Should the UK withhold aid from countries where Christians are persecuted?

Last week I read a typically thought-provoking piece by Gillan on his God and Politics blog about how much aid is given directly by the UK government to those countries ranked in the top 50 of those where the persecution of Christians is most severe (you can read the piece for yourself here).

Since reading Gillan's blog, time and time again I find myself considering the points raised and the same question keeps springing to mind: is it time that we start to withhold aid, in part or in full, from those countries that allow, sanction or even encourage the persecution of Christians?

In 2011/12, the UK's Department for International Development (DfID) gave £3.11 billion in bilateral aid to countries across the world. Of this, £1.74 billion was donated to countries ranked in the top 50 for the persecution of Christians; that's a staggering 56%.

Amongst the recipients was Somalia, which received £101million and is ranked 5th in the world for the persecution of Christians (behind only North Korea, Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan and Iraq). Somalia is a Muslim country (with an estimated 99% being Muslims) with a tiny number of Christians, most of whom are converts from Islam. Although apostasy (converting from Islam to another faith) is officially prohibited in only Somaliland and Puntland, it is effectively considered a crime by most of the rest of society, as Sayid Ali Sheik Luqman Hussein found out when he was shot dead in July 2008. His 'crime'? He had converted from Islam to Christianity.

Another major recipient of aid from DfID was Pakistan, which received £212million and is ranked 14th for persecuting Christians.  Whilst Pakistani law provides a reasonable amount of protection for religious minorities, Christians face severe and increasing opposition from militants and face risks including abduction, torture and death.  An increasing number of Christians find themselves falsely accused of breaking the country's controversial blasphemy laws.  Indeed, it was his opposition to the country's blaspehmy laws that saw Shahbaz Bhatti, Pakistan's Minorities Minister and only Christian cabinet member, gunned down in broad daylight in 2011.

These are but two examples; I could have gone on and on and on (to coin a phrase).

Given how tight the UK's finances currently are, and will doubtless be for the foreseeable future, I can't help but wonder if it is right to donate such a large share of our scarce resources to countries where Christians (or any other religious minority for that matter) fear for their lives daily.

Freedom of religion and belief is a fundamental human right, as per Article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Amnesty International, in its evidence to the Conservative Human Rights Commission commented: "the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion is a fundamental component of the universal and indivisible human rights framework that applies to all people everywhere, as laid out in international law".

Furthermore, the extent of religious freedom in a country is a useful yardstick in assessing the extent of other fundamental freedoms; where the former is absent or in decline, a host other freedoms are usually threatened too. (Check out the aforementioned list of the top 5 culprits for persecuting Christians again).

So should we then reduce or end aid payments to such countries?  Should we make future aid conditional on concerted and tangible efforts by those countries' governments to act to protect religious minorities? I genuinely don't know.

A part of me is of the mind that aid to such countries should end, and the sooner the better. With the majority of the planet living in extreme poverty, surely there are others that are more worthy, more deserving of the UK's assistance?

Another part of me disagrees entirely. How could such a policy, of effectively imposing economic sanctions against some of the world's poorest, be in keeping with the Bible's teachings to love one another unconditionally, to help the weak and needy whoever and wherever they may be?

As with any crisis of conscience, I turn to my Bible for inspiration and quickly stumble upon what I think is the answer I am looking for:

"But if anyone has the world's goods and sees his brother in need, yet closes his heart against him, how does God's love abide in him?" 1 John 3:17

But does this really help? In a country of finite resources, and in a world whose needs far outweigh our ability to help in any meaningful way, bilateral aid is already apportioned based on subjective appraisals of need, of worthiness.  Why should the persecution of religious minorities not be taken alongside the multitude of other considerations?

As I continue to grapple with the question that is the title of this piece, one thing is abundantly clear to me - more needs to be done, and urgently, by countries such as the UK to tackle religious persecution, and particularly of Christians, across the world. With "200 million Christians (10 percent of the global total) being socially disadvantaged, harrassed or actively oppressed for their beliefs", according to Rupert Short's Christianophobia: A Faith Under Attack - a figure which is rising year on year - the time to act is now.

As I will doubtless continue to grapple with this question over the days and weeks to come, I can but hope and pray there are wiser minds than my own working within DfID and the Foreign Office on this very issue.