When the news first broke last week that Caterpillar was dropped from MSCI‘s socially responsible investing indices, pro-Israel organizations downplayed the action claiming it had nothing to do with Israel. MSCI’s statement yesterday that the occupation was a “key factor” in the decision is forcing anti-boycott activists to admit Caterpillar’s relationship to the Israeli military is hurting the company.
From The Forward:
“For us, this is an unequivocal victory,” said Rebecca Vilkomerson executive director of Jewish Voice for Peace.
Jewish organizations, which had at first dismissed the BDS groups’ declarations of victory as spin, voiced dismay with MSCI’s decision after MSCI issued its clarifying statement. “One would hope that the ratings company would base its rating on the companies, not the lies people tell about them,” said Ethan Felson, vice president of the Jewish Council for Public Affairs.
Kenneth Stern, the anti-Semitism expert at the American Jewish Committee said: “The BDS people try to make any investment decision into a victory.”
In annual reports to Congress, the U.S. State Department has repeatedly criticized Israel’s demolition of thousands of Palestinian homes in the occupied territories of Gaza and the West Bank, and in East Jerusaelm over many years. The demolitions have often been implemented with Caterpillar bulldozers and other heavy equipment, leading to the divestment protests against Caterpillar.
Israel has defended the demolitions as actions taken within the context of Israeli law. Many demolished homes, particularly in East Jerusalem, lack proper building permits, though the State Department reports that Israeli laws and procedures make such permits difficult for Palestinians to obtain. Homes of suicide bombers have also been demolished, although that practice has been suspended in recent years. The army sometimes demolishes homes after declaring the land on which they sit to be part of a live-fire zone.
Ethan Felson is quoted in JTA as stating:
He said that linking Caterpillar to Israeli practices was “nonsensical,” noting that it had no say in how the U.S. military resells the tractors and that it could not legally turn down the U.S. military as a client.
Is it a true statement that Caterpillar cannot turn down the U.S. military as a client? I thought that it was up to any company if they listed with the Commerce/State/ or Defense Depts. if they wanted to do business with them. So this statement surprises me.
will caterpillar’s being dropped from msci’s socially responsible investing indices come to be looked upon as the event that heralded the delegitimization of the apartheid entity israel?
Isn’t part of the MSCI criterion for the area that Caterpillar was delisted from that the companies don’t sell military equipment?
Hmmm. The Caterpillar spokesman is quoted as saying that Caterpillar sells its equipment to the U.S. government. If this is accurate that would mean it is most likely a foreign military sale (FMS) handled by DOD.
When Rachel was killed, Caterpillar was selling its equipment directly to Israel through Direct Commercial Sales and it was paid for by Foreign Military Funds (FMF). In a letter to Representative Jim McDermott of Washington the U.S. government stated that the bulldozers were sold as construction equipment and did not require an export license.
Perhaps when it was switched from commercial sales to military sales something was triggered at MSCI?
Let’s all Americans BDS the IRS next April…that might slow Isr’merica down.
They can’t put all of us in jail can they.