The campaign against Caterpillar continues to gain steam. Following the recent Presbyterian General Assembly where the church denounced Caterpillar for its ongoing involvement in "obstacles to a just and lasting peace in Israel-Palestine," Larry Cohler-Esses and Josh Nathan-Kazis report for the Forward:
“Caterpillar is connected to everything that is connected to the land,” said Sydney Levy, director of campaigns for Jewish Voice for Peace, which has been active in the opposition to Caterpillar. “It’s connected to home demolition, it’s connected to building the wall, to building settlements.” Levy’s reference to the wall referred to the separation barrier Israel is building in the West Bank that at points cuts deeply into the occupied territory and separates villagers from their farms.
In a statement sent to the Forward, the company strongly defended its sales to Israel.
“Understandably, Caterpillar cannot monitor the use of every piece of its equipment around the world,” the statement said. “However, we recognize the responsibility companies have to encourage the constructive use of their products. To that end, we do not condone the illegal or immoral use of any Caterpillar equipment, and consistent with Caterpillar’s Worldwide Code of Conduct, we expect our customers to use our products in [ways] consistent with human rights and the requirements of international humanitarian law.”
Asked how those expectations square with Israel’s use of Caterpillar bulldozers for purposes cited by the State Department as human rights problems, the company, in a follow-up statement, stressed: “The Caterpillar products used by the Israeli government are sold as part of a U.S.-Government sponsored program. It is best for governments to work to resolve issues such as the long-standing dispute in the Middle East, rather than having companies like Caterpillar become involved in trying to resolve such matters.”
Peter Rosenblum, a professor of human rights law at Columbia University Law School, doubted this would satisfy the concerns of Caterpillar’s critics.
“As long as [a product] is not inherently dangerous the issue would typically end there,” he said, but added: “At the point you become the sole supplier, the known supplier, the company counted on for that purpose … in what is one of the ugliest stories in occupation — legal arguments aren’t going to get them out of the problem.”
If you’re expecting Caterpillar to say “Oh, you’re right, the Israelis misuse our products and therefore we’ll not be selling to them any longer” then you will be in for a very long wait. Let me know whne godot shows up [sigh].
No matter how arkward BSD activists can make things for Caterpillar, it’s as nothing compared to what Dershowitz, Foxman, David Harris, Mort Klien, The Presidents’ Conference, et. al. can do IF Catepillar was crazy enough to stop selling to Israel.
What’s more, Caterpillar knows this, and as long as Israel is “bulletproof” Caterpillar will vend it’s wares to Israel. To expect them to do otherwise would be unrealistic.
In some sense, BSD is not really the answer right now – it would only have effect if questioning of US support had already reached some sort of critical mass in the polity and the broader society, and there seems to be little evidence of that so far.
Wasn’t Rachel Corrie run over by a bull dozer? Does Caterpillar consider that good use? Coming from the Pocono Mts. in Pennsylvania, Caterpillar was once a respected name. Guess that doesn’t matter anymore, especially if the price is right. But then again, Rachel Corrie was a US citizen, and we know that neither Bush or Obama wouldn’t say a word about US deaths attributed to Israelis, but Caterpillar would be well served not to have it’s equipment used against a Turk. Their President stands tall when it comes to the murder of its citizens, making ours look small and insignificant. But not to worry, maybe Caterpillar will still benefit from the 3.2 billion in financial aid Obama will soon be sending Israel’s way. Yes, the boycott needs to gain more support, and hopefully it will. At least it’s a start. I would also tie it in to our unemployment which is 9.5 while Israel’s is only 6.7, and we’ve armed them to the teeth, so why are we spending 3.2 billion on them, instead of our citizens in need.
1. Caterpillar
2. Caterpillar
Impressive photos! I see now just how afraid Israelis really are! Seriously, only a “generation to generation” fear-scarred person could be motivated to hop into one of those monstrous, armoured machines and go around obliterating Palestinian homes, trees and fields. Or maybe it’s the Palestinians’ lack of “talking” with Israel that forces those poor Israelis to do it. It’s very complicated, what with all the nuances…
The Caterpillar flak is right. The real problem is “the US government-sponsored program.”
“The Caterpillar flak is right. The real problem is “the US government-sponsored program.”
The problem is criminal guvs and private companies who profit from the criminal guv policies. Both are at fault, both need to be “fixed”.
If the government prohibited export of this equipment to Israel, Caterpillar would be left with no choice.
well, that may or may not be the case. We have the export arms control act which stipulates that no US arms will be sold to a country that uses them in any way other than defensivly. And then there is the
Symington amendment which prevents US from having commerce with a nuclear armed country that has not signed the NPT. So there!
But every time Israel kills, it’s only defending itself!
I thought Caterpillar purpose-built armored machines for Israeli demolitions. Am I correct?
I thought they retrofitted them, but I could be wrong about that.
If they retrofit them, does it void the warranty? If it doesn’t, that very indicative.
A US Court of Appeals ruled that whether the D9s are purpose built or not is irrelevant within the purview of its jurisdiction given that D9 exports to Israel fall under the Military Financing Program, a foreign policy matter which precludes it from getting involved.
link to ca9.uscourts.gov
Technically, however, Israel claims that it “purchases” the civilian version of the D9 and then modifies it to “Israeli specs”.
That’s patently false. It’s dubious phraseology.
Israel does not purchase the bulldozers but receives them from the US government. The US government procures the military version that’s built to US military specs. Israel then makes cosmetic changes to them, adds a protective cage and changes the color scheme.
A similar process takes place in regard to Israel’s use of military Jeeps and Humvees; the parts are built in the US and shipped to Israel. In turn, Israel assembles the parts, adds some protective screen to the glass, paints the vehicles in Israeli color schemes, and then refers to it as an Israeli product.
So, as I have said, BDS isn’t relevant at all here. The wrongdoer, as usual, is the US government.
The point of BDS is to boycott divest and sanction the companies that support the occupation, whether they are Israel companies or otherwise.
Another quote :
What does the Defense Department have to do with a private company selling its products to Israel, and why would it be interested in brokering deals like this? An American “military program”, not sure what this means. Maybe this :
David J. Vogel, a professor of business ethics (an oxymoron here?) :
In some ways, their responsibility is beside the point. On some level it’s about politics. What does this vague platitude mean? This defies common sense – if it can be established that your products will predictably be put to a certain use by the buyers, and you cannot claim to be ignorant of this outcome, aren’t you responsible for what happens? Maybe I’m missing something here ; maybe Caterpillar can plead insanity…
I have three words for them, and Mr. Vogel : go f-ck yourselves.