To remind ourselves:
a. The boycotting by Arabs as a weapon against Jews and Zionism began early during the Mandate period.
b. The boycott was directed not only against the idea and practice of Zionism but against Jews as Jews.
c. The boycott was not aimed specifically at an "occupation".
Examples:
1929
^
"foodstuffs originating in territories occupied by the State of Israel must bear the indication of their territory of origin, accompanied, where those foodstuffs come from a locality or a group of localities constituting an Israeli settlement within that territory, by the indication of that provenance... as regards the issue whether the indication ‘Israeli settlement’ is mandatory, the Court first of all underlined that the settlements established in some of the territories occupied by the State of Israel are characterised by the fact that they give concrete expression to a policy of population transfer conducted by that State outside its territory, in violation of the rules of general international humanitarian law. The Court then held that the omission of that indication, with the result that only the territory of origin is indicated, might mislead consumers."
...The boundary of the hill country of Samaria and Judea starts on the Jordan River at the Wadi Malih...at a point on the district boundary between Haifa and Samaria west of El Mansi...From here it follows the northern and eastern boundaries of the village of Ar'ara, rejoining the Haifa-Samaria district boundary at Wadi'Ara
For products from Palestine that do not originate from settlements, an indication which does not mislead about the geographical origin, while corresponding to international practice, could be “product from the West Bank (Palestinian product)”, “product from Gaza” or “product from Palestine”.
the country of origin or the place of provenance of a foodstuff must...be indicated where failure to indicate this might mislead consumers into believing that that foodstuff has a country of origin or a place of provenance different from its true country of origin or place of provenance. In addition, it noted that, where the origin or provenance is indicated on a foodstuff, it must not be deceptive.and
For products from the West Bank or the Golan Heights that originate from settlements, an indication limited to “product from the Golan Heights” or “product from the West Bank” would not be acceptable. Even if they would designate the wider area or territory from which the product originates, the omission of the additional geographical information that the product comes from Israeli settlements would mislead the consumer as to the true origin of the product. In such cases the expression “Israeli settlement” or equivalent needs to be added, in brackets, for example. Therefore, expressions such as “product from the Golan Heights (Israeli settlement)” or “product from the West Bank (Israeli settlement)” could be used.’
Minutes of the Secretary of State’s Staff Meeting
Washington, February 26, 1975, 8 a.m.
MR. ROBINSON: We have the Saudi Arabian Commission meeting starting here in a few minutes. We have run into a problem. The problem is developing over the exclusion of Jews from any of these contractual arrangements. We are going to have to try to work it out. And I think there are solutions. But it is going to create—
SECRETARY KISSINGER: Like what? Like Faisal converting? That way he can also go to Jerusalem...
...SECRETARY KISSINGER: Get that word around, will you, McCloskey. We are against discrimination on the grounds of race and religion.
MR. ROBINSON: It is going to be a problem.
Congressman Waxman, who was not a member of the House Foreign Armed Forces Committee, got onto the Committee’s tour of the Middle East apparently solely to raise the question of visas for Jews. He asked King Faisal why Jews were not permitted freely into the Kingdom and the King asked why they would want to come. Most Jews, said the King, support Israel.^
U.S. Embassy Accidentally Sends Settlement Wine as Jewish New Year Gift
...the U.S. embassy in Tel Aviv sent gift baskets to a number of Israeli organisations, as it does every year. Among the recipients was Peace Now, a group opposed to Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank....An embassy official confirmed the baskets had been sent out, saying they were purchased from a vendor who put together the contents, which were not checked before distribution. "This should in no way be interpreted as a change of our policy on settlements, which is long-standing and clear," the official said.
"in 1945"
Arabs Boycott Jewish Electricity
March 16, 1923
Arab extremists are waging their fight against things Jewish even to the point of refusing the use of electricity derived from a “Jewish” station.
The Jaffa municipality has decided to stick to the old hand, foot and horse power rather than utilize any of the electrical power derived from the Buttenberg station at the Auja.
Efforts by the government to convince the Arabs that electricity was neutral and knew no politics proved unavailing.
Arab Students Adopt Anti-Jewish Resolution
August 18, 1929
What was termed an All-Palestine Arab Students Conference was held here yesterday with the result that a number of anti-Jewish resolutions were adopted. The conference decided to combat Arab land brokers who are instrumental in selling land to Jews, to support Arab industries in Palestine and Syria to boycott foreign products, to appeal for unity among the Arabs of Palestine for the independence of the country within an Arab Confederation,
March 30, 1930
Two Arabs found guilty of agitating for the anti-Jewish boycott have been sentenced to six months each in prison.
...neither Starbucks nor CEO Howard Schultz "provides financial support to Israel," or to its army, in the wake of what Starbucks (SBUX) called "false rumors." The company, which is known for flooding markets with its stores, also pointed out that it closed all of its stores in Israel in 2003 because of "operational challenges."Spokesman Jim Olson wouldn't specify what challenges the company faced in Israel, but did say the decision to leave "was not related to political issues."The company has publicly refuted claims about its support for Israel before, but reiterated its position because it saw an "uptick in false rumors out there about Starbucks and the Middle East," according to Olson.
a leading supplier, providing lightweighting and noise, vibration and harshness (NVH) solutions to automotive, commercial vehicle and other industrial markets. Shiloh delivers these solutions through design, engineering and manufacturing of first operation blanks, engineered welded blanks, complex stampings, modular assemblies and highly engineered aluminum die casting and machined components serving the body-in-white, emission, powertrain, structural and seating needs of OEM and Tier 1 customers. The company has multiple locations across North America, including in Georgia, Indiana, Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio, Tennessee, Wisconsin and Mexico, and has approximately 1,770 employees.
You noted that in Abu Dhabi the Arab press boycotted your film because it was considered “pro-Israeli.” In the wake of the choice to have the film open the Jewish Film Festival, were you urged to take part in the boycott against Israel?“Not personally, but I know that tendency exists. I find no logic in it. A cultural boycott is a paradox: To resolve conflicts, dialogue is necessary, the sides have to talk to each other. The whole idea of the movie is to get Israelis to become acquainted with a different type of Muslim Arab: a down-and-out guy who is looking for love in the big city, just like a lot of other young guys. I am a great believer in the ability of the cinema to advance understanding and dialogue, and in that sense I am an idealist.”
Israel-based Fox clothing chain to open Ramallah branch
Palestinians in Ramallah on Monday expressed outrage on news that the Israel-based Fox clothing chain was planning to open a branch in their city...Large advertising signs in the city announcing the impending opening of a Fox store enraged Palestinian activists involved in various campaigns to promote boycotts of Israel.
...Activist Zeid al-Shuaibi said that opening a Fox branch in Ramallah was in violation of PA laws banning normalization with Israel and trade with settlers...Fadi al-Arouri, a Palestinian journalist involved in the anti-normalization campaign, said that the opening of a Fox branch in Ramallah was a “stain of disgrace in light of calls for boycotting the state of occupation and its produces.”
Al-Arouri accused the PA’s Ministry of Economy of facilitating the entry of Israeli products to the Palestinian market by giving Israeli companies and merchants permits to work in the Palestinian territories.
A spokesman for the PA Ministry of Economy, Hatem Sarhan, said that the Fox store that was planning to open in Ramallah was not an Israeli firm. He said that a company under the same name had registered with his ministry in April 2008 as a local Palestinian business.
"No doubt, the inclination is to boycott Florida, stop conventions, to isolate Florida as a kind of apartheid state..."
Call for Papers: Jews, Colonialism and Postcolonialism
University of Cape Town, 2-4 January 2013
This international and interdisciplinary Conference is jointly organised by the Isaac and Jessie Kaplan Centre for Jewish Studies and Research (University of Cape Town), the Parkes Institute for the Study of Jewish/non-Jewish Relations (University of Southampton), and the Department of Hebrew, Biblical and Jewish Studies (University of Sydney).The conference seeks to explore the connections and intersections between Jews, colonialism, and postcolonialism. The existing scholarly literature, mainly following the work of Paul Gilroy, has begun to recognise this conjunction in a variety of ways whether in relation to ‘multidirectional memory’ (Michael Rothberg), ‘the crisis of postcolonial culture’ (Aamir Mufti), or the exclusions of ‘disciplinary thinking’ (Bryan Cheyette). But there is still a need to bring together these sometimes contradictory approaches and to begin to constitute this topic as a new field of comparative studies.
Proposals are welcome from those who want to promote theoretical engagement between Jewish and postcolonial studies as well as those providing more detailed case studies - including from all periods and all places - relating to the history, sociology, and anthropology of Jews (as both ‘white’ and ‘not quite’) in relation to colonialism and postcolonialism. This conference is part of a growing attempt to explore the substantial ways in which these fields inform each other. We welcome papers – theoretical and case studies - covering all chronologies and locations, including discussions of Jews in imperial contexts from antiquity to the present day. Papers are also welcome on how these tensions and intersections have been articulated in the cultural sphere, including, for example, art, film, literature, museums, music and television.
Many EU imports from Israel are labelled "Made in Israel" even though they originate from areas that are merely occupied by Israel. New transparency rules could change that....
Until now, the EU only requires fruits and vegetables from the occupied areas to be labelled accordingly - a rule that doesn't apply for other agricultural or commercial goods. As a consequence, any other products - from cookies to furniture - may say "Made in Israel", but in fact may come from Israeli settlements within the West Bank or East Jerusalem - settlements which many countries and the UN consider to be illegal...Authorities in Finland are debating special labels for all goods that are produced in Israeli settlements - perhaps then reading "Golan Heights, Israeli settlement area." In May, South Africa and Denmark had announced similar steps; already in 2009, Britain had issued a recommendation for UK retailers to put unambiguous labels on the products in question.
...according to Ralf Hexel, the Tel Aviv bureau chief of the Friedrich Ebert Foundation which is affiliated with Germany's social democratic party..."...there are Palestinians who work in companies that are based within Israeli settlements. Those people often think less of the political consequences, but rather of how to keep their jobs." On both the Palestinian and the Israeli side, he said, there are conflicts of interest...
European governments have every right to boycott trade with West Bank settlements, according to a leading international counsel, British newspaper The Independent reported Monday. Cambridge professor of international law James Crawford formulated the formal opinion in a 60-page document obtained by The Independent. “There do not appear to be any EC [European Commission] laws which could be breached by a member state taking the decision to ban the import of settlement produce on public policy grounds,” Crawford asserted in the document.
He continued that imposing a ban on trade with settlements would not breach obligations to the World Trade Organization, because “as a member of international law, the West Bank and Gaza cannot be considered to be Israel’s territory.”
The international lawyer Dr. Elihu Lauterpacht has written that in order to determine the title to a particular area the normal procedure is to "trace the chain of title back from the present claimant to a holder whose rights were unquestioned".(2)
In the case of Palestine, of which the West Bank is part of, Turkey was the unquestioned holder and one need not go further back than the period of Ottoman rule. In July 1923, Turkey signed the Treaty of Lausanne, in which she renounced her rights and title to various territories which included Palestine.(3) By that time(4) the Council of the League of Nations had already granted the Palestine Mandate to Britain.(5) The question of Sovereignty over mandated territories had puzzled international lawyers for decades and there are a number of possibilities as to where the sovereignty rested. These include the League of Nations, the Mandatory Powers, or that the sovereignty was in abeyance.(6) A possible solution to this question came in 1950 when Sir Arnold McNair in his separate opinion on the International Status of South-West Africa stated that "Sovereignty over a Mandated Territory is in abeyance".(7)
The sovereignty over Palestine when the Mandate over Palestine terminated is discussed by Lauterpacht and he suggested the possibility of a sovereignty gap.(8) In accordance with the opinion of Sir Arnold McNair, this would be a continuation of the Sovereignty vacuum which existed during the life of the League of Nations.
However, since all are agreed that sovereignty was located somewhere or was in abeyance, it has been pointed out by international lawyers that "no mandated territory can be regarded, on the termination of the mandate over it, as a res nullius open to acquisition by the first comer,"(9) and that "sovereignty could only be acquired by lawful action."(10)
Dr. Elihu Lauterpacht (Lecturer in Law at the University of Cambridge): "Jordan was not entitled to claim any of the areas west of the river Jordan [West Bank]" and "Egypt was not entitled to assert sovereignty over the Gaza Strip."(16)
(2) Elihu Lauterpacht, Jerusalem and the Holy Places, (London: The Anglo-Israel Association, 1988), p.38
(3) Lausanne Treaty, signed between British Empire, France et al. on one side and Turkey on the other, on 24 July 1923, Article 16. The text may be found in The Treaties of Peace 1919-1923 vol.2, (New York: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 1924), pp.959ff.
(4) The Palestine Mandate was signed in London on 24 July 1922.
(5) British Mandate for Palestine, League of Nations, Official Journal, 3rd year, no.8, August 1922, Annex 391, pp.1007-12.
(6) Yehuda Blum, "The Missing Reversioner", Israel Law Review, vol.3, no.2, April 1968, p.282; Alan Levine, "The Status of Sovereignty in East Jerusalem and the West Bank," New York University Journal of International Law & Politics, vol.5, no.3, Winter 1972, p.489.
(7) International Court of Justice, Reports of Judgments, Advisory Opinions and Orders, 1950, International Status of South-West Africa, Advisory Opinion of July 11th, 1950, Separate Opinion by Sir Arnold McNair, p.150.
(8) Lauterpact, op. cit., pp.40-41.
(9) Blum, op. cit., p.283.
(10) Lauterpacht, op .cit., p.42.
(16) Lauterpacht, op. cit., p.44.
Prof. Crawford’s opinion rejects arguments suggesting that EU member states are obliged – rather than merely able – to enforce a ban. According to the report, the legalist’s brief will be published by the Trades Union Congress later this week.
Luckily, for those of us looking for some action, the PR end of the conference organized a session between Beinart and the bloggers covering the conference. That was where the real fun began.
With no fancy organizations or publications to represent or professional reputations to protect, debate flowed freely. With many kippot and headscarves in the audience, many of the bloggers held right-wing views directly opposed to Beinart, and some lived over the Green Line. In the crowd were hard-core critics like Yisrael Medad who wrote a piece on Beinart once called “Peter’s Pernicious Paradox.” One blogger, posing a question about Beinart's book, stressed that he had borrowed the book- he would never buy it.
Beinart had to defend his opinion that American Jews should boycott goods and services coming from what he has called "non-democratic Israel" to a woman blogger whose business has been hurt by the BDS campaign - which she feels has been legitimized by his views
He was asked what liberal American Jews will say if there is a two-state solution, and like Gaza, the West Bank is ruled by Hamas that will tolerate terror even when not directly involved in terror against Israel.
And of course, he was asked - probably for the nine millionth time this year - how he, as a Diaspora Jew, can so strongly advocate surrender of all of the territory over the Green Line when neither he nor his children will bear the physical consequences of such a move.
Beinart, to his credit, had an answer for everything. He seemed far more animated with this crowd, and it became clear why he’s such a hit on the speaker’s circuit - there hasn't been anyone with his level of charisma engaged in Jewish issues for a long time. He managed to carve out common ground with right-wing Jews with his genuine concern, he was genuinely worried about the level of education and commitment of American Jews, confessing that he was not optimistic about its future. He won points for honesty by admitting that his kids' day school education is making them far more right-wing than he is and that his Egyptian grandmother chided him for his left-wingness, telling him he was naive about the Arabs.
But what really won over the initially hostile bloggers happened when he was asked by a blogger who lives within the Green Line whether he should travel to his parents' house in the West Bank to give a Torah lesson on the yarhtzeit of his grandfather’s death.
In such a situation, he asked, what would Peter Beinart do? Would he go or would he boycott?
Beinart paused only briefly, then said that he would go to the family event. Politics are politics, he said, but the obligation to honor your mother and father trumps ideology.
One blogger at the meeting said that this was the moment Beinart won over the crowd, and confessed he was among Beinart's new fans. “The answer was so quintessentially Jewish, that I think many of the bloggers were forced to change their mind about Beinart. I doubt anyone there changed their political views. However, leaving the meeting I felt that though I may disagree with him on many things, I had no doubt that he was a Zionist and a truly concerned Jew.”
Mick Jagger turned out to be a nice Jewish boy after all.
Dr. Magnes said that the first of the points he desired to make was that great pressure could be brought to bear on both Arabs and Jews if the United States would impose even partial financial sanctions. He pointed out that the Jewish community in Palestine is an artificial development and that, although the work of the Jews had resulted in many beautiful accomplishments such as farms, universities, and hospitals, which resulted from contributions from the United States, the money now contributed to the Jewish community was being used solely for war "which eats up everything." Dr. Magnes said that the Hagannah costs $4 million a month to run. He was certain that, if contributions from the United States were cut off, the Jewish war machine in Palestine would come to a halt for lack of financial fuel.
Professor Jonathan Rosenhead: Next target is Habima at the Globe in May
LSE Professor Jonathan Rosenhead, Chair of the British Committee for the Universities of Palestine (BRICUP), who helped to disrupt the Israel Philharmonic Orchestra’s concert at the Royal Albert Hall on 1st September 2011, has said that the performance by the National Theatre of Israel (or Habima) of The Merchant of Venice at the Globe Theatre on 28th and 29th May will be the next target for anti-Israel activists.
He said that they had purchased 45 tickets (see from 4 mins. 7 secs. in following clip) for the Israel Philharmonic Orchestra’s disrupted concert and he boasted about the BBC taking the concert off air.
He was speaking on Friday at King’s College London about the academic and cultural boycott of Israel...
He reserved much of his criticism for Arab nations for not standing with Syria and for coming down on it for human rights abuses.
"Their situation is like that of a doctor who tells people not to smoke while he has a cigarette in his mouth," he said.
"We have been working for years to create an office to boycott Israel," he said, referring to the Arab League initiative against Syria. "But in weeks they did it against Syria. Are they swapping Israel for Syria?"
"Did the Arab League respect its own nations whose territory has been invaded or occupied? Have they prevented separation of Sudan, or stopped Sudan famine, or stopped the death of 1 million Iraqis, or re-planted any of the olive trees uprooted by Israel?"
Has the Arab league actually gained independence for its states, and consequently for itself? Has it ever implemented its decisions and removed the dust off its files and achieved only a fragment of the aspirations of the Arab peoples? Or has it contributed directly to sowing the seeds of sedition and disunity? Has it respected its charter and defended its member states whose land, or the rights of whose peoples, have been violated? Has it returned one olive tree uprooted by Israel or prevented the demolition of one Palestinian house in occupied Arab Palestine?...
...we say that with this attempt they don’t focus on getting Syria out of the League, but rather on suspending Arabism itself so that it becomes an Arab
League only in name. It will no longer be a league – bringing people together – or Arab. It will be a mock-Arab body in order to be in line with their policies and the role they are playing on the Arab arena. Otherwise, how can we explain this unprecedented and unreasonable tact with the Zionist enemy in everything it does and this decisiveness and toughness with Syria?
We have been trying for years to [re?]activate the Israel-boycott office; and we have been receiving excuses of the type that this is no longer acceptable; but, within a few weeks, they activate a boycott against Syria.
The [Arab] League was founded in 1944, and in 1945 began a boycott of Zionist goods and services in the British mandate territory of Palestine. In 1948, following the war establishing Israel’s independence, the boycott was formalized against the state of Israel and broadened to include non-Israelis who maintain economic relations with Israel or who are perceived to support it. The boycott is administered by the Damascus-based Central Boycott Office (CBO), a specialized bureau of the Arab League...
The social structure of the Arab world, with its large diversity, is based on two strong and integrated pillars: Arabism and Islam. Both of them are great, rich and vital. Consequently, we cannot blame them for the wrong human practices. Furthermore, the Muslim and Christian diversity in our
country is a major pillar of our Arabism and a foundation of our strength...Defeat is not necessarily military and it might come true if they succeed in making us withdraw to international conflicts and forget about our bigger issues on
top of which the Palestinian Issue...
... but we can draw deductions about...the [anti-Syrian] conspiracy. It will end when the Syrian people decide to turn into a submissive people,
when we submit and abandon all our heritage: the heritage of the October war of liberation in 1973, when we abandon our pan-Arab positions. We defended
Lebanon in 1982, when it was the springboard of resistance which led to the liberation of Lebanon in 2000, when we stop supporting the resistance which
we supported in 2006 and 2008 in Lebanon and Gaza, when we give free concessions partially or fully in the peace process, particularly in our occupied land in the Golan, when we abandon our pan-Arab positions towards the Palestinian cause which we have adopted since 1948, when we accept to be false witnesses to the systematic and unprecedented destruction of al-Aqsa mosque.
...who said that we are talking about an Arab race? Had Arabism been only the Arab race, we wouldn’t have had much to be proud of. The last thing in Arabism is race. Arabism is a question of civilization, a question of common interests, common will and common religions. It is about the things which bring about all the different nationalities which live in this place. The strength of this Arabism lies in its diversity not in its isolation and not in its one colordness. Arabism hasn’t been built by the Arabs. Arabism has been built by all those non-Arabs who contributed to building it and those who belong to this rich society in which we live. Its strength lies in its diversity. Had there been a group of non-Arabs who wanted to change their traditions and customs and abandon them, we would oppose them on the grounds that they weaken Arabism. The strength of our Arabism lies in openness, diversity and in showing this diversity not integrating it to look like one component. Arabism has been accused for decades of chauvinism. This is not true. If there are chauvinistic individuals, this doesn’t mean that Arabism is chauvinistic. It is a condition of civilization.
What is taking place in Syria is part of what has been planned for the region for tens of years, as the dream of partition is still haunting the grandchildren of [the 1915] Sykes–Picot [British-French Agreement]...The West is still colonial in one way or another. It is changing from an old colonizer to a modern colonizer and from a modern colonizer during the Sykes-Picot agreement to a contemporary colonizer.
Posts
