In Congress, Democrats and Republicans are trying to attach an anti-boycott bill to a mega-trade deal involving Europe and the U.S. In Tennessee and Indiana, state officials have passed a resolution criticizing the boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) movement as anti-Semitic. And in Illinois, state legislators look set to approve an anti-BDS law requiring state pensions to divest funds from companies that boycott or divest from Israel.
It all adds up to a sustained attack on the BDS movement in the U.S. The methods differ: some are mere resolutions expressing an opinion, while others have teeth. But they are all united in seeking to stigmatize the BDS movement as beyond the pale.
The moves are part of a nationwide effort to halt a movement that has had symbolic success on college campuses, and some concrete success in forcing foundations and churches to divest from corporations that do business with the Israeli military. BDS has not succeeded in isolating Israel. But pro-Israel officials in the U.S. want to stop it before it gets close to harming the state.
The Congressional initiative, backed by the influential American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), has attracted the most attention. In February, Representatives Peter Roskam, a Republican from Illinois, and Juan Vargas, a California Democrat, introduced the Israel Trade and Commercial Enhancement Act. It is designed to be attached to the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership, a major free trade deal with the European Union.
The legislation would require the U.S. to discourage European trade partners from boycotting Israeli products–even if they are made in West Bank settlements, products that EU nations have targeted. The amendment has passed committees in the House and the Senate. Earlier last week week, Senate Democrats held up moving forward on the trade deal votes. But a day later, the Senate struck a deal with Obama to allow votes on a number of trade related bills, paving the way for the EU trade deal to be debated and voted on eventually–BDS amendments included.
The measures have been harshly criticized by activists for Palestinian rights. Writing in The Hill, Jewish Voice for Peace’s Naomi Dann said the bill “would legislate support for Israel’s illegal settlements and would impede efforts to apply non-violent pressure on Israel to change its discriminatory policies towards Palestinians.”
Liberal Zionist groups opposed to BDS are also opposed to the Congressional effort because of legislative language that would, in a first, put the U.S. government on the record as recognizing Israeli control of the West Bank.
Meanwhile, state-level efforts targeting the BDS movement are moving ahead.
The Tennessee House and Senate have passed a resolution that declares the BDS movement to be “one of the main vehicles for spreading anti-Semitism and advocating the elimination of the Jewish state.” JNS.org reported that a Christian Zionist activist was initially behind the resolution.
The Indiana House and Senate have passed a similar resolution. The Indiana bill has been harshly criticized by a coalition of groups including the National Lawyers Guild, Palestine Solidarity Legal Support and Jewish Voice for Peace.
“While ostensibly opposing anti-Semitism, it erroneously conflates criticism of Israeli policies and practices toward Palestinians with hatred of Jewish people,” the coalition wrote in a letter to Indiana Governor Michael Pence, who is expected to sign the bill. “In its intolerance for political advocacy that it clearly misunderstands, the Resolution threatens to chill protected speech by intimidating people who wish to criticize Israel’s behavior toward Palestinians.”
The Illinois measure on state pensions, which has passed the state Senate, is now being debated in the House. This measure, like the Congressional one, is a law with some teeth. The legislation requires pension funds to stop investing money in foreign companies that have boycotted Israel.
In a statement, Palestine Solidarity Legal Support said that the bill forces “pension fund administrators to blacklist companies that boycott Israel or businesses that operate in ‘territories under the control of Israel.’ Illinois should not be shielding Israel from boycotts protesting human rights abuses and settlements, which are illegal under international law in what is considered occupied territory by the U.S. government.”
Dima Khalidi, the director of Palestine Solidarity Legal Support, told me in an e-mail that one of the dangers of the Illinois bill is that it would have a “chilling” effect “not only on companies that would consider making ethical business decisions, but also on people who advocate for such decisions. When the state takes a policy position such as this, it is telling people what the state believes is acceptable discourse and political activity, thereby dissuading viewpoints that are contrary to that.”
These efforts are looking to be more successful than the previous wave of anti-boycott bills that were debated after the American Studies Association voted to boycott Israel in late 2013. Many of those bills did not get support from pro-Israel lobby groups because of concerns over academic freedom and free speech, though. This crop of legislation has garnered more support from traditional bastions of pro-Israel advocacy.
After an Illinois committee passed the anti-BDS bill, the Jewish group B’nai Brith International applauded the state representatives in a statement for “taking such a strong stance against a movement rooted in anti-Semitism that ultimately impedes the peace process by opposing constructive dialogue between Israel and Palestinians.”
Well-written and cogent summary of what’s going on. Very disingenuous though:
1) Alex, you quote the following approvingly:
“When the state takes a policy position such as this, it is telling people what the state believes is acceptable discourse and political activity, thereby dissuading viewpoints that are contrary to that.”
Is this not a perfect argument as to why University Student Governments should not be taking positions on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict? It’s at a lower and less reaching level for sure, but the principle holds the same: officializing a certain point of view effectively discriminates against the dissenting minority. But you fully support such initiatives because they are in keeping with your goal of BDS-ing Israel to death.
2) Ah — now you act as if the resolution is bad because it entails protecting the settlement project. But as Barghouti and his acolytes have graciously clarified on many occasions, BDS is not about the settlements or occupation: it’s about dismantling the Zionist project entirely.
Sucks for you that Illinois legislators know this. You guys made a tactical error in not just officially restricting BDS’ demands to the ending the occupation, even if you really want all of Israel gone. Now, the movement has become viewed as extreme and as delegitimating the concept of a Jewish state.
Alex admits that BDS has not really isolated Israel and that its limited and small successes are all anecdotal. Perhaps that is because you are ideologically schizophrenic and morally bankrupt.
You guys try to invoke the settlements when you need to pander to a more moderate audience, but within the cult, are on the same page about what BDS really means: no Jewish state.
Here’s to hoping that more states will being pursuing similar legislation.
It should be noted that this legislation does not infringe upon your right to boycott Israel; you won’t find yourself in jail if you don’t buy Sabra Hummus. It does, however, bring the weight of Illinois’ $700 billion GDP as a serious disincentive to doing so.
” But they are all united in seeking to stigmatize the BDS movement as beyond the pale.”
So, let me see if I got this straight.
Israel and it,s paid whores want to punish those who support human rights and justice for all , but aid and abet those who break international law on a daily basis.
Now that is beyond the pale.
One could argue that it is anti- semitic to oppose BDS. I think I will do that from now on.
It’s also antithetical to democracy to legislate against it.
As for B’nai Brith International’s statement that “applauded” the benighted Illinois reps for :
“taking such a strong stance against a movement rooted in anti-Semitism that ultimately impedes the peace process by opposing constructive dialogue between Israel and Palestinians.””
I guess they didn’t notice that there is no “peace process”, and that the PM and his cabinet don’t do peace or dialogue. Israel never has been constructiv;, they only expand the construction of illegal settlements and are committed to the destruction of all things and people that are Palestinian.
Thanks, Alex. I think these actions reek of desperation/ flop sweat. They’re really afraid of BDS!
These guys may soon be in opposition to the Pope, surely a scary position for a politician to be in.
In religious and political gesture, Pope confers sainthood on two Palestinians.
Pope calls Abbas ‘angel of peace’ during Vatican visit.
Vatican recognises State of Palestine.
This is done by Congress at the orders of their masters in Tel Aviv. They bark the orders, and the minions scuttle around like little busybodies to please them, something they do not do for the American people, who voted them in. Why else should American leaders want to stifle what I consider free speech? Aren’t we allowed to protest and boycott anything we want, without interference from the government? Or has Israel been able to successfully make them go against the constitution?