Mid-East Realities | www.middleeast.org |
|
|||||||||||
Upcoming this weekend from MER: Telling Reality Maps of the Israeli-Palestine Conflict CHURCH BOYCOTT OF ISRAEL CREEPING FORWARD MIDDLEEAST.ORG - MER - Washington - 24 September: The Christian Churches in Europe and the United States have been amazingly acquiescent for so long when it comes to the Land of Christ which we have taken to calling the once Holy Land. And as the official mainstream Churches have held back from speaking up -- many feel betraying Christ's teachings and principles in the process -- the Christian Evangelical Zionist movement has pushed forward with growing messianic support for Israel, even though Christ and the second coming is so antithetical to Jewish theology. A few months ago the American Presbyterians officially took the first major Church steps to sanction Israel, recalling how South Africa was treated in the days of Apartheid not that long ago. Now an influential Anglican group is pushing for a combination of boycott and divestment from Israel when their senior Church leaders next meet. The Israelis and their many powerful friends and supporters are working hard to stem this Christian movement before it can gain significant traction and following. Their campaign to intimidate university professors and students groups that have called for similar policies has had considerable but not totally success, especially in the U.S. But in view of Israel's actual policies, the recent International Court of Justice decision, and the growing feelings among many that Israel has itself become a dangerous rogue State, what many Israelis and Jews have feared for a long time is beginning to happen. Anglican group calls for Israel sanctions Campaigners inspired by boycott of apartheid South Africa Chris McGreal in Jerusalem
The Guardian - Friday September 24, 2004: An influential Anglican group is to ask church leaders to impose a boycott of Israel and firms that do business there in protest at the occupation. The call, by the Anglican Peace and Justice Network, comes amid growing concern in Israel at rising support among churches, universities and trade unions in the west for a divestment campaign modelled on the popular boycott of apartheid South Africa. In July, the Presbyterian church in the US became the first major denomination to agree a formal boycott of Israel. The network said it would press leaders of the 75 million Anglicans and Episcopalians worldwide to impose sanctions on Israel after an eight-day visit to the occupied territories. The leader of the group, Jenny Te Paa, said the delegation from Anglican churches across the globe was so shocked by the plight of the Palestinians, including the construction of the concrete and steel barrier through the West Bank, that there was strong support for a boycott. "There was no question that there has to be a very serious kind of sanction in order to get the world to see that at least one major church institution is taking very, very seriously its moral responsibility," she said. "It happened in South Africa, and in South Africa the boycott had an effect. Everybody said it wouldn't work and it did work. So here we are taking on one of most wealthy and incredibly powerful nations, supported by the US. That's the Christian call." The network is to recommend the boycott to the church's decision-making body, the Anglican consultative council, in Wales, in June. The group will also make the case that divestment is a "moral imperative" to a meeting of Anglican archbishops in London in February. Ms Te Paa said the network had influence within the Anglican community and that she believed the consultative council would agree to a boycott of Israel. In July, the general assembly of the Presbyterian church in the US, which has 3 million members, voted overwhelmingly for a boycott of Israel. Some Scandinavian churches are also pressing for a boycott of Israeli goods. The Israeli government is increasingly concerned about the prospect of popular boycotts. It believes there is little prospect of the US or European governments endorsing sanctions, but it recognises growing support among some religious organisations, and in the academic world and trade unions, for organised action against the occupation. A campaign by British academics for a boycott of Israeli universities drew a furious reaction, including accusations of anti-semitism. Israeli universities have called it an "unwarranted attack on Israeli academic freedom". Supporters of the protest say the Israeli occupation, including military checkpoints and curfews, places great restrictions on Palestinians' academic freedom. Dozens of professors at prestigious American universities, including Princeton and Harvard, have signed a petition calling for an end to US military aid to Israel and for their universities to divest from firms doing business there. Among the targets would be Israeli products such as fruit, shops that do business there and companies such as Caterpillar, which sells the bulldozers used by the army to destroy Palestinian homes. "I hope that even by mentioning that we could call for this it would serve as an invitation for dialogue with the Israeli government," said Ms Te Paa. "If it doesn't happen I think divestment can mean anything from having the list of stores [to boycott] to very significant withdrawal of investment from Israel." · Three Israeli soldiers were killed in a Palestinian attack on an army outpost protecting the tiny Jewish settlement of Morag in the Gaza Strip yesterday. Troops then killed three of the Palestinian fighters. A Palestinian umbrella group, the Popular Resistance Committees, claimed responsibility for the raid, in which the gunmen infiltrated the post under cover of heavy fog. The attack is likely to strengthen public support for Ariel Sharon's plan to withdraw all settlers and soldiers.
Boycott call strikes a responsive chord By Laila El-Haddad in Gaza
Aljazeera - 17 September 2004: Whether
it is the UN General Assembly or the Non-Aligned Movement, resolutions
condemning Israel are one thing, implementation is quite another. None
the less, many believe international boycott is an idea whose time has
come. In
July the International Court of Justice, in a landmark ruling, declared
the West Bank separation barrier illegal and urged Israel to demolish
the structure as well as pay compensation to Palestinians affected by
its construction. This decision of the UN's top court, although
non-binding, cleared the decks for sanctions in the event of
non-compliance by the Jewish state. It was on the basis of this World Court ruling that
the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) voted last month for a partial boycott
of Israel, asking the 115 member-nations to ban Israeli settlers from
visiting their countries and to boycott companies that work on the
separation barrier. Not unnoticed
While the result of the NAM vote is awaited (India is
said to have expressed its official disapproval of the document at the
UN this week), the development did not go unnoticed in Tel Aviv. It was enough to get Shraga Brosh, chairman of Israel
Export and International Cooperation Institute, talking about potential
losses to the economy and damage to exports.
The wall has made Palestinians "This is the marker that grants legitimacy to
economic and commercial sanctions, which could endanger our future and
security," commented Haifa University professor Nitza Nahmias in the
Maariv daily. But other analysts beg to differ. "It's
a long way from a declaratory action by the Non-Aligned Movement to
serious enactments by western European or North American governments. I
don't see sanctions on the horizon," Hebrew University political
science professor Ira Sharkansky told Aljazeera.net. "I wouldn't count on the Non-Aligned Movement. With
all the proclamations of NAM forums, plus $2 or $3, you can buy a cup
of Starbucks." New dynamic
Rather than a literal reading of the NAM resolution,
Israeli analyst Yossi Alpher sees it and other boycott efforts like it
as part of a "genuine new dynamic" developing in the international
community with regard to Israel and the occupied Palestinian
territories. "It's what I call the 'South Africanisation' of the conflict," Alpher said.
"We are seeing a very new international dynamic
that seeks to relate to the issue of the territories, in ways similar
to South Africa" He says here is a growing awareness in Israel of the
need to respect the International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruling, and
sees this "awakening" as the main motivation behind the disengagement
movement, regardless of what people think about it. "Certainly Sharon's disengagement plan represents his
ability to predict this dynamic. We are liable to find ourselves
branded like South Africa." In a report to the to the UN General Assembly early
last month, Dugard said there is "an apartheid regime" in the
territories "worse than the one that existed in South Africa". Dugard was a member of the Truth and Reconciliation
Commission at the end of the apartheid regime. In May, he called for an
arms embargo against Israel similar to the one imposed on South Africa
in 1977. Boycott revisited
This is not the first time that a boycott has been
attempted against Israel of course. The NAM decision brings to mind a
decades-long Arab boycott of the state of Israel that was for the most
part dormant and largely ineffective. One of the consequences of the Arab-Israeli peace agreements, including the Oslo accords, was the unravelling of the boycott.
Humiliating checkpoints recall life A list of 15 firms to be blacklisted was drawn up, but the list has remained unpublished. League members Egypt, Jordan and Mauritania - which
maintain diplomatic ties with Israel - and Somalia did not attend the
meeting. The NAM resolution reintroduces the possibility, yet
again, of an Arab boycott in view of the fact that many Arab countries
are NAM members. But according to the Palestinian Trade Centre's Gaza
director, Hanan Taha, the goal of any boycott effort this time around
would be the European market rather than the Arab one. "NAM is trying to pressure other countries, mainly
western ones, to take a similar decision. The EU is a huge trade market
for Israel. This is more of a political move than an economic one. It's
a sort of lobbying effort," Taha said. Growing trade
Jamal Juma, coordinator of the Anti-Apartheid Wall
Campaign, says Arabs should be the first to renew their diplomatic and
economic boycott of Israel, but admits that this is unlikely to happen
anytime soon - certainly not without a European lead. "The EU is a huge When completed, the highway will stretch from Tel
Aviv to the Jordan Valley, dividing the West Bank in half as it
connects illegal Israeli colonies along the way. Indeed, trade relations between Israel and Jordan
have never been stronger. Israeli exports to the Hashemite kingdom
increased by 50% last year, according to newly released Israeli
economic data. Juma believes that more pressure needs to be applied
to force Israel to abide by international law, and that resolutions
such as the one taken by NAM aren't nearly enough. Global boycott
The Israeli Government is tightening its
apartheid-like system like never before, with evidence on the ground to
prove it, Juma says. "There are metal doors at checkpoints and a matrix of
administrative procedures to get through. Paths of travel are
categorised into various permits and ways, and this is in addition to
mass land confiscation that is going on," he said.
Palestinians need more than just "It's not time for a boycott of settlement products alone. We need a boycott on a global level of Israel as an apartheid system, as a state not abiding by international law. That's how it should be dealt with," Juma told Aljazeera.net. "We have to ask ourselves: Who is behind settlements? Who is supporting it? Who is making it a reality in the West Bank? The Israeli Government. It must be a boycott of Israel and it must be made clear to them why." Palestinian diplomatic sources say PLO representative to the UN Nasir al-Kidwa is planning to build on the international momentum generated by the ICJ ruling and the NAM vote by proposing a resolution of his own in the General Assembly this week. The resolution will threaten Israel with sanctions if it continues to ignore the Hague-based court's ruling. However, as far as tangible action is concerned, whether by way of NAM or the United Nations, Palestinians should not expected anything in the foreseeable future. |
|||||||||||
Your comments and information and welcome in the new MER FORUM. Make Sure You are Subscribed to receive MER - it's free, it's vital, it's exclusive MID-EAST REALITIES - www.MiddleEast.Org Phone: (202) 362-5266 Fax: (815) 366-0800 Email: MER@MiddleEast.Org Copyright © 2004 Mid-East Realities, All rights reserved |
||
If you don't get MER, you just don't get it! Click here to subscribe by email |
Mid-East Realities | www.middleeast.org |
Source: http://www.middleeast.org/articles/2004/9/1118.htm |