Peace activists in Iraq
Dear Editor:
Re: The truth about the Christian Peacemakers Teams
I’ve been checking the news on the internet to see what is happening with the CPT
hostages and came across your article. I’d like to comment on it from my knowledge
of CPT, which is quite close, though I have not joined the team, in part because of
some of the things you touch on. Having said that, I think your critique of them is too
harsh.
First, in my opinion, you’re absolutely right that the comment on their website in
which they blame the US and UK invasion of Iraq for the kidnapping is simply
untenable from almost any perspective. They wouldn’t be in Iraq if it was the Garden
of Eden, and their mandate is to ‘get in the way’ when there is conflict, so, no, the US
and UK are not to blame for the kidnappings, and it’s just bad karma to say so on
their website.
However, to state that they are on the side of the ‘enemy’ does misrepresent the
group. Theoretically, they take no sides whatsoever and endeavor simply to reduce
violence by standing between warring parties (not in actual firefights, but in situations
of high tension where open battle has occurred) and trying to find ways to get the two
sides to talk to each other sensibly. In doing so, they sometimes find themselves
siding with one group or another, depending on where they see the power lying and
where they see the initiation of the conflict coming.
Sometimes this does lead them to be critical of their own governments, and to be
true to their belief that all (unnecesary) violence is wrong, they must also report on
the actions of their own governments. This is not by design, it is a result of the
realities on the ground to which they are exposed.
If they are on the side of anyone, it is the ordinary Iraqis, and they will report on
anything that makes the life of an ordinary Iraqi more difficult - whether it is the
actions of the insurgency, of the coalition troops, or of the Iraqi police. One cannot
have credibility if one takes sides before entering into a situation.
I have critiqued them on occasion for even taking sides as much as they do. My
argument has been that you get nowhere by being harsh with people who appear to
making another’s life difficult. Both sides in a conflict believe they are right and take
whatever actions are necessary to make the world a place where their idea of ‘right’
will have a chance to prevail - that one side succeeds where another fails doesn’t
make either one of them more or less right or worthy of respect and forgiveness for
their actions.
So, to end my email (I was going to address a couple other issues, but this is long
enough), I agree with you that their political comments are unwarranted, but it is
unfair to depict them as political activists who have it in for the American
government. They are ‘peace activists’ who are trying their very best to remain
neutral while in places of extreme conflict. That they fail sometimes is perhaps
understandable, and to some degree a result of an over-emphasis on ‘justice’ for
those with whom they live.
David Pankratz
