Συνοδική Επιτροπή επί των Διορθοδόξων και Διαχριστιανικών Σχέσεων

Bishop of Truro’s Independent Review for the Foreign Secretary of FCO Support for Persecuted Christians

Final Report and Recommendations

---

 Clik:Download Report as PDF

1. Preface: a word on what you will find here

It is now over five years since ‘The Times’ published an editorial entitled ‘Spectators at the Carnage’¹. It began in these terms:

Across the globe, in the Middle East, Asia and Africa, Christians are being bullied, arrested, jailed, expelled and executed. Christianity is by most calculations the most persecuted religion of modern times. Yet Western politicians until now have been reluctant to speak out in support of Christians in peril.

That sums up succinctly the background to the work of this Independent Review, established by the Rt Hon Jeremy Hunt MP, HM Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, and chaired by the Bishop of Truro, Rt. Rev. Philip Mounstephen. The core tasks (referenced in the Terms of Reference in the Appendix to this Final Report) were to map the extent and nature of the global persecution of Christians; to assess the quality of the response of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO), and to make recommendations for changes in both policy and practice.

Initially, the aim was to conclude the Review by Easter 2019. However it rapidly became apparent that the scale and nature of the phenomenon simply required more time. Thus it was agreed that an Interim Report focusing on the scale and nature of the problem would be produced by the end of April 2019, with this Final Report to be delivered by the end of June.

After an introduction, and explanation of the methodology used to produce this Final Report, it continues with an analysis of the global phenomenon of Christian persecution. It provides this first by reproducing the Interim Report in its entirety as an essential element of the whole. It then drills down into particular countries by summarising the situation there, before taking a particular case study for each and commenting on and analysing the FCO response to it. The analysis of the phenomenon concludes with a summary analysis of the considerable amount of oral and written evidence that the Review team took.

The next section focusses more specifically on the FCO response to the issue by analysing the responses to a questionnaire sent to a large number of religious and civil society actors around the world. It follows that with an analysis of a parallel questionnaire sent to UK Embassies and High Commissions, before looking at the approach taken to Freedom of Religion or Belief (FoRB) both by individual states globally and by a number of multilateral institutions.

The report then ends with a conclusion and a clear set of recommendations for the FCO to implement.

There are two critical qualifying comments to make about the whole.

First, Independent Reviews of this nature would normally be conducted over a considerably longer period of time and with greater resources allocated to them than has been the case here. Nonetheless there have been strengths in a more light touch approach that has inevitably been less bureaucratic. But as a consequence I make no claim at all for this to be seen as ‘the last word’ on this issue. I would much rather it be seen as catalysing further action, as I’m sure it should. And while it makes no claim to be comprehensive, and some readers will no doubt take issue with parts of it, it nonetheless makes a persuasive case for a different approach on the part of the FCO.

Second, and all that notwithstanding, there is a considerably greater evidence base that stands behind this Review than will be evident from this present work in its printed form. Much of the evidence cited above will be complemented by a significantly greater body of evidence that will be deposited on the Review website https://christianpersecutionreview.org.uk/ over the coming days. Indeed there is further evidence still which cannot be made public due to security and confidentiality concerns.

‘The Times’ editorial cited above continued, ‘The West must be ready to support the Christian faith. That, rather than embarrassment, has to be the starting point of our necessary conversations with…. followers of other faiths.’ And it concluded, ‘We cannot be spectators at this carnage.’ Indeed we cannot, and it is the hope of the whole Review team that this report will help the FCO not to be spectators but to be actors using their very best efforts to address this egregious phenomenon.

2. Introduction to Final Report: justifications and qualifications

‘You may choose to look the other way, but you can never again say you did not know’
(William Wilberforce MP, to the House of Commons, on the slave trade, 1791)

At the launch of this Independent Review in January I outlined six reasons why I felt that the Review, in focussing specifically on the plight of Christians, was justified. I list these below - but will follow them with an explanation of why the Review’s recommendations are couched much more in terms of guaranteeing Freedom of Religion or Belief (FoRB) for all rather than focusing on the needs of one community exclusively.

First, to understand why this Review is justified we have to appreciate that today the Christian faith is primarily a phenomenon of the global south - and it is therefore primarily a phenomenon of the global poor. Despite the impression those in the West might sometimes have to the contrary, the Christian faith is not primarily an expression of white Western privilege. If it were we could afford to ignore it - perhaps. But unless we understand that it is primarily a phenomenon of the global south and of the global poor we will never give this issue the attention it deserves. That is not to patronise, but it is to be realistic. Western voices that are quick to speak up for the world’s poor cannot afford to be blind to this issue.

Secondly, this particular focus is justified because Christian persecution, like no other, is a global phenomenon. And it is so precisely because the Christian faith is a truly global phenomenon. Thus Christian persecution is not limited to one context or challenge. It is a single global phenomenon with multiple drivers and as such it deserves special attention. More specifically it is certainly not limited to Islamic-majority contexts. So this review is not a stalking horse for the Islamophobic far-right, and nor does it give the Islamophobic right a stick to beat Islam with. To focus on one causative factor alone is to be wilfully blind to many others.

Thirdly, Christian persecution is a human rights issue and should be seen as such. Freedom of Religion or Belief is perhaps the most fundamental human right because so many others depend upon it. As this report argues, in the West we tend to set one right against another. But in much of the world this right is not in opposition to others but rather is the linchpin upon which others depend. And we in the West need to be awake to such dependencies and not dismiss FoRB as irrelevant to other rights. If freedom of religion or belief is removed so many other rights are put in jeopardy too.

Fourthly, this is not about special pleading for Christians, but making up a significant deficit. There is a sense that for a number of reasons we have been blind to this issue - and those reasons would certainly include post-colonial guilt: a sense that we have interfered uninvited in certain contexts in the past so we should not do so again. But this is not about special pleading for Christians: rather it’s about ensuring that Christians in the global south have a fair deal, and a fair share of the UK’s attention and concern. So in that sense it is an equality issue. If one minority is on the receiving end of 80% of religiously motivated discrimination² it is simply not just that they should receive so little attention.

Fifthly however, this is also about being sensitive to discrimination and persecution of all minorities. Because the Christian faith is perhaps the one truly global faith it has become a bellwether for repression more generally. If Christians are being discriminated against in one context or another you can be confident other minorities are too. So renewing a focus on Christian persecution is actually a way of expressing our concern for all minorities who find themselves under pressure. And ignoring Christian persecution might well mean we’re ignoring other forms of repression as well.

And finally to look at this both historically and theologically the Christian faith has always been subversive: 'Jesus is Lord' is the earliest Christian Creed. Those were not empty words. Rather, they explain why from the earliest days the Christian faith attracted persecution. To say that Jesus is Lord was to say that Caesar was not Lord, as he claimed to be. So from its earliest days the Christian faith presented a radical challenge to any power that made absolute claims for itself. Christian faith should make no absolutist political claims for itself - but it will always challenge those who do, which is precisely why the persecution of Christians is a global phenomenon and not a local or regional one.

The Christian faith will always present a radical challenge to any power that makes absolute claims for itself, and there are plenty of those in the world today. And I suggest that confronting absolute power is certainly a legitimate concern and policy objective of any democratic government. Indeed the Christian faith’s inherent challenge to absolutist claims explains why it has been such a key foundation stone of Western democratic government – and explains too why we should continue to support it vigorously wherever it is under threat.

Nonetheless the focus of the Review’s recommendations is clearly on guaranteeing freedom of religion or belief for all, irrespective of faith tradition or belief system, taking full account of the scale, scope and severity of its abuse in various contexts (which in itself has justified the Foreign Secretary asking for a particular focus on Christian persecution at this present time). To argue for special pleading for one group over another would be antithetical to the Christian tradition. It would also, ironically, expose that group to greater risk. We must seek FoRB for all, without fear or favour.

Similarly the very first recommendation calls for the protection of freedom of religion or belief to be set within a broader human rights framework, whilst nonetheless emphasising that this is a right upon which so many others depend. There is, for instance, a critical interconnectedness between this right and freedom of expression, so whilst I want to give it particular prominence an exclusive focus on it would not only be counterproductive, it would be nonsensical. Properly understood, rights are interdependent and inseparable. And so much depends upon them – as this Report argues, key issues such as trade and security amongst them. So paying proper attention to FoRB within a broader human rights framework will simply enable the Foreign and Commonwealth Office to do its job better.

I am concerned therefore to uphold the rights of all minorities and it is only right in this Introduction to acknowledge the very significant persecution other communities have suffered. The Rohingya community in Myanmar have suffered grievously, as have the Yazidis in Iraq. The Ahmadis have been persecuted since their inception. Whilst it is right to recognise the suffering of Christians in India and China, it would be quite wrong to ignore the persecution of Muslim communities in those countries, including the Uighur Muslims, who have suffered appallingly. In many places in the world it is certainly not safe to admit that you are an atheist. Jehovah’s Witnesses have experienced severe persecution historically, and are certainly not free of it today.

It is also vital to acknowledge that those who profess Christian faith have also, historically, been the persecutors of others. One thinks with shame of the Crusades, the Inquisition and the Pogroms. But this is not simply a historical phenomenon. Some of the violence in the Central African Republic has very likely been initiated by Christian militia. And responsibility for the dreadful massacre of 8,373 Bosniaks in Srebrenica in July 1995 must be laid squarely at the feet of those who professed Christian faith.

It seems to me that we currently face two existential threats to human flourishing and harmonious communities: climate change and the systematic denial of FoRB. We are beginning to pay proper attention to the former. It is high time we paid proper attention to the latter. This Report both outlines the seriousness of the challenge and also suggests how the FCO might better address it.

Rt. Rev. Philip Mounstephen
Bishop of Truro
July 2019

Acknowledgements

I record my personal thanks to (amongst others) Tom Woodroffe, Richard Jones, Julian Mansfield, Margaret Galy and Jaye Ho from the FCO. I am grateful too for the expert input from Aid to the Church in Need, Open Doors and Release International and also to Christian Solidarity Worldwide and the Observatory of Religious Freedom in Latin America. My grateful thanks go to the independent members of my Secretariat, David Fieldsend, Charles Hoare, Rachael Varney and our volunteers Johnny Humphrey and Keith Tapp. I am indebted to them for their hard work and dedication over the last six months.

I am also extremely grateful to the many hundreds of witnesses who are too numerous to mention who have assisted my team. Fellow Christians, many having to endure the frustrations of discrimination or pain of physical persecution, have entrusted us with their evidence in the midst of their challenging circumstances. We have been deeply moved by their joyful faith in Christ and commitment to each other in the midst of pain and suffering. Church leaders from around the world have also been very generous with their time and ideas in responding to our questionnaire and providing evidence of FCO support of their communities. Staff, volunteers and specialist researchers from the world-wide FoRB NGO Community, who have been campaigning tirelessly over many decades in support of the persecuted Church, have willingly shared their expertise. Finally my thanks go to the members of the wider FCO Network both in King Charles Street and around the world who have completed our questionnaires, hosted visits from the independent team, often at impossibly short notice, and patiently answered endless questions. Their dedication to their service of Crown and Country has been very evident to see and in the age of austerity, hugely inspiring.

Independent Review Methodology

 In order faithfully to fulfil the Foreign Secretary’s commission as set out in the Independent Review’s Terms of Reference (see Appendix) careful consideration was given at the outset to the most appropriate methodological approach that would best serve the research and analysis. The desire for a global and comprehensive scope led to an agreement to extend the length of the Review from three to six months. The terms of reference were finally agreed in late February.

Independence

As stated in the introduction to the Interim Report it was felt that, with an issue of this sensitivity, the independence of the Review was of paramount importance, because it is upon that independence that its credibility depends. Hence the Independent Review team consisted of a carefully balanced ‘tripartite alliance’ of FCO officials, secondees from NGOs with great experience in the world of FoRB, and independent members. On the basis of that balance it is hoped that readers can be confident of the genuine independence of the review’s findings and recommendations.

Secure evidence base

At the specific suggestion of the Foreign Secretary, several of the leading NGOs working with the global community of persecuted Christians were approached to seek their particular expertise and three of these provided seconded researchers to join the Secretariat team. The purpose of creating a secure evidence base was to enable an accurate and informed assessment of FCO support both centrally in King Charles Street and also at Post level in UK High Commissions and Embassies around the world.

Regional Summaries

The Secretariat’s specialist NGO researchers focused initially on producing comprehensive regional summaries of what were assessed to be the four key regions where Christians were under most pressure. During the course of preparing these summaries the researchers collectively determined that there were two additional regions that ought to be included. This inadvertently left the region of Europe as the only region not to be covered. Although the level of discrimination and persecution might be thought to have reduced in the last part of the twentieth century, the European continent remains an area where Christian communities do experience discrimination and isolated incidents of physical persecution on the basis of their faith. Future independent reviews of this area should consider including this region as part of a global study.

Case Studies

The tragic narrative of individual lives destroyed and communities devastated on a global scale provided the Review team with the task of assessing the validity of reported cases of FoRB violations. In order to better assess FCO response and support of Christian communities, the Independent Review commissioned detailed case studies for a number of nations that the Secretariat chose to highlight. These ‘Focus Countries’ were identified in consultation with the specialist researchers. The nature of the problem in these countries brought with it the challenge of determining which cases to highlight amongst such a large number of tragedies. In addition, in stressful and high risk environments, it is often difficult to distinguish reports based on fears and rumour, from specific factual and evidence-based testimony. Incidents often occur in remote areas with limited communications or technology to enable the accurate recording and dissemination of information from the testimony of eye witnesses. The case studies selected in the Focus Countries were chosen with a desire for as robust an evidential base as possible. Ideally the researchers identified cases that were already in the public domain where they could establish the facts and conduct analysis on the basis of the triangulation of evidence from three independent sources. Where possible they also sought to include the full range of persecution, from discriminatory action to violent acts leading to serious injury and loss of life.

Comparative FoRB Assessment

The Review’s assessment of some comparative FoRB policies, initiatives and practice has placed the FCO’s own FoRB initiatives in the context of the work of ‘like-minded’ states. Visits to both bilateral FoRB partners and multilateral contexts enabled a wider assessment of FCO FoRB work.

Visits to Key Countries

Despite the constrained length of the review period, it was decided at the outset that a purely armchair, paper-based, exercise would not take seriously enough the egregious nature of the discrimination and persecution of the global Christian communities. It would also risk missing the collection of some very significant first-hand evidence from Christians living in the most challenging FoRB environments. As agreed in the Terms of Reference, the Independent members of the Secretariat undertook a number of brief visits to engage with FCO diplomats and locally employed officers at Posts and Christian communities in a representative sample of countries.

FCO FoRB policy and practice

Where possible the Independent Review team has sought sight of key documents from departments in King Charles Street, Country Desk Officers and Officers at Post level. In addition we have engaged with individuals on specific subjects. We have also received extensive written and oral evidence from retired members of staff who have served in the FCO over the past sixty years. This evidence has been invaluable not only in assessing FCO support for persecuted Christians but also in developing the Independent Review’s Recommendations.

Development of Recommendations

From the outset of the Independent Review, the Foreign Secretary expressed a desire that the recommendations for changes in FCO policy and practice should be both robust and yet realistic and implementable. In order to do that those recommendations are based on the firm and incontrovertible foundations of Article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and Articles 18 and 27 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Thus the recommendations have expressly not been limited only to Christian communities but where possible are framed in terms of the full application of FoRB principles, policy and practice to all communities. It is the clear conviction of the Review that the very best way to protect the rights, welfare, livelihoods and lives of Christians is to ensure Freedom of Religion or Belief for all.

Further evidence

As highlighted in the Preface above, a significant amount of evidence gathered in connection with the preparation of this Final Report does not appear in its printed form but where not constrained by security and privacy considerations, will appear on the Independent Review’s website, as a resource for continued study and the framing of further responses to this issue.

4. The Persecution Problem

As outlined in the Preface above the purpose of this section is to provide an overview of the phenomenon of the persecution of Christians. It does so first by reproducing the Interim Report, published just after Easter 2019. This has been edited subsequently to reflect various representations made to the Review following its publication.

The Interim Report is followed by an analysis of a number of particular countries. The in-country context is summarised before a particular case study is analysed and the FCO response to it is commented upon. The whole section then concludes with a summary analysis of the considerable amount of oral and written evidence that the Review team took.

In some ways it seems as if the persecution of Christians has come out of clear blue sky. It was an identifiable phenomenon in the days of the Cold War when Christians and Churches in some contexts in the Soviet bloc experienced significant pressure. Post-1989, however, it seemed to recede somewhat, only to reassert itself, seemingly by degrees, in the intervening period.

There are perhaps two striking factors behind its re-emergence. First, where once it seemed only to be located behind the Iron Curtain, it has re-emerged as a truly global phenomenon. The regional foci of the Interim Report thus necessarily expanded from four to six regions to take account of its global nature.

But it is not a single global phenomenon: it evidently has, as what follows shows, multiple triggers and drivers. This would argue that responses to it should not only be principled and over-arching, but also be tailored to context. The recommendations that conclude the Final Report specifically recommend that double approach.

The second striking factor is that because the re-emergence of Christian persecution has both been gradual, and has lacked a single driver, it has to some significant extent been overlooked in the West. And the western response (or otherwise) has no doubt too been tinged by a certain post-Christian bewilderment, if not embarrassment, about matters of faith, and a consequent failure to grasp how for the vast majority of the world’s inhabitants faith is not only a primary marker of identity, but also a primary motivation for action (both for good or ill).

It is the hope of this Review that its evidence and analysis of ‘The Persecution Problem’ will help significantly in addressing it as the serious issue it undoubtedly is.