This year, the Bush administration shows almost no interest in pursuing nuclear disarmament as laid out in the ‘13 steps.”

Notable General Convention resolutions include: endorsing a bilateral freeze on the testing and production of nuclear weapons (1982–D030); observing World War II anniversaries and committing to complete abolition of nuclear war (1994–B008); and supporting the goal of total nuclear disarmament (1994–D122, 1997–D022).

United States–Soviet/Russian Strategic Nuclear Arms Control

Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty I (START I) both countries were required to reduce the number of strategic nuclear warheads in their arsenals to 6,000 by December 2001. The former Soviet republics and the United States report that they are in compliance with these terms. The treaty is set to expire Dec. 5, 2009. Strategic Offensive Reduction Treaty (SORT) or The Moscow Treaty: Ratified by the U.S. Senate and the Russian Parliament in 2003, SORT calls for the further reduction in strategic nuclear warheads to between 1,700 and 2,200 in both countries by December 31, 2012.

Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT)

Prior General Convention Resolutions addressed issues relating to U.S.–Soviet nuclear nonproliferation: commended efforts to control nuclear weapons (1976–D052); urged a governmental policy of no first use of nuclear weapons (1982–D031); and commended leaders for efforts to reduce nuclear armaments (1988–D137).

The U.S. Senate failed to ratify the CTBT in October 1999, and the Bush administration has not brought the treaty to the Senate for ratification. The United States is one of 11 holdout countries required to ratify CTBT before it takes effect. Other holdout nations include China, Iran, Israel, India, Pakistan and North Korea. The failure of the United States to ratify the CTBT is seen as a crucial roadblock for the treaty and for the role it can play in the goal of nuclear disarmament. The 71^st General Convention urged the President of the United States to sign the CTBT (1994–D122).

United States Policy

After becoming the only nation to use nuclear weapons, a 2005 Carnegie Endowment Report states the United States has the largest inventory of deployed strategic nuclear weapons. As a major determiner of international policy for decades, the United States can lead the way to peace or to war. The U.S. would set an example that other nations could follow if the administration were to ratify the CTBT and reverse its position on policies that contradict the “13 steps toward nonproliferation.” Full and cooperative participation by the United States in negotiations and treaty reviews and helping various parties move toward a consensus is another way this country can lead the way to peace.

The good news is that for the second year in a row, funding for “bunker busters” is not included in the FY2006 U.S. budget. There is no indication whether this will be added in the future. There are two additional issues of concern relating to U.S. nuclear policy being publicly debated. As of this writing, before the release of budget requests to Congress, faith-based peace activists on Capitol Hill are concerned that one or both of these proposals will show up in the next budget request to Congress. The first concern involves refurbishing and consolidating nuclear weapons production facilities. The second involves a proposal to produce a new series of nuclear warheads called the Reliable Replacement Warhead (RRW), which would be restricted to replace existing warheads and not to develop new nuclear weapons. There is, however, concern that this restriction could be lifted in future budgets. If funded, expenditures for the two proposals would require billions of dollars over many years.

The Episcopal Church has a long history of policies calling for nuclear abolition and disarmament. The Commission strongly urges that the Episcopal Church continues to lift up a vision of a nuclear weapons free world. The Commission reported to the Executive Council on this topic and portions of the report were incorporated into the Council’s resolution, “No Preemptive Use of Nuclear Weapons” in October 2005.

The Standing Commission on Anglican and International Peace with Justice Concerns will meet approximately four times and make three site visits during the 2007–2009 triennium. This will require $18,000 in 2007, $30,000 in 2008 and $10,000 in 2009 for a total of $58,000.