Letters - 18 July 2025
From whatever we can offer to remembrance events
Whatever we can offer
Jan Arriens (Letters, 4 July) explains Friends’ current concentration on the situation in Gaza persuasively. He rightly says that Quaker capacity for conflict intervention is limited, and we work best where we have historic links; we have no point of entry in, say, Myanmar or Sudan.
Does this help us in relation to the war in Ukraine? Many Friends brought refugees into their homes, and some of us used to work there, particularly in peace education and the Alternatives to Violence Programme; so we have personal connections and often close friendships. But it does not follow that we should be protesting publicly, as many Quakers do about Palestine. There we believe that our government is out of step with public feeling; and appearing on the streets is a good way of making our disagreement visible. But who needs persuading that the war in Ukraine is wrong?
The effectiveness of Quaker peacemaking is not measured by the amount of noise we are making in the public media, which I suspect would not have any effect in Russia. Instead we might link ourselves to the small Quaker group in Kyiv, and join their Meetings for Worship, through their Facebook page (www.facebook.com/QuakersKyivUkraine). Those of us with personal contacts already understand the value to our friends who are under attack of telling them they are remembered and loved. We can also read the statements of our Quaker agencies which have some access to decision makers – the Quaker Council for European Affairs, the Quaker United Nations Office, and our own Yearly Meeting – let them know our interest, and support whatever they can do. Whatever we offer in love is acceptable. We should not however overestimate the Quaker capacity to make a difference.
John Lampen
Call to arms
Richard Romm (Letters, 20 June) is right to draw our attention to the many conflicts worldwide that need our concern. But surely our focus on Gaza reflects the complicity of all of us in this country in our government’s continuing supply of the arms that feed this conflict. The same, actually, applies to the conflict in Yemen, via our arms sales to Saudi Arabia. The extra factor with Gaza is our historical complicity in the background to this conflict. We all have to choose where we bear ‘faithful and courageous witness to suffering’ but always, as Richard says, ‘holding all people and all suffering in the Light’.
Helen Porter
