Economic and political boycotts of Israel

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article or section needs to be updated. Please update the article to reflect recent events / newly available information, and remove this template when finished.

This article is part of the Arab-Israeli conflict series.

History

Views of the conflict

International law

Facts and figures

Related

Israeli-Palestinian conflict

Arab League

Soviet Union, Russia

Israel, Palestine and the United Nations

Iran-Israel relations

Israel-United States relations

Boycott of Israel

Peace treaties and proposals

Israel-Egypt

Israel-Jordan

This box: view • talk • edit

See also: Boycotts

Boycotts of Israel are economic and political campaigns that seek a selective or total cutting of ties with the State of Israel. Such campaigns constitute one tactic used by those who challenge the legitimacy of Israel's right to exist or oppose Israeli territorial claims in the West Bank and policies towards the Palestinians over the course of the Arab-Israeli and Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Arab boycotts of Zionist institutions and Jewish businesses began before Israel's founding as a state. An official boycott was adopted by the Arab League almost immediately after 1948, but is not fully implemented in practice.

Similar boycotts have been proposed outside the Arab world and the Muslim world. These boycotts comprise economic measures such as divestment; a consumer boycott of Israeli products or businesses that operate in Israel; proposed academic boycott of Israeli universities and scholars; and a proposed boycott of Israeli cultural institutions or Israeli sport venues. Many advocates of the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) campaign use the 1980s era movement against South African apartheid as a model.^[1]

Under 1977 amendments to the Export Administration Act (EAA), it is illegal for US citizens to participate in boycotts imposed by foreign countries that are not sanctioned by the United States. Accordingly, the Arab League boycott of Israel is illegal for U.S. citizens.^[2]

Contents 1 Arab League boycott 1.1 Arab Boycott of Jewish Business 1.2 Arab Boycott of Israel 1.3 Passport Restrictions 1.4 Economic effects 1.5 Weakening of the boycott 1.6 Recent events 2 Recent economic boycotts 3 Academic boycotts 4 Artistic boycotts 5 United States Office of Antiboycott Compliance 6 Support 7 Criticism 8 References 9 See also 10 External links

[edit] Arab League boycott

The Arab economic boycott of Israel is a systematic effort by Arab states to isolate Israel economically.

[edit] Arab Boycott of Jewish Business

According to Divestment Watch, whose stated mission is "leading the fight against the Divest-from-Israel campaign", Arab boycotts of Jewish interests started as early as 1921 ^{[3] [4]}, 27 years before the establishment of Israel. The original boycott forswore with any Jewish owned business operating in the British Mandate of Palestine.

Aiming to isolate the Jewish community economically, on December 2, 1945, the newly formed Arab League Council declared a formal boycott: "Jewish products and manufactured goods shall be considered undesirable to the Arab countries." All Arab "institutions, organizations, merchants, commission agents and individuals" were called upon "to refuse to deal in, distribute, or consume Zionist products or manufactured goods." ^[5]

[edit] Arab Boycott of Israel

Officially, the boycott covers three areas:

• Products and services that originate in Israel (referred to as the primary boycott and still enforced in many Arab states)
• Businesses that operate in Israel (the secondary boycott)
• Businesses that have relationships with other businesses trading in Israel (the tertiary boycott)

At one point the boycott was observed by the entire Arab League. Today, only Lebanon and Syria adhere to it stringently. The boycott list was maintained by a special office within the Arab League called the "Central Boycott Office." Each participating Arab League state had its own national office. The Central Boycott Office has always been headquartered in Damascus, although there was no meeting of the coordinating committee from 1993 to 2002 due to the fact there was no quorum.

[edit] Passport Restrictions

In addition to goods and businesses, many Arab states (and their supporters) refuse to allow entrance to anyone who uses an Israeli passport or who has any Israeli stamp in his or her passport. The stamp may be a visa stamp, or a stamp on entry or departure. It can also include a stamp of another country which indicates that the person has entered Israel. For example, if an Egytian departure stamp is used in any passport at the Taba Crossing, that is an indication that the person entered Israel.

Countries that do not accept Israeli passports

• Algeria [1]
• Bangladesh [2]
• Brunei [3]
• Djibouti [4]
• Iran [5]
• Kuwait [6]
• Lebanon^[6] [7]
• Libya [8]
• Malaysia (Clearance permit needed from the Ministry of Internal Security). [9]
• Pakistan [10]
• Saudi Arabia [11]
• Sudan [12]
• Somalia^{[citation needed]}
• Syria^[7] [13]
• United Arab Emirates [14]
• Yemen^[8] [15]

[edit] Economic effects

Because of the boycott, certain products which were ubiquitous elsewhere in the world, such as Coca-Cola were not to be found in the Arab world. A similar situation existed in Israel as in the case of Pepsi products, which were non-existent in Israel until the boycott began waning in the late 1980s.

Although Israel's economy has performed relatively well since 1948, achieving a higher GDP per capita than that of all Arab countries but oil-rich United Arab Emirates and Qatar, the boycott nevertheless has undoubtedly harmed Israel. The Israeli Chamber of Commerce estimates that with the boycott Israeli exports are 10 percent less than they would be without the boycott and investment in Israel likewise 10 percent lower. Trade with Japan and South Korea was particularly affected.

Despite the boycott, Israeli goods often do make it to Arab markets in boycott countries. Typically, the Israeli goods are sent to a third country and then reshipped to an Arab state. Cyprus is the greatest transshipment point. In 2001, Cyprus imported $164 million in Israeli goods, but only exported $ 27.5 million to Israel. It is probable that the bulk of that enormous Israeli trade surplus ends up in the Arab world.^{[citation needed]}

[edit] Weakening of the boycott

In 1977 the Congress of the United States passed a law that then-President Jimmy Carter signed, and according to which fines would be levied on American companies which cooperate with the boycott. For the surveillance after the implementation of this law, an office called the "Office of Antiboycott Compliance" was opened in the United States as part of the American trade ministry. Despite the fines, there were some American companies (like McDonald's) which preferred to pay the fine than break the boycott and endanger loss of business with the Arab world.

Egypt was the first nation to abandon the boycott, doing so in 1980. Jordan followed in 1995. The Palestinian Authority likewise agreed not to abide by the boycott in 1995. In 1994 several of the Gulf States abandoned the secondary and tertiary boycotts. Today, most Arab states, Syria being the exception, no longer attempt to enforce the secondary or tertiary boycotts although by now Coca-Cola can be found in Syria. As the boycott was relaxed (or rather, not as stringently enforced) starting in the late 1980s and early 1990s, many companies which previously stayed out of the Israeli market had entered it, e.g. McDonald's, Toyota, Nestlé, etc.

Though not an Arab state, Iran attempts to enforce the secondary and tertiary boycotts.

[edit] Recent events

During the al-Aqsa Intifada there were calls for a renewal of the boycott and the boycott council finally met again. However, these meetings came to nothing. In 2005, shortly after the Gaza disengagement, Bahrain announced that it was completely withdrawing from the boycott. The withdrawal of Bahrain from the boycott was in order to ease the approval of free trade agreements between Bahrain and the United States. The decision to leave the boycott sparked harsh criticism of this move by the Bahraini public, and on October 11 the Bahraini parliament voted for a non-binding resolution asking for Bahrain to return to participating in the boycott.

In 2005, Saudi Arabia announced the end of its ban on Israeli goods and services, mostly due to its application to the World Trade Organization, where it is illegal for one member country to ban trade with another. However, as of summer 2006 Saudi boycott was not cancelled. ^{[9] [10] [11]}

On May 16, 2006, after four-day conference of the Arab Boycott Bureau in Damascus, Syria, a "source close to the conference" reported that "the majority of Arab countries are evading the boycott, notably the Gulf states and especially Saudi Arabia. ... The boycott deteriorated a lot, regressed and even almost collapsed... We should not lie on each other, because the boycott is quasi... paralyzed." ^[12]

However, reporting by the Jerusalem Post has found that many countries and entities are still enforcing aspects of the boycott, including the UAE and its Dubai Ports World firm, ^[13] and the Sultanate of Oman. ^[14]

In November, 2006, The Jerusalem Post reported that "According to material compiled by the US Commerce Department's Bureau of Industry and Security, ... Arab states made a total of 201 boycott-related requests in all of 2005, or fewer than 17 per month. By contrast, US firms have reported receiving 120 boycott-related requests in just the first six months of this year, for an average of 20 per month, marking an increase of nearly 20 percent over the rate recorded last year." and "it appears that at least seven Arab countries, including ostensible US allies such as Bahrain, the United Arab Emirates (UAE), Kuwait and Iraq, are enforcing the terms of the Arab boycott more energetically this year than in 2005. At the top of the list is the UAE, which made 40 boycott-related requests during the period of January to June, followed by Syria, with 20."^[15]

[edit] Recent economic boycotts

Main article: Divestment campaign#Israel

In July 2004, the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church (USA) (PCUSA) voted to "initiate a process of phased selective divestment in multinational corporations operating in Israel." ^[16] On June 19, 2006, the Committee on Peacemaking and International Issues of the PCUSA adopted a compromise resolution that calls for the Church to invest only in "peaceful pursuits" in Israel and Palestine. The new resolution does not include the word "divestment." ^[17]

On July 9, 2005, 171 Palestinian non-governmental organizations put out a call for an international economic campaign against Israel which has come to be referred to as Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) after the resolution's call "... for Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions against Israel Until it Complies with International Law and Universal Principles of Human Rights." ^[18] The three stated goals of the campaign are:

• 1. An end to Israel's "occupation and colonization of all Arab lands and dismantling the Wall;"
• 2. Israeli recognition of the "fundamental rights of the Arab-Palestinian citizens of Israel to full equality;" and,
• 3. Israeli respect, protection, and promotion of "the rights of Palestinian refugees to return to their homes and properties as stipulated in UN resolution 194."^[18]

In May 2006, the Ontario section of the Canadian Union of Public Employees approved a resolution to "support the international campaign of boycott, divestment and sanctions against Israel until that state recognizes the Palestinian right to self-determination" and to protest the Israeli West Bank barrier. ^{[19] [20] [21]}

The Congress of South African Trade Unions published a letter expressing their support for the CUPE boycott of Israel. ^[22]

The Toronto assembly of the United Church of Canada supports CUPE's boycott. In 2003, the Toronto assembly voted to boycott goods produced by Jewish settlements in the occupied territories.^[23]

The Church of England synod has voted for disinvestment from Israel, which was criticised by George Carey, the former Archbishop of Canterbury as "inappropriate, offensive and highly damaging".^[24]

Britain's National Union of Journalists called for boycott Apr. 14, 2007. By a vote of 66 to 54, the annual delegate's meeting of Britain's largest trade union for journalists called for "a boycott of Israeli goods similar to those boycotts in the struggles against apartheid South Africa led by trade unions, and [for] the [Trades Union Congress] to demand sanctions be imposed on Israel by the British government." ^[25]

[edit] Academic boycotts

Main article: Academic boycotts of Israel

In 2006, two of Britain's lecturers' unions, the National Association of Teachers in Further and Higher Education and the Association of University Teachers, voted to support an academic boycott against Israel. ^[26] The AUT ban was overturned by members at an EGM a few weeks later, while the NATFHE boycott expired when a merger with AUT to form the University and College Union came into effect. ^[27] In May, 2007, the UCU congress passed Motion 30, which called on the members to circulate information and consider a boycott request by Palestinian trade unions.

[edit] Artistic boycotts

After a festival director pushed for a boycott of Israeli films at the San Diego Women Film Foundation and Festival, the Board of Directors announced on its website that "The San Diego Women Film Foundation and Festival would like to apologize to all in the community -- we are embarrassed and horrified to learn such a position was taken without our knowledge or consent. It is the personal view of the Festival Director and not the view of the San Diego Women Film Foundation and we in no way support, sponsor or condone their statements. ... For the record, the San Diego Women Film Foundation and Festival is NOT boycotting Israeli films. We are hopeful that filmmakers from the Israeli community will continue to submit films."^[28]

[edit] United States Office of Antiboycott Compliance

The United States adopted two laws that seek to counteract the participation of U.S. citizens in other nation's economic boycotts or embargoes. These "antiboycott" laws are the 1977 amendments to the Export Administration Act (EAA) and the Ribicoff Amendment to the 1976 Tax Reform Act (TRA). The antiboycott provisions of the Export Administration Regulations (EAR) apply to all "U.S. persons," defined to include individuals and companies located in the United States and their foreign affiliates, and prohibit them to participate in unsanctioned boycotts against other nations, punishable by fines of up to $50,000 or five times the value of the exports involved^[29] or jail term of up to 10 years^[30].

Conduct that may be penalized under the TRA and/or prohibited under the EAR includes:

• Agreements to refuse or actual refusal to do business with or in Israel or with blacklisted companies.
• Agreements to discriminate or actual discrimination against other persons based on race, religion, sex, national origin or nationality.
• Agreements to furnish or actual furnishing of information about business relationships with or in Israel or with blacklisted companies.
• Agreements to furnish or actual furnishing of information about the race, religion, sex, or national origin of another person.

[edit] Support

Archbishop Desmond Tutu has called on the international community to treat Israel as it treated apartheid South Africa and supports the divestment campaign against Israel. ^[31]

Arch-bishop K. G. Hammar, ambassador Carl Tham and a list of 71 others have supported a boycott of products from the occupied areas.^[32][33][34]

[edit] Criticism

Critics of the proposals argue that making unilateral demands on Israel will not promote negotiation and a just peace.^{[35] [36] [37] [38]} Some opponents of a boycott claim similarities with the Nazi boycotts of Jews of the 1930s and claim this is a form of anti-Semitism.^[39]

The Economist contends that the boycott is "flimsy" and ineffective, that "blaming Israel alone for the impasse in the occupied territories will continue to strike many outsiders as unfair," and points out that the Palestinian leadership does not support the boycott.^[40]

[edit] References

[edit] See also

• Israeli passport
• Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions
• Constructive engagement

[edit] External links

• BYTOPIC: Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions at The Electronic Intifada
• An example of site calling for the boyocott of israeli products.
• Office of Antiboycott Compliance at the United States Department of Commerce
• CUPE boycott of Israel won't help cause of peace
• The Arab Boycott at JVL
• Report: Port firm's parent boycotts Israel at UPI (accessed March 1, 2006)
• U.S. urges UAE to end its boycott of Israel By David R. Sands and Shaun Waterman at The Washington Times March 2, 2006
• Israel at War - Ynetnews