Investment Activism

World UMC Urges Boycotts & Sanctions, Not Divestment

elaine — Sat, 05 May 2012 09:27:51 -0700

from the U.S. Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation: http://www.endtheoccupation.org/article.php?id=3205

World United Methodist Church Recommends Boycotts & Sanctions; Rejects Divestment

The US Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation was honored to witness and support a historic vote by the world United Methodist Church (UMC)’s 2012 General Conference (GC), the highest decision-making body of the church, to adopt a resolution:

1. Urging the U.S. government to “end all military aid to the region”;

2. Calling on “all nations to prohibit… any financial support by individuals or organizations for the construction and maintenance of settlements”; and

3. Calling on “all nations to prohibit… the import of products made by companies in Israeli settlements on Palestinian land.”

At the same time, the US Campaign regrets that the GC subsequently voted against a resolution to divest from Caterpillar, Motorola Solutions, and Hewlett Packard (HP) due to the corporations’ complicity in the Israeli occupation. For more than forty years, the UMC has passed countless resolutions condemning the Israeli occupation and affirming the rights of the Palestinian people to freedom and self-determination. The divestment campaign, led by United Methodist Kairos Response (UMKR), a US Campaign coalition member, sought to align UMC policy with UMC pension fund investments in response to the Kairos Palestine document, a call from Palestinian Christians to move from sympathetic words to tangible action.

The votes followed multiple impassioned speeches on the GC plenary floor, witnessed by 1,000 voting delegates; hundreds of supporters, bishops, and church leaders; and thousands around the world online. (TO CONTINUE READING, CLICK HERE) or go to:

http://www.endtheoccupation.org/article.php?id=3205

Methodists Boycott Settlement Products

elaine — Fri, 04 May 2012 08:26:10 -0700

Wallwritings: http://wallwritings.me/2012/05/03/methodists-boycott-settlement-products...

Methodists Boycott Settlement Products

By a vote of 558 to 367, a strong majority of lay and clerical delegates to the United Methodist General Conference called this week for a boycott of Israeli companies operating in Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPT).

The resolution denounces the Israeli occupation and the settlements in a sweeping indictment.

It calls for “all nations to prohibit the import of products made by companies in Israeli settlements on Palestinian land.”
The resolution was focused specifically on the settlements, not on the state of Israel. It states:

“The United Methodist Church does not support a boycott of products made in Israel. Our opposition is to products made by Israeli companies operating in occupied Palestinian territories.”
That was not an easy vote. It also was an important victory for anti-occupation forces in Tampa since it calls attention to one of three actions in the growing Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement that Palestinians have adopted as a non-violent way to attack the occupation.

The vote on a resolution calling for the UMC to divest its pension funds from three US Corporations, Caterpillar, Hewlett Packard and Motorola Systems, was brought to the floor on Wednesday afternoon.

That resolution was a long shot from the outset. It lost after a series of votes that ended in a final 685 to 246 decision that the UMC would continue to finance the occupation.

One loss and one victory will prepare the United Methodist Church to take the next step in ending United Methodist support for the occupation. Like the segregated church it was until 1964, the United Methodist church can change.

In 1964, a United Methodist layman, W. Astor Kirk demonstrated how that change can happen. His life story was distributed by United Methodist News Service after his death eight months ago. The full story may be found at the end of this posting. (To continue reading, click here.)

Methodists Reject Divestment

elaine — Fri, 04 May 2012 08:32:18 -0700

from United Methodist Kairos Response:

United Methodist Church Fails to Align its Words with its Actions

Today, United Methodist Kairos Response (UMKR) did not get the decision that we had hoped for, as the General Conference plenary voted against a motion calling for divestment from Caterpillar, Hewlett-Packard, and Motorola Solutions, companies that profit from Israel's violations of Palestinian human rights and denial of Palestinian freedom. The conference faced a choice between standing with the oppressed as Jesus did, or yielding to fear. It appears that they yielded to fear as a result of misinformation spread about the consequences of supporting divestment.

However, we have achieved a great victory nonetheless. We have succeeded in raising awareness amongst the general public and in our churches about the suffering of Palestinians, including Palestinian Christians, living under Israel's nearly 45-year-old military occupation, and the colonization of their lands. The brutal reality of the Israeli occupation can no longer be hidden, and the myth that Christians are leaving the Holy Land because of Muslim pressure has been exposed as false. Palestinian Christians who traveled 6,000 miles to share their reality told delegates that they suffer alongside their Muslim neighbors from Israel's occupation.

Though the Pension Board has chosen to keep church funds in companies that profit from the occupation, a number of annual (regional) conferences within the church have already divested. Individual United Methodists will also do so. Friends Fiduciary, the large Quaker financial services corporation, voted last month to divest from Caterpillar. Other churches will soon follow the Quakers.

This issue has brought together conservative, moderate and liberal leaders in our own denomination, as well as others, who support justice and human rights for all, and we believe our shared experience in advocating for this issue will result in closer working relationships on other issues as well. The quest for justice unites people in ways that go far beyond theology, ethnicity, or politics. Deep and lasting interfaith friendships have been forged through this initiative. We have been humbled by the rabbis and other Jewish supporters who traveled to Tampa to stand with us.

Despite this disappointment, our efforts to inform and educate United Methodists and others about the plight of the Palestinians, and the ways in which church investments further their suffering, will continue, as will the global struggle for peace and justice for all the peoples of the Holy Land.

Tutu: "Justice requires action . . "

elaine — Tue, 01 May 2012 10:41:46 -0700

Justice requires action to stop subjugation of Palestinians

By Desmond Tutu, special to the Times
In Print: Tuesday, May 1, 2012

http://www.tampabay.com/opinion/columns/justice-requires-action-to-stop-subjugation-of-palestinians/1227722

A quarter-century ago I barnstormed around the United States encouraging Americans, particularly students, to press for divestment from South Africa. Today, regrettably, the time has come for similar action to force an end to Israel's long-standing occupation of Palestinian territory and refusal to extend equal rights to Palestinian citizens who suffer from some 35 discriminatory laws.

I have reached this conclusion slowly and painfully. I am aware that many of our Jewish brothers and sisters who were so instrumental in the fight against South African apartheid are not yet ready to reckon with the apartheid nature of Israel and its current government. And I am enormously concerned that raising this issue will cause heartache to some in the Jewish community with whom I have worked closely and successfully for decades. But I cannot ignore the Palestinian suffering I have witnessed, nor the voices of those courageous Jews troubled by Israel's discriminatory course.

Within the past few days, some 1,200 American rabbis signed a letter — timed to coincide with resolutions considered by the United Methodist Church and the Presbyterian Church (USA) — urging Christians not "to selectively divest from certain companies whose products are used by Israel." They argue that a "one-sided approach" on divestment resolutions, even the selective divestment from companies profiting from the occupation proposed by the Methodists and Presbyterians, "damages the relationship between Jews and Christians that has been nurtured for decades."

While they are no doubt well-meaning, I believe that the rabbis and other opponents of divestment are sadly misguided. My voice will always be raised in support of Christian-Jewish ties and against the anti-Semitism that all sensible people fear and detest. But this cannot be an excuse for doing nothing and for standing aside as successive Israeli governments colonize the West Bank and advance racist laws.

I recall well the words of the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. in his Letter from a Birmingham Jail in which he confesses to his "Christian and Jewish brothers" that he has been "gravely disappointed with the white moderate … who is more devoted to 'order' than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: 'I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action;' who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man's freedom. ..."

King's words describe almost precisely the shortcomings of the 1,200 rabbis who are not joining the brave Palestinians, Jews and internationals in isolated West Bank communities to protest nonviolently against Israel's theft of Palestinian land to build illegal, Jewish-only settlements and the separation wall. We cannot afford to stick our heads in the sand as relentless settlement activity forecloses on the possibility of the two-state solution.

If we do not achieve two states in the near future, then the day will certainly arrive when Palestinians move away from seeking a separate state of their own and insist on the right to vote for the government that controls their lives, the Israeli government, in a single, democratic state. Israel finds this option unacceptable and yet is seemingly doing everything in its power to see that it happens.

Many black South Africans have traveled to the occupied West Bank and have been appalled by Israeli roads built for Jewish settlers that West Bank Palestinians are denied access to, and by Jewish-only colonies built on Palestinian land in violation of international law.

Black South Africans and others around the world have seen the 2010 Human Rights Watch report which "describes the two-tier system of laws, rules, and services that Israel operates for the two populations in areas in the West Bank under its exclusive control, which provide preferential services, development, and benefits for Jewish settlers while imposing harsh conditions on Palestinians." This, in my book, is apartheid. It is untenable. And we are in desperate need of more rabbis joining the brave rabbis of Jewish Voice for Peace in speaking forthrightly about the corrupting decadeslong Israeli domination over Palestinians.

These are among the hardest words I have ever written. But they are vitally important. Not only is Israel harming Palestinians, but it is harming itself. The 1,200 rabbis may not like what I have to say, but it is long past time for them to remove the blinders from their eyes and grapple with the reality that Israel becoming an apartheid state or like South Africa in its denial of equal rights is not a future danger, as three former Israeli prime ministers — Ehud Barak, Ehud Olmert and David Ben Gurion — have warned, but a present-day reality. This harsh reality endured by millions of Palestinians requires people and organizations of conscience to divest from those companies — in this instance, from Caterpillar, Motorola Solutions and Hewlett Packard — profiting from the occupation and subjugation of Palestinians.

Such action made an enormous difference in apartheid South Africa. It can make an enormous difference in creating a future of justice and equality for Palestinians and Jews in the Holy Land.

Desmond Tutu, winner of the 1984 Nobel Peace Prize, is archbishop-emeritus of Cape Town, South Africa.

[Last modified: Apr 30, 2012 05:41 PM]

Tutu Supports United Methodist Divestment

elaine — Tue, 01 May 2012 10:46:08 -0700

Archbishop Desmond Tutu Endorses United Methodist Divestment Resolution

26 April 2012

Dear Friends of the United Methodist Church

The situation in Israel and Palestine pains me greatly since it is the place where God formed a very particular relationship with a particular group of people; Hebrews who were oppressed as slaves in another land. As time moved on, this people disobeyed God and time and time again the prophets had to call them back to their deepest values.

The Jewish Holocaust, engineered and implemented primarily by Europeans, gave some ideologues within the Jewish and Christian community an excuse to implement plans that were in the making for at least 50 years, under the rubric of exceptional Jewish security. In this way began the immense oppression of the Palestinian people, who were not at all involved in the Holocaust. Not only is this group of people being oppressed more than the apartheid ideologues could ever dream about in South Africa, their very identity and history are being denied and obfuscated. What is worse, is that Europe and the USA are refusing to take responsibility for their actions with regard to both the Holocaust and the over-empowering of the Israelis, their disregard for the international conventions and regulatory framework of the nuclear industry and their continued oppression of the Palestinian people.

But God, who is the same yesterday, today and forever, neither slumbers nor sleeps. Prophetic voices have been calling this empowered people who were once oppressed and killed, to their deepest values of justice and compassion, but they have refused to listen even to the most reasonable voices. The human community cannot be silent in the face of the gross injustice being meted out to the people of Palestine. If international courts and governments refuse to deal with this matter, we in the churches and in the rest of civil society really have no choice but to act in small ways and big ways.

God is busy doing a new thing. And God is using all of us to be partners with him. Both the Israelis and the Palestinians have to be liberated, but at this stage the greater onus is on the Israelis since they are the ones who are in power, economically, politically and militarily. We have to think about ways that will allow them to reflect deeply on what it is that they are doing and bring them back from the brink, not out of spite or revenge, but because we love them deeply.

I therefore wholeheartedly support your action to disinvest from companies who benefit from the Occupation of Palestine. This is a moral position that I have no choice but to support, especially since I know of the effect that Boycotts, Disinvestment and Sanctions had on the apartheid regime in South Africa.

May God bless your conference as you deliberate on this matter, and I pray that your decision will reflect the best values of the human family as we stand in solidarity with the oppressed.

God bless you.

Archbishop-Emeritus Desmond Tutu
Cape Town, South Africa.

Source: https://www.kairosresponse.org/Endorsement_Statements.html

BDS: Olympia Food Co-Op Wins

elaine — Sat, 03 Mar 2012 09:35:36 -0800

Olympia Food Co-Op Wins Anti-SLAPP Motion, Court Dismisses StandWithUs Lawsuit

by: Richard Silverstein, RichardSilverstein.com | Report
http://www.truth-out.org/olympia-food-coop-wins-anti-slapp-motion-court-dismisses-standwithus-lawsuit/1330530579

Today, a Washington state court dismissed a lawsuit brought against the Olympia Food Coop by StandWithUs and the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs:

[The] court dismissed the case, calling it a SLAPP – Strategic Litigation Against Public Participation – and said that it would award the defendants attorneys’ fees, costs, and sanctions. The judge also upheld the constitutionality of Washington’s anti-SLAPP law, which the plaintiffs had challenged.

In a court hearing last Thursday, lawyers from the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR) and Davis Wright Tremaine LLP argued that the court should grant the defendants’ Special Motion to Strike and dismiss the case because it targeted the constitutional rights of free speech and petition in connection with an issue of public concern.

“We are pleased the Court found this case to be what it is – an attempt to chill free speech on a matter of public concern. This sends a message to those trying to silence support of Palestinian human rights to think twice before they bring a lawsuit,” said Maria LaHood, a senior staff attorney with the Center for Constitutional Rights.

…We’re thrilled that the court saw fit to protect the board’s right to free speech. This decision affirms the right to engage in peaceful boycotts without fear of being dragged through expensive litigation,” said Bruce E.H. Johnson of Davis Wright Tremaine LLP, who drafted Washington State’s Anti-SLAPP law.

…“Today’s victory is not only for the Co-op, but one for free speech,” said Jayne Kaszynski, spokesperson for the Olympia Food Co-op, and one of the defendants in the case.”

In this case, the issue was whether the food coop had the right to ban nine Israeli products from its shelves in support of the global BDS movement. This action was taken according to coop rules which permitted the board by concensus to approve this measure. The plaintiffs could’ve requested a vote of the entire membership to confirm or reject the board’s decision, but refused to go this route. They ran for the coop board in the next election on a platform that opposed the board’s BDS decision and lost.

Though five coop members sued the coop itself in this case, the plaintiffs were recruited by the right-wing pro-Israel advocacy group, StandWithUs and Israel’s Northwest Consul General, Akiva Tor. SWU and the MFA also recruited the lawyers representing the anti-BDS group. Israel’s deputy foreign minister, Danny Ayalon, told an Israeli TV news show that the government was using such suits in order to pre-empt what he called efforts to delegitimize Israel internationally. Thus, today’s court victory is a small, but important victory in the battle to bring Israel’s human rights abuses and illegal Occupation to a broader public audience. It is a defeat for the Israeli government and its NGO allies who seek to sweep such issues under the rug and use lawfare tactics to battle human rights activists.

The plaintiffs refuse to declare who is paying the legal fees and the attorney has refused to say that he is doing the case pro bono. Bob Sulkin, the senior partner responsible for the case, has been publicly associated with SWU fundraising efforts in the past and his wife is on the group’s board. It’s also not known who will be paying the fine and court costs ordered by the judge.

Plaintiff’s attorneys told The Olympian that the matter would be decided in the Court of Appeals or Supreme Court, indicating an appeal is likely. It would also appear that the Israeli government, seeing this type of lawfare as a potent strategy in the fight against what they see as delegitimization, would want to maintain the suit as long as possible and as high up the judicial food chain as possible. Even judicial sanctions and fines like the ones the judge levied today are unlikely to deter.

Presbyterian Leadership Takes Historic Stand

elaine — Fri, 17 Feb 2012 17:35:06 -0800

Press Release - for immediate release
contact: info@theIPMN.org

Presbyterian Leadership Takes Historic Stand

LOUISVILLE, KY - February 17, 2012 - The General Assembly Mission Council (GAMC) of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) voted to send a recommendation to the July meeting of the 220th General Assembly (national Presbyterian voting body) to divest its holdings from Caterpillar, Inc., Hewlett Packard, and Motorola Solutions. The original recommendation came from the denomination’s Mission Responsibility Through Investment Committee (MRTI) at its meeting of September 2011. MRTI’s recommendation first went to the GAMC Subcommittee on Justice, who passed it on to the larger body by unanimous consent.

Brian Ellison, Chair of MRTI, made presentations to both the subcommittee and the larger body, covering the long and painstaking process of corporate engagement that led to this recommendation. A Presbyterian pastor from Kansas City, Ellison made it clear that MRTI’s attempts at engagement with the top executives of these companies over the years have borne no fruit and that according to the Presbyterian Church’s own investment guidelines, MRTI is left without any choice but to recommend divestment as the last step of the process. When asked why these companies are being singled out among all those that do business in Israel, Ellison said that these companies profit from non-peaceful pursuits by supporting illegal occupation, which is not in line with Presbyterian values or investment philosophy.

When a member of the subcommittee mentioned that she had received information by e-mail from a Presbyterian opponent of divestment suggesting that MRTI had not gone far enough in contacting company executives, Ellison disagreed and went on to say that MRTI and its ecumenical partners persistently contacted CEOs and top executives of the three companies over several years, and received no meaningful responses to their questions or concerns.

The Israel Palestine Mission Network of the PC(USA) [IPMN]commends the General Assembly Mission Council for this historic vote. Much like the decision by Presbyterians in 1983 to divest from companies profiting from Apartheid in South Africa, this is an action that will send a clear message to the world that our Church will do everything in our power to make sure it does not profit from violence or the systematic violation of Palestinian human rights. If history is our guide, then such action, when combined with those of other religious bodies and individuals of conscience, will help bring change and transformation to the land that holds deep meaning for all the people of the three Abrahamic faiths.

About IPMN: In joyful obedience to the call of Christ, and in solidarity with churches and our other partners in the Middle East, this network covenants to engage, consolidate, nourish, and channel the energy in the Presbyterian Church (USA) toward the goal of a just peace in Israel /Palestine by facilitating education, promoting partnerships, and coordinating advocacy.
Our network speaks TO the Church not FOR the Church.

for story by Presbyterian News Service on PC(USA) website, please click here.

National ME Presbyterian Caucus Support and Endorses BDS

elaine — Tue, 11 Oct 2011 11:27:55 -0700

Nahida H. Gordon, Ph.D.
Moderator, National Middle Eastern Presbyterian Caucus
Nahida.gordon@case.edu

National Middle Eastern Presbyterian Caucus Supports and Endorses the Boycott, Divestment
and Sanctions Campaign Against the Israeli Occupation of Palestine

As Middle Eastern Americans who trace their faith origin to the apostolic age, the members of the National Middle Eastern Presbyterian Caucus (NMEPC) have a particular responsibility to be faithful disciples of Jesus Christ; and to be a voice of justice, peace, and reconciliation in the USA and the Middle East.

To that end, NMEPC upon due consideration and deliberation at its biennial meeting August 23, 2011, endorsed the call by the Palestinian civil society for a boycott, divestment, and sanctions (BDS) campaign against the Israeli occupation of Palestinian lands.

As noted in their call, "the representatives of Palestinian civil society call upon international civil society organizations and people of conscience all over the world to impose broad boycotts and implement divestment initiatives against Israel similar to those applied to South Africa in the apartheid era."
Further they request that "these non-violent, punitive measures should be maintained until Israel meets its obligation to recognize the Palestinian people's inalienable right to self-determination and fully complies with the precepts of international law by:

1. Ending its occupation and colonization of all Arab lands and dismantling the Wall;
2. Recognizing the fundamental rights of the Arab-Palestinian citizens of Israel to full equality; and
3. Respecting, protecting and promoting the rights of Palestinian refugees to return to their homes and properties as stipulated in UN resolution 194."

Keeping in mind that a BDS campaign is an internationally accepted means for non-violent opposition to discrimination, racism, and bigotry and keeping in mind that a similar BDS campaign was instrumental in ending apartheid in South Africa, the NMEPC endorsement is in expectation that BDS will also be instrumental in ending the Israeli occupation of Palestinian lands and ending the Israeli government's crime of apartheid against the Palestinian.

The end of the occupation of Palestinian lands and the end of the system of apartheid against the Palestinian people will provide the basis for justice with reconciliation between the Israeli and Palestinian people.

Source: http://www.religionnews.com/index.php?/pressreleases/nmepc_support_boyco...

Presbyterians Call for Divestment

elaine — Tue, 13 Sep 2011 10:45:41 -0700

MRTI reports on engagement with companies doing business in Israel-Palestine

LOUISVILLE

At its meeting on September 9, the Committee on Mission Responsibility Through Investment (MRTI) approved its report to the 220th General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) on its engagement with corporations doing business in Israel-Palestine. As part of its regular process of corporate engagement, and based on directives given to it by each General Assembly since 2004, the committee recommended that three companies be added to the General Assembly divestment list: Caterpillar, Hewlett-Packard, and Motorola Solutions.

“The General Assembly asked us to do everything we could to bring about change through dialogue, and we have done this, even asking the Assembly for more time over the years,” said committee chair the Rev. Brian Ellison, a pastor from Kansas City, Mo. “Today we are sadly reporting that these efforts have not produced any substantive change in company policies or practices, and that there is little reason for hope they will do so in the future. According to the Assembly’s prior directives and the church’s ordinary engagement process, we have little choice but to recommend divestment.” [Emphasis added].

Continue reading this report on the PCUSA website:
http://www.pcusa.org/news/2011/9/12/mrti-reports-engagement-companies-doing-business-i/

Archbishop Tutu: TIAA–CREF should hear us

Lea — Mon, 18 Jul 2011 14:59:09 -0700

A Message from Archbishop Desmond Tutu

Winner of the Nobel Peace Prize in 1984 and the
Presidential Medal of Freedom in 2009

TIAA-CREF should hear us

Sunday, July, 17, 2011

As shareholders with the retirement giant TIAA-CREF head to Charlotte this week for their national meeting, there is one issue they will find conspicuously absent from the agenda: divestment from the Israeli Occupation. Despite pleas from shareholders, including medical professionals, students and academics from universities across the United States, the pension fund refused to allow a vote on a resolution that would have compelled TIAA-CREF to consider divestment from companies such as Caterpillar or Elbit. These are companies that profit substantially from the illegal Israeli occupation of Palestinian land.

In an effort, presumably, to avoid the topic altogether, TIAA-CREF even went so far as to move its annual meeting to Charlotte from its usual location in New York City. But even in Charlotte, they will not be able to escape from "occupation." Throughout the United States and the world, people will continue to speak truth to power about the apartheid perpetrated in the Holy Land.

I, for one, never tire of speaking out against these injustices, because they remind me only too well of what we in South Africa experienced under the racist system of apartheid. I have witnessed firsthand the racially segregated roads and housing in the Occupied Palestinian territories. I have seen the humiliation of Palestinian men, women and children at the checkpoints and roadblocks. I have met Palestinians who were evicted and replaced by Jewish Israeli settlers; Palestinians whose homes were destroyed even as new, Jewish-only homes were illegally built on confiscated Palestinian land.

This oppression, these indignities and the resulting anger are only too familiar. It is no wonder that so many South African leaders in the anti-apartheid struggle, including Nelson Mandela and numerous Jewish leaders, have found ourselves compelled to speak out on this issue.

Though the situation deteriorates daily, I am not without hope. Before apartheid ended, most South Africans did not believe they would live to see a day of liberation. They did not believe that their children, or even their children's children, would see it. But we have seen it, and I know that if apartheid can end in South Africa, so too can this occupation.

We could not have won our freedom in South Africa without the solidarity of people around the world who adopted non-violent methods to pressure governments and corporations to end their support for the apartheid regime. Faith-based groups, unions, students and consumers organized on a grassroots level and catalyzed a global wave of divestment, ultimately contributing to the collapse of apartheid.

More than two decades later, another wave of divestment has emerged, this time with the goal of ending Israel's 44-year-old occupation and its unequal treatment of the Palestinians.

The TIAA-CREF campaign is important because it is one of the most broad-based divestment efforts in the U.S.: thousands of professors, doctors, students, and many other people of conscience are coming forward demanding that the suffering of the Palestinians not be ignored in the company's bottom line. The campaign originated with a call from the American group Jewish Voice for Peace, whose members understand that ending the occupation means a better future for both Israelis and Palestinians; a future in which both the violence of the occupier and the violent resistance of the occupied come to an end, where one people no longer rule over another, and where the cycles of suffering, humiliation and retaliation are broken.

In South Africa we understood that true peace could be built only on the basis of justice and an unwavering commitment to universal rights for all humans, regardless of ethnicity, religion, gender, national origin or any other identity attribute. I encourage TIAA-CREF, whose slogan is "for the greater good," to heed the call for divestment, to refuse to profit from oppression of a people, and thus to stand on the side of what is right: a safe, secure and peaceful future for Palestinians and Israelis.

Source: The Charlotte Observer

Petition to put shareholder proposal on the agenda of TIAA-CREF Shareholder Meeting, Tuesday, July 19,2011.

Boycott: Put More Pressure on Israel to Change

elaine — Tue, 23 Nov 2010 10:20:07 -0800

The Oregonian
GUEST COLUMNIST

http://www.oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2010/11/put_more_pressure_on...

By Steven Goldberg

As Israel increasingly ignores our government's objections to the expansion of settlements, its primary concern is with placating its own right-wing parliamentary coalition. And why should Israel be concerned with the protests of the Obama administration when U.S. military aid to Israel – now billions of dollars per year, paid by U.S. taxpayers at a time when they have no jobs and are losing their homes – continues unabated?

Israel is increasingly a rogue nation under international legal standards. Decisions from the International Court of Justice declaring the separation wall illegal, United Nations reports detailing Israel's illegal actions during its invasion of Gaza (the Goldstone Report), and the recent U.N. Human Rights Council report criticizing Israel's attacks on the Gaza flotilla are bolstered by ongoing reports by groups such as Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch detailing Israel's illegal actions. In past generations, American policy has often led us to support dictatorships and overlook gross violations of human rights. The Obama administration promised a different path, but not in its unquestioned support for Israel as legal, ethical and moral concerns are readily tossed aside.

Oregon has not done much better. Our progressive politics and concern about the environment don't seem to apply to the Israeli government's policy of destroying Palestinian homes and crops as Israel expands its borders. Ethics and morals be damned if Israel promises opportunities for Oregon businesses. Thus our governor leads a trade delegation to Israel, the city of Portland promotes seminars encouraging investment in Israel, and local stores such as New Seasons – which tout their commitment to promoting local communities and agriculture – stock products made in Israel.

There are ways of putting pressure on Israel to change its policies. Military aid provided to Israel can be reduced by our government. Of course this is little more than a fantasy as our senators and representatives receive millions of dollars a year in contributions from political organizations that support Israel. (There are exceptions: former Rep. Brian Baird of Washington spoke out strongly against the invasion of Gaza and Rep. Earl Blumenauer of Oregon courageously speaks out against Israel's actions as violations of international humanitarian law).

Several decades ago, when the white South African government instituted a policy of apartheid against its black citizens – justifying the policy as a response to alleged terrorist acts – U.S. citizens, students, labor unions and ultimately our government responded through a policy of boycott, divestment and sanctions against the South African regime. Inspired by the success of this model of political action, a campaign to boycott Israeli products has begun in Europe, and has now spread to the United States, as one method of putting pressure on Israel to end its policies of occupation and discrimination against Palestinians. (More information about this campaign is available at www.bdsmovement.net.) If our government is unwilling to meaningfully pressure Israel to change its policies, then, as our recent elections have shown, it is time for the people to act.

Steven Goldberg lives in Southwest Portland.

Tutu Calls on Opera Company to Boycott Israel

elaine — Wed, 27 Oct 2010 10:03:22 -0700

Desmond Tutu calls on South African opera company to boycott Israel

Archbishop emeritus tells Cape Town Opera that the treatment of Palestinians is like South Africa under apartheid

David Smith in Johannesburg
# guardian.co.uk, Wednesday 27 October 2010 14.34 BST
http://www.guardian.co.uk/global/2010/oct/27/desmond-tutu-opera-boycott-israel/print

Archbishop emeritus Desmond Tutu has urged a South African opera company to boycott Israel, comparing its treatment of Palestinians to his own country's era of racial apartheid.

The Nobel peace prize laureate said it would be "unconscionable" for Cape Town Opera to perform in Israel while millions of people there are denied access to culture and education.

But the opera company today insisted that it would go ahead with next month's tour of the American classic Porgy and Bess, while Tutu's stand was condemned by the South African Jewish Board of Deputies.

The 79-year-old, who earlier this month announced his retirement from public life, issued a statement that said: "Just as we said during apartheid that it was inappropriate for international artists to perform in South Africa in a society founded on discriminatory laws and racial exclusivity, so it would be wrong for Cape Town Opera to perform in Israel.

"Cape Town Opera should postpone its proposed tour next month until both Israeli and Palestinian opera lovers of the region have equal opportunity and unfettered access to attend performances."

Tutu, a veteran of the anti-apartheid struggle and campaign to free Nelson Mandela, continued: "Only the thickest-skinned South Africans would be comfortable performing before an audience that excluded residents living, for example, in an occupied West Bank village 30 minutes from Tel Aviv, who would not be allowed to travel to Tel Aviv, while including his Jewish neighbours from an illegal settlement on occupied Palestinian territory.

"The Tel Aviv Opera House is state sponsored. By luring international artists to perform there, it advances Israel's fallacious claim to being a 'civilised democracy'. Yet, every day, millions of citizens are denied the right to educational and cultural opportunities in Israel and the Palestinian territories it occupies."

Tutu added: "Please, fine singers of the Cape Town Opera: much as it offers you opportunities to travel abroad and show the world what we can do, listen to your conscience. God loves Jews and Muslims equally. To perform Porgy and Bess, with its universal message of non-discrimination, in the present state of Israel, is unconscionable."

But the plea was rejected by Cape Town Opera. Michael Williams, its managing director, said today: "Cape Town Opera respects the views held by retired Archbishop Tutu. We are, however, first and foremost an arts company that believes in promoting universally held human values through the medium of opera and we are accordingly reluctant to adopt the essentially political position of disengagement from cultural ties with Israel or with Palestine."

He added: "I am proud that our artists, when travelling abroad, act as ambassadors and exemplars of the free society that has been achieved in democratic South Africa. Indeed, the production of Gershwin's Porgy and Bess in question has, in our view, much which should provide food for thought for audiences in Israel."

Williams said discussions for the visit to Israel began four years ago and that negotiations to perform "within the Arab world" are ongoing.

Tutu's stand was criticised by the South African Jewish Board of Deputies (Cape Council). Its executive director, David Jacobson, said: "Peace and understanding are best served through constructive and positive engagements between Israel, South Africa and the Palestinian regions, not by boycotts."

He added: "The SAJBD Cape Council further completely rejects Archbishop Tutu's claim that Israel is founded on 'discriminatory laws and racial exclusivity'. There is, in fact, no other country in the Middle East that can claim to be as inclusive, non-discriminatory and multicultural than Israel."

Tutu caused controversy last month when he supported Johannesburg University's (UJ) decision to sever links with Israel's Ben-Gurion University, accused of actively supporting the Israeli military, unless it meets two conditions within six months.

UJ stipulated that its memorandum of understanding with Ben-Gurion should be amended to include Palestinian universities and that UJ "will not engage in any activities with [Ben-Gurion] that have direct or indirect military implications".

Presbyterian Mission Network Joins BDS, Calls for Boycotts, Supports Kairos

elaine — Mon, 25 Oct 2010 09:33:34 -0700

Contact:
The Rev. Dr. Jeff DeYoe
IPMN Advocacy Chair
deyoejeffrey@yahoo.com

Presbyterian Mission Network Joins BDS Movement, Calls for Boycotts on goods from Illegal Israeli Settlements
Supports Kairos Palestine

CHICAGO—In response to a call to action from the Christians of the Holy Land, The Israel/Palestine Mission Network (IPMN) of the Presbyterian Church (USA) [PC(USA)] voted at its annual meeting to join the international boycott of goods produced in illegal Israeli settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPT).

The first targeted products for the boycott are Ahava Cosmetics, King Solomon Dates, and Jordan River Dates, imported into the United States from illegal Israeli settlements in the West Bank.

The network also voted to identify companies profiting from the illegal military occupation, initiate dialogue with them and expand the boycott list if needed, at a later date. This action would include companies doing business in the OPT or contributing to the building of infrastructure of illegal settlements.

Carol Hylkema, Moderator of IPMN from Detroit Presbytery said, "Our grassroots network has reached a tipping point and we find we must respond to the call of Christians in the Middle East who through The Amman Call asked for 'No more words without deeds.'" In addition to calling for boycott, as a mission network of the PC(USA), the IPMN will sponsor an initiative that will seek to make its position that of the entire denomination when their General Assembly meets in 2012.

In June 2008, the General Assembly of the PC(USA) voted to endorse The Amman Call and its "commitment to imperatives of ecumenical solidarity in action for Just Peace."

Similarly, at its General Assembly in 2010, the denomination voted to receive for study, a confession from the Christians of the Holy Land known as Kairos Palestine: A Moment of Truth.

As this bold confession of faith, hope, and love approaches its first anniversary in December 2010, the IPMN joins in solidarity with the confession's call to action, which asks the Churches and Christians of the world "to engage in divestment and in an economic and commercial boycott of everything produced by the [Israeli military] occupation." The object of this form of peaceful resistance, Kairos declares, "is not revenge but rather to put an end to the existing evil...bringing both [Palestinians and Israelis] to justice and reconciliation."

Co-chair of the IPMN Education Committee, David Jones of Redwoods Presbytery stated, "Our network reads the Kairos confession as a Palestinian 'letter from a Birmingham Jail.' Recognizing the hour is late and the call is urgent; we are joining the international BDS movement (boycott, divestment, sanctions) because it is time for action."

The Israel/Palestine Mission Network (IPMN) of the Presbyterian Church (USA) is a grassroots organization established in 2004 with a mandate from the denomination's General Assembly. This mandate is to advocate by "demonstrating solidarity and changing the conditions that erode the humanity of Palestinians." As part of its mandate, the IPMN speaks TO the church not FOR the church.

Pax Christi Intl. Statement on Jerusalem

elaine — Tue, 14 Sep 2010 09:40:40 -0700

Pax Christi International

On the situation in Jerusalem

Written statement submitted by Pax Christi International Human Rights Council
Fifteenth Session 13 September – 1 October 2010

Agenda item 7
Pax Christi, the International Catholic peace movement with more than 100 member organisations active worldwide, urges the Human Rights Council’s attention for the numerous and disastrous violations of human rights in Jerusalem. Recently, political tension in the city
has increased. Under increased international pressure on Israel to halt its policies to change the permanent status of the city and that violate international law, Israel has reacted in defiance and recently the city witnessed a new wave of violations of human rights and
international humanitarian law. Jerusalem, city of two peoples and three religions, is one of the keys to a just and lasting peace. Due to its special status, violations in the city do not only affect its residents but the global community at large.

Click here to continue reading. (This is a pdf file)

Global Actions to End the Israeli Occupation

elaine — Fri, 30 Jul 2010 18:39:30 -0700

Contact:
Susanne Hoder
Moderator, Interfaith Peace Initiative
(401) 595-9887
apassionforpeace@aol.com

World Actions to End Israel's Occupation Double After Flotilla Attack

A compelling new list of "Global Actions to End the Israeli Occupation" is available through the Interfaith Peace Initiative at http://www.interfaithpeaceinitiative.com/globalactions.pdf. It demonstrates clearly that the era of ignoring Israel's excesses and its abuse of human rights has ended. The world will no longer be silent. The tide has turned.

In 2009, the Interfaith Peace Initiative posted a 44-page list of actions by countries and organizations around the world designed to end the Israeli occupation of Palestinian land. On May 31, 2010, Israel's military raid on the flotilla of ships carrying humanitarian aid to the Gaza Strip generated widespread global anger and opposition. It was followed by marches, demonstrations, declarations and plans for new flotillas by many groups around the world. The list has been updated, and now fills 88 pages, including actions by businesses, governments, labor unions and religious and consumer organizations. Among these are many Jewish and Israeli groups. Readers may obtain more information about each action using links provided.

Throughout history, regimes built on oppression and apartheid have failed. If the determined and creative actions documented in the new list are sustained, Israel's oppression of Palestinians cannot last. The Interfaith Peace Initiative wishes to celebrate the courage and initiative shown by countless individuals and organizations who have finally said, "Enough!" Special thanks should go to the committee of Ann Arbor Quakers who first initiated the list (piag_@mac.com) in the hope it would inspire others to action. The massive global surge of resolve reflected in the new report will hasten an end to Israel's occupation so a just peace may finally prevail.

Desmond Tutu Backs Boycott

elaine — Tue, 03 Aug 2010 13:03:23 -0700

Haaretz

Published 21:53 28.07.10 -- Latest update 21:53 28.07.10
http://www.haaretz.com/news/international/desmond-tutu-backs-u-s-food-co-op-boycott-of-israeli-products-1.304657

Desmond Tutu backs U.S. food co-op boycott of Israeli products

South African Nobel laureate Archbishop Desmond Tutu issues statement of support for boycott announced by food co-op in Rachel Corrie's hometown of Olympia, Washington.
By Natasha Mozgovaya Tags: Israel news

South African Nobel laureate Archbishop Desmond Tutu said on Wednesday that he supports the Olympia Food Co-op's boycott of Israeli products.

The Olympia Food Co-op, located in Olympia, Washington, the hometown of the International Solidarity Movement activist Rachel Corrie who was killed seven years ago in Gaza, announced last week that no Israeli products would be sold at its two grocery stores in the city.

“I, Desmond Tutu, fully support and endorse the Olympia Food Co-op's boycott of Israeli products," Tutu said in a statement. "The Olympia Food Co-op has joined a growing worldwide movement on the part of citizens and the private sector to support by non-violent tangible acts the Palestinian struggle for justice and self-determination."

Tutu also encouraged other cooperatives, grocers and businesses to boycott Israeli goods.

More on this topic: Food co-op in Rachel Corrie's hometown boycotts Israeli goods

Methodist Church of Great Britain to Boycott Goods from Israeli Settlements

elaine — Sun, 11 Jul 2010 14:04:41 -0700

Methodist Church to boycott goods from illegal Israeli settlements

http://www.methodist.org.uk/index.cfm?fuseaction=opentogod.newsDetail&ne...

The Methodist Church has today voted to boycott all products from Israeli settlements in the Palestinian territories, and to encourage Methodists across Britain to do the same.

The decision is a response to a call from a group of Palestinian Christians, a growing number of Jewish organisations, both inside Israel and worldwide, and the World Council of Churches. A majority of governments recognise the Israeli occupation of Palestinian territories as illegitimate under international law.

Christine Elliott, Secretary for External Relationships, said, “This decision has not been taken lightly, but after months of research, careful consideration and finally, today’s debate at the Conference. The goal of the boycott is to put an end to the existing injustice. It reflects the challenge that settlements present to a lasting peace in the region.

“We are passionate about dialogue across communities and with people of all faiths. We remain deeply committed to our relationships with our brothers and sisters of other faiths, and we look to engage in active listening so that we act as agents of hope together.”

In December, Defra introduced new advice on labelling, recommending that packaging of products imported from the West Bank should distinguish between Palestinian areas and Israeli settlements.

The Conference also adopted a statement calling for a full arms embargo against all sides in the conflict. “This conflict is further fuelled by partisan support by other countries. Violence from all parties in this conflict must be denounced, and a just peace sought for all peoples living in the region,” said Christine.

The move to boycott is just one among a number of measures agreed by the Conference, which also include a commitment to regular and informed prayer for the needs of those in region. Methodists across Great Britain are also encouraged to visit the region, write to their MPs and engage in respectful dialogue with Jews and Muslims on this issue.

United Methodists Vote to Divest

elaine — Fri, 18 Jun 2010 09:39:02 -0700

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

UNITED METHODISTS VOTE TO DIVEST FROM COMPANIES THAT BENEFIT FROM OCCUPATION OF PALESTINE

CONTACT: CONNIE BAKER, 630-363-7713
End the Occupation, Northern Illinois Conference of the United Methodist Church

ST. CHARLES, ILL. June 15, 2010 – At its annual conference, the Northern Illinois Conference (NIC) of the United Methodist Church (UMC) voted to divest all holdings in three international corporations that profit from the occupation of Palestine. This action is in response to a plea by Palestinian Christians for action, not just words.

Divestment is a nonviolent form of economic protest long-used by churches and other shareholders to encourage companies to end unjust practices. By selling its investments in Caterpillar (CAT), General Electric (GE) and Terex (TEX), the NIC expresses its commitment to do no harm with its investments and affirms the call of the UMC Book of Discipline to "avoid investments that appear likely, directly or indirectly, to support violation of human rights” (Paragraph 716).

These three companies are among 20 targeted by many UMC conferences across the country because they (1) have a presence on occupied land, (2) are involved with the physical settlements, checkpoints and the separation wall, or (3) support activities of the Israeli military in the occupied territories.

Connie Baker from the End the Occupation Task Force of the Board of Church and Society which brought forth the resolution stated: “We are resolute in our support of peace for both Israelis and Palestinians in the Holy Land and the rights of each to co-exist according to the principles set forth in the Geneva Conventions. It is a small step, but an important one.”

The conference will also send a list of the 20 identified companies to the nearly 400 local churches in Northern Illinois and encourage them to consider divestment from any corporations on the list.

For the list of targeted corporations, which was compiled by the New England Conference (UMC) Divestment Task Force, please see: http://www.neumc.org/pages/detail/375.

The Nation Article on BDS Movement

elaine — Thu, 24 Jun 2010 10:32:07 -0700

Published on The Nation (http://www.thenation.com)
________________________________________

The Boycott Divestment Sanctions Movement

Adam Horowitz and Philip Weiss | June 9, 2010

In April the student senate at the University of California, Berkeley, twice held all-night sessions to debate a proposal urging the school to divest from two US military companies "materially and militarily profiting" from the occupation of the Palestinian territories. Hundreds of people packed the hall, and statements in support of the measure were read aloud from leaders, including Noam Chomsky, Archbishop Desmond Tutu, Naomi Klein and Alice Walker. In the end the divestment measure failed (the senate majority of 13 to 5 was not enough to overturn the student government president's veto), but the outcome was surely less significant than the furor over the issue. Following related battles last year at Hampshire College and the Toronto International Film Festival, the Berkeley measure was yet another signal that the divestment initiative, part of a broader movement popularly known as BDS, for Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions, has become a key battleground in the grassroots struggle over the future of Israel/Palestine.

"We're at a super-exciting moment, truly a turning point," says Rebecca Vilkomerson of Jewish Voice for Peace, an activist organization that supports selective divestment from companies profiting from the occupation. "For the first time we're seeing a serious debate of divestment at a major public university." BDS supporters say the movement has the potential to transform international opinion in much the way that the divestment movement in the 1980s isolated the South African apartheid regime. Or as Tutu wrote to the Berkeley students:

The same issue of equality is what motivates the divestment movement of today, which tries to end Israel's 43 year long occupation and the unequal treatment of the Palestinian people by the Israeli government ruling over them. The abuses they face are real, and no person should be offended by principled, morally consistent, nonviolent acts to oppose them. It is no more wrong to call out Israel in particular for its abuses than it was to call out the Apartheid regime in particular for its abuses.

Opponents of BDS see just that threat—that Israel will be isolated. They say that BDS unfairly singles out Israel for conduct that other states are also guilty of and that it seeks to delegitimize the Jewish state in the eyes of the world, thereby threatening Israel's existence. Some argue that grassroots actions put the emphasis on the wrong target. As Rabbi Arthur Waskow of the Shalom Center said on Democracy Now! in March, "It's the United States government you've got to look to, not private industry or private commerce. So that's one really big difference simply at strategic and tactical levels."

When did the BDS movement begin, why is it growing and what does it want?

The campaign traces its origins to a July 2004 advisory opinion by the International Court of Justice (the World Court), which found Israel's separation wall in the West Bank to be "contrary to international law." The ICJ also recommended that the parts of the wall built inside the occupied territories be dismantled and that Palestinians affected by the wall be compensated. When a year passed with no sign that the opinion would be enforced, a wide-ranging coalition of more than 170 organizations representing Palestinian civil society issued a call for boycott, divestment and sanction of Israel "until it complies with international law and universal principles of human rights." Compliance meant three things: ending the occupation, recognizing equal rights for Palestinian citizens of Israel and respecting the right of Palestinian refugees to return to their homes and properties as stipulated in UN Resolution 194 of 1948.

The "call" (which can be found at bdsmovement.net [1]) was notable for unifying the Palestinian grassroots and for the simplicity and coherence of its platform. BDS was seen as an "essential component" for shifting the playing field in the Palestinians' favor after the slow death of the peace process, the Israeli settlement expansion and the inability of the international community to hold Israel accountable.
Boycotts are not a new tactic for Palestinians. As far back as the 1936–39 revolt against the British Mandate, Palestinians incorporated general strikes and boycotts into their struggle. During the first intifada in the late 1980s, they boycotted Israeli goods, and the West Bank town of Beit Sahour led efforts to refuse to pay Israeli taxes that helped finance the occupation. And in 2001 an international boycott effort was launched after the World Conference Against Racism in Durban, South Africa. It quickly met forceful pushback, notably in a 2002 charge by Harvard president Lawrence Summers that divestment was anti-Semitic "in effect, if not intent."

Today the BDS movement is loosely coordinated by a body called the Boycott, Divestment & Sanctions Campaign National Committee (BNC), which is made up of nongovernmental organizations representing Palestinian civil society. The BNC is not affiliated with any political party (though it has been endorsed by some) and does not take positions on issues that fall outside the specific principles of the "call." Thus it does not endorse either a one-state or two-state solution to the conflict.

Israel's 2008–09 attack on Gaza spurred the campaign in the United States and around the world. "The most important thing for the Palestinian movement is the rise of the solidarity movement worldwide after the war crimes in Gaza," Palestinian activist and former Palestinian Authority presidential candidate Mustafa Barghouthi said earlier this year at a demonstration in the West Bank. "Boycott is the best way of changing the balance of forces. Military force will not work, because of the imbalance of forces, but also because it is not right. I don't think Israel will change its policy unless it hurts, and BDS will hurt it."

Most recently, Israel's raid on the Free Gaza flotilla, which killed at least nine activists, has added fuel to the campaign. The attack on a humanitarian ship seemed to reignite much of the international furor from the Gaza invasion of the year before, as it highlighted Israel's inhumane policy of collective punishment in the besieged territory. And with this latest outrage came even louder calls for accountability.
BDS represents three strategies: boycotts are commonly carried out by individuals, divestment by institutions and sanctions by governments. For example, organizers have called on people to avoid buying products made in Israeli settlements; on churches to sell stocks of companies such as Caterpillar, which makes the infamous D9 bulldozer used to demolish Palestinian homes and fields; and on politicians to make conditional or end US aid to Israel. BDS's proponents argue that unless Israel experiences material, political and moral pressure, it will maintain the status quo. Nobel laureates Shirin Ebadi, Mairead Maguire (Corrigan), Rigoberta Menchu Tum and Jody Williams made this point in a letter supporting the Berkeley divestment bill:

We stand united in our belief that divesting from companies that provide significant support for the Israeli military provides moral and strategic stewardship of tuition and taxpayer-funded public education money. We are all peace makers, and we believe that no amount of dialogue without economic pressure can motivate Israel to change its policy of using overwhelming force against Palestinian civilians.
The movement has won adherents by saying that it will accept any gesture of boycott or divestment that Westerners are willing to make. "If you only want to boycott an egg, we want you to boycott an egg," said Omar Barghouti, a founding member of the Palestinian Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel (PACBI), which is part of the BNC, during a tour of America last year to drum up support.

Even the Palestinian Authority—never celebrated for its connection to the grassroots—has made a nod toward the movement, with Prime Minister Salam Fayyad vowing to empty Palestinian homes of goods made in the settlements. But BDS's biggest victories have come in the West and have involved divestments from businesses profiting from investment in the West Bank, where 2.5 million Palestinians live under an occupation whose hundreds of armed checkpoints and separate roadways for Jewish colonists have led some South Africans to declare that the system is worse than apartheid. French multinational Veolia Transport was targeted for its role in building a light-rail system that will connect West Jerusalem to settlements in the occupied territories. Veolia dropped out of the project following an escalating international campaign against the firm, during which the Dutch ASN Bank severed ties to Veolia. Israeli diamond merchant Lev Leviev was also targeted because of his funding of settlements. Last year the US investment firm BlackRock divested itself of stock in Leviev's Africa-Israel company, and Britain canceled plans to move its Tel Aviv embassy into a Leviev-owned building. Similarly, the Frankfurt-based Deutsche Bank recently divested its shares in the Israeli military contractor Elbit Systems, which supplies components for the separation wall. Wiltrud Rösch-Metzler, vice president of Pax Christi Germany, who helped lead the campaign, called it "a huge success.... [Deutsche Bank] went out of their way to list numerous standards and international ethical commitments to which the bank is party, highlighting how Elbit investments would violate them all."

The immediate aftermath of the flotilla attack saw a surge in BDS activity across Europe. Most notably, Britain's largest union, UNITE, passed a motion to "vigorously promote a policy of divestment from Israeli companies," along with a boycott of Israeli goods and services. At the same time, the Swedish Port Workers Union announced it would refuse to load or unload any ships coming to or from Israel for nine days, to protest the flotilla raid.

In the United States, BDS has been percolating among activist groups, churches and campuses for several years. Since 2005 the Presbyterian Church (USA) has undertaken what it calls a "phased, selective divestment" process aimed at five companies benefiting from the occupation [see Hasdai Westbrook, "The Israel Divestment Debate," May 8, 2006]. Again, the West Bank is the focus. Adalah-NY, a New York–based justice group, regularly leads pickets of Leviev's Madison Avenue jewelry store and pressured UNICEF and the humanitarian organization Oxfam to distance themselves from Leviev. The peace group Code Pink has led a campaign called "Stolen Beauty" that targets Ahava, a cosmetics company based in a West Bank settlement that uses ingredients from the Dead Sea.
"What we've seen in the past two years is a rapidly growing, diverse movement dedicated to universal human rights and international law," says David Hosey, a spokesman for the US Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation, a national coalition of grassroots organizations that supports BDS. "On campuses and in communities across the United States, people are sending a clear message that if the US government won't hold Israel accountable for violations of Palestinian human rights, then civil society will step up and do the job."
Two of the biggest divestment fights in the past year in some ways could not have been more different—Hampshire College in Massachusetts and the Toronto International Film Festival. One year ago Hampshire students ignited a firestorm with a campus divestment campaign that drew national attention, including calls from Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz to student organizers on their cellphones. The Hampshire board of directors voted to divest from six military companies involved in the occupation and to adopt a "social responsibility" screen for Hampshire's investments. Though the administration denied that the divestiture was specifically aimed at the Israeli occupation, the headlines helped catalyze the national student BDS movement. In November the college hosted a divestment organizing conference of student leaders from more than forty campuses, including Berkeley; UC, San Diego; the University of Arizona; and Carleton University in Ottawa—whose campaigns all made news this past spring. The movement won a notable victory in June when the student body of Evergreen College in Olympia, Washington—Rachel Corrie's alma mater—voted to call on the college to divest from companies profiting from the occupation and to ban the use of Caterpillar equipment on campus. The resolution passed with nearly 80 percent of the vote. Evergreen junior Anna Simonton explained that the issue resonated across the student body because of the US role in the conflict. "This issue is something we're all complicit in," she said. "It's our money and our taxes."

At the Toronto International Film Festival last fall, movie premieres were overshadowed by the controversy over a "city to city" promotion by the festival that paired Toronto with Tel Aviv. In a "Toronto Declaration," critics said the showcase had been pushed by the Israeli consulate as part of its efforts to "rebrand" Israel after the horrific public relations fallout from the Gaza war months earlier [see Horowitz and Weiss, "American Jews Rethink Israel," November 2, 2009].

The response from Israel's supporters was immediate and forceful. Big-name stars, including Sacha Baron Cohen and Jerry Seinfeld, came out against the declaration, and so did filmmakers David Cronenberg and Ivan Reitman. Dan Adler, a former executive at the Creative Artists Agency, worked with the Los Angeles Jewish Federation and United Jewish Appeal of Toronto to push the claim that the declaration was a boycott of the festival and a blacklist of Israeli artists. The declaration was neither, but the response was a sign of where the battle was headed, with many Israel supporters describing BDS as a Trojan horse aimed at delegitimizing Israel as a Jewish state.

In January the Reut Institute, a Tel Aviv think tank, issued a report describing BDS as part of a campaign "to demonize Israel." The movement has had limited "practical success," the Reut study said, but it has been "highly successful in generating publicity and in mobilizing anti-Israel activism, in effect uniting anti-Zionists with critics of specific Israeli policies." The risk, Reut went on, was to Israel's image: "that such campaigns will create an equivalency between Israel and apartheid-era South Africa that penetrates the mainstream of public and political consciousness."

This fear was echoed by Asher Fredman, a commentator on the website of the Israeli paper Yediot Ahronot, who described the BDS movement as a "soft war" against Israel. "The point that must be internalized is that the soft war constitutes not simply a nuisance or even an economic threat," Fredman warned. "It is a process that could play a major role in shaping the future status quo between Israel and the Palestinians."

Many American Jewish community groups have taken action against the movement on a similar basis. The delegitimization worry has generated some surprising alliances between liberal Zionist groups and right-wing hawks. BDS supporters counter that it is Israel's actions, not the protest, that are delegitimizing Israel in the eyes of the public. Ali Abunimah, author, activist and co-founder of the Electronic Intifada website, said at the Hampshire BDS conference, "Israel's self-image as a liberal Jewish and democratic state is impossible to maintain against the reality of a militarized, ultranationalist, sectarian Jewish settler colony that has to carry out regular massacres of indigenous civilians in order to maintain its control. Zionism simply cannot bomb, kidnap, assassinate, expel, demolish, settle and lie its way to legitimacy and acceptance."

Some liberal Jewish organizations and individuals have adopted a now-is-not-the-time policy. Naomi Paiss of the New Israel Fund says she respects colleagues who do not buy goods made in the territories, but she believes an "official" boycott of companies in the territories would be impossible to implement, given that major Israeli companies and the Israeli government itself are involved. "We think it's a delegitimizing tactic, inflammatory, won't end the occupation and isn't productive," she e-mailed. Cora Weiss, a longtime liberal leader who championed Hampshire's South Africa divestment initiative in the 1970s, when she was on the board, says BDS is too broad-brush. "César Chávez led a focused boycott—grapes—and for several years no one ate grapes," she recalls. "That had an impact."
Americans for Peace Now has also criticized BDS as being counterproductive and even anti-Semitic. The longtime peace group said in a recent statement that the campaign creates a "circle the wagons" reaction in the Jewish community:
Such a response is understandable, since much of the pressure for such campaigns comes from historically virulently anti-Israel sources that are often not interested in Israeli security concerns or Palestinian behavior. This in turn creates very real and understandable worries about global anti-Semitism and the perception that the campaigns are not truly (or only) about Israeli policies but rather reflect a deep-seated hatred for and rejection of Israel.
Parts of this ad hoc coalition went into action during the Berkeley divestment debate. J Street, the new alternative Israel lobby, joined forces with such right-wing groups as the Anti-Defamation League, the David Project and StandWithUs\SF to decry the original Berkeley senate bill. The issue is "complex," the coalition warned, and that "complexity should be reflected in the dialogue on campus rather than singling out one side or another for condemnation and punishment."

According to the Jewish Daily Forward, Berkeley Hillel, a Jewish campus organization, "coordinated a comprehensive national lobbying campaign consisting of a teach-in, face-to-face meetings with student senators and an intervention by a Nobel laureate [Elie Wiesel], all aimed at robbing the divestment supporters of three senate votes." Adam Naftalin-Kelman, Berkeley Hillel's newly installed executive director, said the strategy was devised at a roundtable convened by Hillel and attended by representatives of local branches of J Street, the Anti-Defamation League, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) and the Jewish Community Relations Council, as well as local rabbis and Israel's consul general in San Francisco. This strategy included circulating antidivestment talking points that urged students to reframe the debate as an attack on the Jewish community and to avoid talking about the particulars of the Israel-Palestine conflict.

But Jewish organizations face insurgent generational forces over the issue. Some students in J Street's college organizations quietly support BDS as a nonviolent means of doing something to end the oppression of Palestinians. This tension was even on display at J Street's organizing conference in October. During a student workshop called "Reckoning With the Radical Left on Campus: Alternatives to Boycotts and Divestments," there was reportedly considerable interest in divestment campaigns targeting the occupation. At the same time, "J Street U," the student branch of J Street, is officially opposed to divestment and has begun an "Invest, Don't Divest" campaign, which encourages students to "Invest $2 for 2 States" as an alternative to BDS activities on campus.

By opposing direct action, the older generation is arguing that government must take the lead through a peace process that so far has resulted in little more than further Israeli colonization. "I find boycotts kind of distasteful. It's a little bit like collective punishment," says Ralph Seliger, long associated with Meretz USA, a left Zionist organization. "That probably wouldn't be very emotionally satisfying to someone who was upset about the issue. But I think it's part of growing up to understand that the world is not here to give you emotional satisfaction, and in this issue there is both complexity and perplexity, and you need to learn as much as you can, and be receptive to all sides, and be discerning."

Portions of the BDS call have been unsettling even to longtime advocates for Middle East peace. Its support for the refugees' right of return is a deal breaker for many liberal Zionists, who believe Israel needs to maintain a Jewish majority. Other activists have said BDS should focus primarily on the US role in the conflict. Israeli writer and activist Joseph Dana says that while the campaign has informed people around the world about the issue, almost all US military aid to Israel winds up in the United States with military manufacturers, so "it would be more productive for the BDS campaigns to focus on these companies," especially if American citizens are doing the pressuring.

Perhaps the most controversial part of the BDS movement, even for some supporters, has been the call for a cultural and academic boycott. Organizers of the boycott explain that it is directed at institutions, not individuals, meaning that people are encouraged to boycott academic conferences, events or products (i.e., films, talks or performances) sponsored by the Israeli government or Israeli universities but not individual academics based on their politics. MIT scientist Nancy Kanwisher recently circulated anonymous letters of support for an academic boycott from two colleagues. One colleague said that while refusing to support Israeli academic research, "I will continue to collaborate with, and host, Israeli scientific colleagues on an individual basis."

Alisa Solomon, a noted critic of Israel's actions and editor, with Tony Kushner, of Wrestling With Zion: Progressive Jewish-American Responses to the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict, says she supports BDS but draws the line at academic boycott. "I believe in and support a lot of [the BDS movement]; I just see a lot of different strains and approaches and am enthusiastic about some (economic boycotts against settlement products, companies participating in and profiting from occupation, plus think we should cut military aid, etc.), generally supportive of others ("don't play Sun City" efforts), and have qualms about academic/cultural in this direction both for the free expression reasons and because it requires declaring some people kosher and some not," she wrote in an e-mail. "I prefer direct to symbolic action, so taking money away from occupation seems to me a far better effort than denouncing, say, a choreographer."
For their part, supporters of the academic boycott say that Israeli universities are implicated in the occupation because they are intimately connected with the Israeli government in ways that outstrip even American university contributions to the Vietnam War effort a generation ago. The argument was lent support last year when Rivka Carmi, president of Ben-Gurion University, attacked faculty member (and frequent Nation contributor) Neve Gordon for advocating BDS in an op-ed in the Los Angeles Times. Gordon had crossed "the boundaries of academic freedom," Carmi said, and she questioned his ability to work at the school: "After his...extreme description of Israel as an 'apartheid' state, how can he, in good faith, create the collaborative atmosphere necessary for true academic research and teaching?"

The controversy came to Tel Aviv University this spring when novelists Margaret Atwood and Amitav Ghosh were named as recipients of a $1 million prize from the Dan David Foundation, which is headquartered at the university. Boycott activists, including students from the besieged Gaza Strip, implored Atwood and Ghosh to refuse the award because of its relationship to the university. In the end, the writers accepted the prize and criticized the activists in their joint acceptance speech: "the all-or-nothings want to bully us into being their wholly owned puppets." They also quoted Anthony Appiah, president of PEN American Center, who said, "We have to stand, as we have stood from the very beginning, against the very idea of a cultural boycott. We have to continue to say: Only connect." After she got home, Atwood wrote a piece for Ha'aretz saying that Israel's greatest threat was now internal: "The concept of Israel as a humane and democratic state is in serious trouble."
Another prominent focus of the BDS campaign has been on musicians. In recent months Leonard Cohen played Tel Aviv despite an appeal to him to cancel, while Gil Scott-Heron and Elvis Costello pulled out of their Israeli appearances. Costello explained on his website that his decision was "a matter of instinct and conscience" and that "there are occasions when merely having your name added to a concert schedule may be interpreted as a political act that resonates more than anything that might be sung." The Forward recently quoted an anonymous music industry insider who said more than fifteen performers have recently refused to play in Israel, and in the week after the flotilla attack three more popular groups—the Klaxons, Gorillaz and the Pixies—canceled upcoming performances to protest the raid.
In the end many in Israel, and its supporters in the United States, return to the fear that BDS is advancing the likelihood of the dissolution of the Jewish state—the delegitimization issue. "The BDS movement seems dominated by those whose endgame is one state, not two," Meretz USA executive director Ron Skolnik wrote in Israel Horizons, a liberal Zionist publication. The movement "apparently wishes to build on legitimate international opposition to the 1967 occupation in order to undermine Israel's independent existence."

Rebecca Vilkomerson says that is not the case. Her group, Jewish Voice for Peace, does not take a position on the two-state versus one-state solution. Many Jewish students who spoke out against the Berkeley measure, she said, objected in highly subjective terms, saying, "We feel marginalized, we feel scared, we feel intimidated, we feel alienated" by the legislation. According to Vilkomerson, the best response to this came from Tom Pessah, an Israeli PhD student at Berkeley and co-author of the bill, who said that it was "OK" to have such feelings. He says he also felt uncomfortable when he first learned how much of his freedom in Israel was based on Palestinian dispossession—and so he feared what justice would entail.

Such anxieties would seem to accompany any transformative social movement, and BDS supporters are beginning to acknowledge them. Palestinian leader Mustafa Barghouthi addressed the issue in his appeal to the Berkeley students on grounds they might best understand. He has lived his life under occupation, he wrote; he and his community seek freedom: "Do not stand in the way like those angry Alabama students 50 years ago blocking integration. You have, I trust, nothing in common with those students but misplaced fear."
The Berkeley bill failed, but the all-night debates only seemed to give the movement confidence that the next vote will go differently. We might not have to wait long to find out: six more American university student bodies are said to be taking up the call in the near future.
________________________________________
Source URL: http://www.thenation.com/article/boycott-divestment-sanctions-movement

Links: [1] http://www.bdsmovement.net

UMC-New England Task Force Updates Divestment Recommendations

elaine — Fri, 04 Jun 2010 21:44:49 -0700

Media Contacts:
Alexx Wood, Communications Director
New England Conference of The United Methodist Church
978-682-8055 ext. 150 (office) or 617-838-2828 (mobile), communicate@neumc.org
William Aldrich, Divestment Task Force Chairperson
401-785-1596, wpaldrich@cox.net

New England Task Force Updates Divestment Recommendations
Nine companies added to divestment report and recommendations

LAWRENCE, Massachusetts—This week marks 43 years of the Israeli occupation of Palestinian land, which the United Methodist Church has long opposed. The New England Conference of the United Methodist Church has issued an update to its Divestment Task Force report, which outlines divestment recommendations for companies supporting the Israeli occupation of Palestinian land. Nine companies have been added to the report published by the New England Conference in June 2007. The research of the task force has shown that each company supports the occupation in a significant way.

In addition to the 20 companies in the task force's initial report, the 2010 updated recommendations include Cellcom Israel, Cemex, Elbit Systems Ltd., Formula Systems Ltd., Hewlett-Packard, ICx Technologies, Ingersoll Rand, On Track Innovations, and Valero Energy Corporation.

The latest report and the full record of company correspondence are available at www.neumc.org/divest. Additional supporting documentation, including statements from Jewish organizations that support divestment, is also included.

The names of these companies were released after careful study and after giving each company a chance to respond to task force concerns. All companies included in the report met at least one of the following criteria:

• Providing support for the occupation's infrastructure (settlements, roads, checkpoints, or portions of the separation wall built on occupied land),
• Having a physical presence such as a factory or store on occupied land, or
• Providing the Israeli military with offensive weapons or items used to enforce the occupation of Palestinian land.

These recommendations are specific and selective and do not call for divestment from Israel, from Israeli companies, or from companies that do business in Israel. "Rather," stated Task Force Chairman William Aldrich, "we focus only on companies sustaining an occupation that damages Palestinian lives, Israeli lives, and the prospects for a just peace."

The New England Conference is one of at least ten United Methodist Annual Conferences that from 2005 to 2009 have adopted resolutions addressing some kind of divestment process consistent with the denomination's long-standing opposition of the Israeli occupation of Palestinian land. The work of the New England task force provides information and resources on companies supporting the occupation in a significant way.

"The United Methodist church has called for an end to the Israeli settlements on Palestinian land, and we must continue to pray for and seek an end to violence and true steps toward peace with justice," said Bishop Peter D. Weaver of the New England Conference. "The task force information will be helpful for those that voluntarily choose to divest from companies involved in activities the denomination opposes."

About the New England Conference
The New England Conference (www.neumc.org) includes more than 500 United Methodist and federated congregations in Eastern Connecticut, Massachusetts, Maine, New Hampshire, and Rhode Island. In July 2010, Vermont churches will also become part of the New England Conference.