Power - and hence responsibility for the initial and continuing conflict - is massively asymmetrical between Israel and the Palestinians.
Every Physics 101 student learns Newton's First Law - the Law of Inertia - which states that absent the introduction of an outside force, the momentum of a system remains constant in both its velocity and direction. There is no reason to assume that individual or collective human behavior provides an exception to this natural law. Societal laws, moral standards and social norms and their enforcement are therefore needed to stop, slow or alter the direction of unacceptable human behaviors.
The Israeli occupiers have a sophisticated 21st century military with F-16s, Apache attack helicopters, T67 tanks, armored vehicles, cluster bombs, laser-guided missiles and rockets, "robo-snipers" (unmanned aerial drones) as well as IDF snipers, nuclear weapons including depleted uranium warheads and ammunition, death squads with sophisticated electronic support, and massive Caterpillar D9 bulldozers used to destroy Palestinian residential and agricultural properties. Reports of newer Israeli explosives causing horrific injuries suggest use of white phosphorus, a weapon illegal under international law for human targets (legal only for battlefield illumination). In addition to U.S. weaponry supplied through "military aid" at U.S. taxpayer expense, Israel has developed a $3.5 billion weapons industry of 150 "defense" firms and has become third only to the U.S. and Russia in worldwide arms exporting.
Advanced Israeli weaponry assures minimal risk to IDF troops. In contrast, other than primitive rockets and mortars, the occupied Palestinians have nothing but their own bodies as weapons delivery systems. Palestinians cannot even legally obtain or possess guns to protect themselves against armed and violent Israeli settlers. But they have nevertheless waged a determined resistance for 60 years including strikes, demonstrations, and guerilla retaliations, accepting hugely disproportionate casualties, but refusing to give up their internationally established legal right to oppose Israeli abuse and regain their stolen lands and properties.
Through their determined and steadfast will, although stripped of resources with which to mount any effective uprising for freedom, justice and equality, Palestinians stand proxy for us all in resistance to abusive power.
In the face of this absolute power imbalance, the world community is beginning to recognize that it must start to level the playing field to move Israel toward honest negotiations and eventual settlement meeting reasonable standards of justice and compliance with international human rights law.
By Brazilian cartoonist Latuff
The Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement was launched in 2005 by some 170 Palestinian civil organizations to bypass the US roadblock to justice - including US diplomatic protection from international justice by exercise of its veto power in the UN Security Council - following the model used to force an end to apartheid in South Africa. BDS is an especially suitable method for a small, trade-dependent and resource-limited country like Israel, and the academic and cultural boycott component is important to deny Israel its pretensions of normalcy and Western-style democracy while holding in bondage half the people under its control. A thorough description and analysis is provided by international law professor Francis Boyle in his book, Palestine, Palestinians and International Law. The non-violent methods used to bring South Africa to heel can and must be applied to Israel. These consist of boycotts, divestment and sanctions, known as the BDS movement, which is growing worldwide.
Israel's efforts to represent itself as a normal democracy and victim state rather than a brutal oppressor and occupier has been crumbling with its 2006 assault on Lebanon, its 2008-09 "Cast Lead" assault upon Gaza killing over 1,400 trapped and largely helpless prople, the Goldstone Commission report documenting 10 categories of Israeli war crimes in this operation, its 2010 massacre of nine humanitarian international citizens aboard the Mavi Marmara in the Gaza Freedom Flotilla, and its 2014 "Protective Edge" assault on Gaza that killed over 2,200 helpless people, inflicting massive infrastructure devastation and eliminating 40% of Gaza's already constricted ghetto community with a population of some 1.8 million, 80% of whom are multi-generational refugees from Israel's original and ongoing ethnic cleansings.
The world is becoming aware
People world-wide are expressing their values by taking action against these atrocities by answering the BDS campaign call by Palestinian civil society for boycott of Israeli export products, especially those produced in the occupied territories such as Ahava and SodaStream falsely marketed as products "made in Israel" that are in fact...
Companies to target for boycott or divestment identified
...made in occupied Palestine, boycott of RE/MAX realtors that sell stolen Palestinian properties in the occupied territories, and divestment from international companies profiting from the occupation such as Caterpillar, Hewlitt-Packard and Motorola.
Complementing the economic BDS strategies, the Palestinian Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel(PACBI) is a growing effort to brand Israel appropriately as an outlaw state operating outside international moral and legal standards by denying its normalcy through refusing exchanges of scholars, performers and other cultural products.
Jewish voices both within and outside Israel, discouraged by the absence of progress from negotiations, the "peace process," protests and demonstrations alone, many recognizing that Israel is destroyiny itself through its brutality and belligerence, are supporting the BDS call as well.
A detailed discussion is provided below from the Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions (ICAHD), the first Israeli human rights organization to articulate a formal program. ICAHD has long been headed by Nobel Peace Prize nominee and anthropologist Jeff Halper, who provides important insights and analyses of the situation.
For further detail, descriptions are provided further below of programs advocated by the Presbyterian and Methodist churches, the US Campaign to End the Occupation, Israeli NGO Zochrot and Palestinian Christian organization Sabeel, a call for academic and cultural boycotts by PACBI representing Palestinian civil society, and links to other programs including Israeli Citizens for BDS.
ICAHD FIRST ISRAELI PEACE GROUP TO CALL FOR SANCTIONS
Thursday, January 27, 2005
SANCTIONS AGAINST THE ISRAELI OCCUPATION: IT’S TIME
"If apartheid ended, so can the occupation. But the moral force and international pressure will have to be just as determined. The current divestment effort is the first, though certainly not the only, necessary move in that direction." -Bishop Desmond Tutu
You can’t have it both ways. You can’t complain about violence on the part of the Palestinians and yet reject effective non-violent measures against the Occupation that support their right to self-determination, such as economic sanctions. You can’t condemn the victims of Occupation for employing terrorism while, by opposing divestment, thereby sheltering the Occupying Power that employs State Terror. You can’t end the isolation and suffering of people living under Occupation while permitting the Occupying Power to carry on its life among the nations unencumbered and normally, by withholding a boycott of its economic and cultural products.
The Case For Sanctions
Sanctions, divestment and boycotts are absolutely legitimate means at everyone’s disposal for effectively opposing injustice. As penalties, protest, pressure and resistance to policies that violate fundamental human rights, international law and UN resolutions, they are directed at ending a situation of intolerable conflict, suffering and moral wrong-doing, not against a particular people or country. When the injustice ends, the sanctions end.
Sanctions, divestment and boycotts represent powerful international responses that arise not only from opposition to an intolerable situation, but also to the complicity of every person in the international civil society that does nothing to resolve it. Because they are rooted in human rights, international law and the will of the international community, and because they are supremely non-violent responses to injustice, sanctions carry a potent moral force. A campaign of sanctions, even if it proves impossible to actually implement them, mobilizes what has been called "the politics of shame." No country wants to be cast as a major violator of human rights. Precisely because it is so difficult to enforce international humanitarian law, holding up its oppressive policy for all to see is often the only way of pressuring it to cease its oppressive policies. The moral and political condemnation conveyed by a campaign for sanctions and the international isolation it threatens sends a powerful, unmistakable message to the perpetrator: cease your unjust policies or suffer the consequences.
Rather than punishment, a campaign of sanctions rests upon the notion of accountability. A country threatened by sanctions stands in violation of the very principles underlying the international community as articulated in human rights covenants, international humanitarian law and UN resolutions. If we go by Amnesty’s annual report, virtually every country could be "called on the carpet" for their human rights violations. A campaign of sanctions constitutes an extraordinary step, however. It is invoked when injustice and suffering have become so routinized, so institutionalized, so pervasive, so resistant to normal international diplomacy or pressures, that their very continuation compromises the very validity of the international system and the moral standing of its members, countries, corporations and citizens alike. And it targets the strong parties. The very basis of a call for sanctions is that the targeted country has the ability to end the intolerable situation. A campaign of sanctions embodies a fundamental principle of the international system: that each country must be held accountable for its policies and actions in light of accepted international norms. The message to all countries must be: Participation in the international community depends upon conformity to the "rules of the game."
Campaigns of sanctions are in essence educative, and that is part of their power. Since the reasons for taking such drastic action must be explicit, weighty and compelling, it forces those calling for sanctions to make a strong case for them. The very act of initiating such a campaign, then, raises awareness not only of the injustice itself, but of the principles it violates, thus strengthening the understanding of the international system itself. And since a campaign of sanctions must be accepted by the international community in order to succeed, it necessitates discussion and dialogue. The considerations behind the demand for sanctions are made transparent, and the targeted country given an opportunity to present its case. The likelihood, then, is that a campaign of sanctions initiated by civil society will express broad-based international consensus if it is to take hold.
Again, at issue is a serious violation of international law and norms. Just as in a case of an individual caught breaking the law, what is in question is what acts have been done, not who the country or the individual is. To paraphrase Jefferson, who spoke of "a government of laws, not men," here we are speaking of "an international system of laws and not only countries that do whatever they want." Thus, when the violations end, the sanctions cease and the country in question rejoins the international community.
The Case for Sanctions Against Israel
In line with the principles just discussed, economic sanctions against Israel are not invoked against Israel per se, but against Israel until the Occupation ends. With this proviso it is Israel’s policy of occupation that is targeted, its status as an Occupying Power, not Israel itself. When South Africa ended its system of apartheid, sanctions ceased and it fully rejoined the international community. When apartheid ended, so did the boycott of its sports teams, one of the most potent measures employed to impress on the South African government its international isolation. The divestment campaign currently directed against Caterpillar has gained considerable momentum among the international public, effectively educating people about Israel’s policy of demolishing Palestinian homes. It has generated calls for other sanctions, such as the Presbyterian Church’s initiative to divest from companies profiting from the Occupation. The European Parliament has also called for trade sanctions on Israel given Israel’s violation of the "Association Agreements" that prohibit the sale of settlement products under the "Made in Israel" label. The American Congress should take similar steps, since Israel’s use of American weapons against civilian populations violates the human rights provisions of the Arms Control Exports Act. The boycott of California grapes in the 1960s played a key role in gaining employment rights for migrant workers. The current boycott of settlement products is intended to express moral opposition to the very presence of settlements while making it economically and politically difficult for Israel to maintain them.
Once it builds momentum, there is probably no more effective means for civil society to effectively pursue justice than a campaign of sanctions. Its power derives less from its economic impact – although, with time, that too can be decisive – than from the moral outrage that impels it. Sanctions themselves seriously affected the South African economy. Following massive protests inside South Africa and escalating international pressure in mid-1984, some 200 US companies and more than 60 British ones withdrew from the country and international lenders cut off Pretoria’s access to foreign capital. US Congressional pressure played a crucial role as well, an element totally lacking vis-à-vis the Israel-Palestine conflict, which makes the possibility of actually imposing sanctions on Israel that more difficult. In 1986 Congress – with a Republican-controlled Senate – passed the Comprehensive Anti-Apartheid Act over the Reagan’s veto. The Act banned new US investment in South Africa, sales to the police and military and new bank loans.
Although the Act was not strictly enforced by the Reagan and Bush Administrations, although European governments found ways of quietly doing business with Pretoria (while Israel, by the way, was helping South African businesses by-pass sanctions by peddling their products in the US and Europe under a "Made in Israel" label, as well as by continued involvement in military development in South Africa, including nuclear; Hunter 1986), it did generate a climate – moral and economic – that made it increasingly difficult to maintain business-as-usual with the apartheid regime. The moral dimension led to a delegitimization of the very apartheid system that left no room for "reform." Carried over to Israel’s Occupation, the moral element in a larger political condemnation of Israel’s policies could delegitimize the Occupation to the point where only its complete end is acceptable. A campaign of sanctions which highlights the moral unacceptability of Israel’s Occupation could have a great impact, eventually impelling governments to impose economic sanctions while creating a climate difficult for businesses (beginning with Caterpillar) to continue function.
It is not only the political unacceptability of Israel’s Occupation which makes the call for sanction urgent and obligatory, it is the massive violations of Palestinian human rights, of international law and of numerous UN resolutions that the Occupation entails. If Israel as the Occupying Power is not held accountable for the intolerable situation within its ability, indeed, within its responsibility to end, the entire international system of justice is rendered meaningless and empty. And that is what makes the Occupation an international issue. If Israel succeeds in defying the Fourth Geneva Convention and making its Occupation permanent, if an entire population is literally locked behind walls and its right of self-determination trampled, then the ability of human rights to win out over an international order founded on power politics and militarism is jeopardized. We all have a stake in ending the Occupation; the implications of occupation actually prevailing and a new apartheid regime emerging are chilling. Since the Palestinians do not have the power to shake off the Occupation on their own and the Israelis will not, only international pressure will effectively achieve a just peace. A campaign of sanctions represents one of the most efficacious measures.
ICAHD’S Position on Sanctions
In principle ICAHD supports the use of sanctions against countries engaged in egregious violations of human rights and international law, including the use of moral and economic pressures to end Israel’s Occupation. An effective approach to sanctions operates on different levels, however, and requires a number of strategic considerations as to its scope and focus.
First, the generic term "sanctions" actually includes three main types of economic and moral pressure:
(1) Sanctions, defined overall as "penalties, specified or in the form of moral pressure, applied against a country guilty of egregious violations of human rights, international law and UN resolutions, intended to bring that country back into compliance with international norms." Since they must be imposed by governments, regional associations (such as the EU or SEAC) or the UN, the power to actually apply sanctions falls outside of civil society. Nevertheless, governments can be prodded in that direction – and the "prodding" itself constitutes an important form of consciousness-raising and moral pressure.
(2) Divestment, the withdrawal of investments in companies doing business with the offending country or directly involved in violating human rights and international law;
(3) Boycott, the voluntary refraining from purchasing the products of the offending country or allowing its companies, institutions, representatives or even professionals from participating in international intercourse.
Now sanctions, divestment and boycott can be applied either totally or selectively, the decision involving a strategic mix of efficacy and moral stance. In the most successful case of sanctions, apartheid South Africa, the call was for total sanctions, since the entire system was considered illegitimate. In the case of Israel and the Occupation, it is the Occupation which is considered illegitimate, illegal and immoral, not Israel per se. Although there are those who would argue that a Zionist Israel whose ongoing policy is to displace Palestinians from the country or confine them to reservations is, indeed, as illegitimate as apartheid, this is a position from which it would be difficult to generate mass support. Most advocates of a just peace – including the Israeli peace movement, ICAHD included – support Israel’s right as a recognized member state in the UN to rejoin the international community when the Occupation truly ends and a just peace is attained. Since governments must be induced to impose sanctions, on a purely pragmatic level it is difficult to imagine the international community, with the US at its head, actually agreeing to blanket sanctions.
More do-able would be a campaign for selective sanctions. This could be no less principled and focused than a call for total sanctions, but it targets Israel’s Occupation rather than Israel itself. A campaign of selective sanctions can be effective if the choice of targets is strategic: refusing to sell arms to Israel that would be used to perpetuate the Occupation, especially in attacks on civilian populations, for example, or banning Israeli sports teams from competing in international tournaments, especially potent in the South African case. (Israel is currently the European basketball champion and is scheduled to play in the World Cup of football/soccer). These and other selected measures could have a great impact upon Israel, as well as the ability to mobilize international opposition to the Occupation. Yet, with strong civil society advocacy, they also have a reasonable chance, over time, of being adopted.
ICAHD, then, supports in principle a multi-tiered campaign of sanctions against Israel until the Occupation ends. We believe that a selective campaign is most effective and we would incorporate into that campaigns that other organizations have already launched. At this stage, ICAHD supports:
• Sanctions: Sales or transfer of arms to Israel conditional upon their use in ways that do not perpetuate the Occupation or violate human rights and international humanitarian law, violations that would end if governments enforced existing laws and regulations regarding the use of weapons in contravention of human rights. Rather than adopting new policies of sanctions, ICAHD calls on the governments of North America, Europe and Asia to stop selling arms to Israel that are used in perpetuating the Occupation in accordance with their own laws prohibiting sales of weapons to countries engaged in serious human rights violations. No new policy of sanctions has to be adopted; the existing laws prohibiting such sales must simply be enforced. In addition existing international law must be applied against Israel for using its weapons illegally: against civilian populations, for example, or in campaigns of extra-judicial executions, to name but two. Sanctions that comprise implementation of international and domestic laws should include a ban on purchasing Israeli weapons as well. ICAHD is currently investigating Israel’s involvement in the world’s arms trade, including weapons development, joint production and coordinated sales with other countries. We believe this is a hidden element that underlies the broad support Israeli receives from governments, including those outwardly critical of its occupation policies. We hope that advocates for a just peace will use our information to expose their own country’s complicity in policies that perpetuate the Occupation. We also call on activist groups to investigate and publicize the forms of aid their country – and especially the US – is giving Israel. Components of that aid that support occupation or settlement, whether military, technological or economic, should be opposed. We also call on Jewish communities to oppose the use of their donations to Israel – to the Jewish National Fund, for instance, or to the United Jewish Appeal, Israel Bonds and other channels of funding – in the Occupied Territories.
• Trade sanctions on Israel due to its violation of the "Association Agreements" it has signed with the European Union that prohibit the sale of settlement products under the "Made in Israel" label, as well as for violations of their human rights provisions.
• Divestment in companies that profit from involvement in the Occupation. Here ICAHD supports the initiative of the Presbyterian Church of the US to divest in "multinational corporations that provide products or services to…the Israeli police or military to support and maintain the occupation,…that have established facilities or operations on occupied land,…that provide services or products for the establishment, expansion or maintenance of Israeli settlements,…that provide products or services to Israeli or Palestinian organizations/groups that support or facilitate violent acts against innocent civilians,…that provide products or services that support or facilitate the construction of the Separation Barrier." We certainly support the campaign against Caterpillar whose bulldozers demolish thousands of Palestinian homes.
We join with the Jewish Voice for Peace in the US whose statement in support of the Presbyterians says in part:
At JVP, we fully support selective divestment from companies that profit from Israel's occupation of the West Bank, Gaza, and East Jerusalem. This includes American companies like Caterpillar who profit from the wholesale destruction of Palestinian homes and orchards. It also includes Israeli companies who depend on settlements for materials or labor or who produce military equipment used to violate Palestinian human rights.
We believe that general divestment from Israel is an unwise strategy at this time. We believe that economic measures targeted specifically at the occupation and the Israeli military complex that sustains it are much more likely to produce results. However, we absolutely reject the accusation that general divestment or boycott campaigns are inherently anti-Semitic. The Israeli government is a government like any other, and condemning its abuse of state power, as many of its own citizens do quite vigorously, is in no way the same as attacking the Jewish people. Further, it is crucial not only to criticize the immoral and illegal acts of the Israeli government, but to back up that criticism with action.
We also note with satisfaction the many Jewish and Israeli organizations who support the idea of selective sanctions on Israel: European Jews for a Just Peace (a coalition of 16 Jewish groups from eight European countries); Not in My Name (US); Matzpun (Israel/International); Jews Against the Occupation (NYC Chapter); the petition of South African government minister Ronnie Kasrils and legislator Max Ozinsky, which has gathered more than 500 signatories from South African Jews; Jewish Voices Against the Occupation (US); Jewish Women for Justice in Israel and Palestine (US); Gush Shalom (Israel); Jews for Global Justice (US); and Visions of Peace With Justice (US), among others.
• Boycott of settlement products and of companies that provide housing to the settlements or which play a major role in perpetuating the Occupation, a campaign initiated several years ago by Gush Shalom.
These campaigns, it seems to us, build on existing initiatives. They are capable of garnering broad international support, are focused, raise public consciousness over the economic aspects of the Occupation and expose the complicity of the international community in it. They bring significant moral pressure to bear on Israel, while moving towards effective forms of economic sanctions designed to end the Occupation.
We believe that Israel as a powerful state occupying the territory of another people should be held accountable for its policies and actions. We would therefore add to the list of sanctions the following element:
• Holding individuals, be they policy-makers, military personnel carrying out orders or others, personally accountable for human rights violations, including trial before international courts and bans on travel to other countries.
Since sanctions are a powerful non-violent means of resisting the Occupation, ICAHD supports this burgeoning movement and calls on the international community – civil society as well as governments – to do all that is possible to bring a swift end to Israel’s terrible Occupation so that all the peoples of the region, and especially Israelis and Palestinians, can enjoy the benefits of a just and lasting peace for the generations to come. The time has come; sanctions seem the next logical step in a global campaign to end the Occupation.
The Presbyterian Church has a program called Mission Responsibility Through Investment (MRTI): Faith-Based Investing, which supports divestment from companies that profit from military aggression or support human rights violations:
General Assembly Divestment List
Confirmed By the committee on Mission Responsibility Through Investment
The General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) urges divestment and/or proscription of some corporations due to their involvement in military-related production (MR), tobacco (TO) or human rights violations (HR). The following document contains a comprehensive list of corporations or securities affected by those General Assembly policies.
Download the 2007 GA Divestment List PDF icon for a full, annotated explanation of the corporations and securities affected, including the military-related and human rights investment policies. A quick look at corporations or securities affected:
1. Alliance One International — AOI (TO)
2. Alliant Techsystems — ATK (MR)
3. Altadis — Paris & Madrid Exchanges (TO)
4. Altria Group (Philip Morris) — MO (TO)
5. Boeing — BA (MR)
6. British American Tobacco Industries — BTI (Amex ADR) (TO)
7. CACI — CAI (MR)
8. Gallaher Group PLC — GLH (TO)
9. General Dynamics — GD (MR)
10. Imperial Tobacco PLC — ITY (NYSE ADR) (TO)
11. Japan Tobacco — Tokyo Exchange (TO)
12. Lockheed Martin — LMT (MR)
13. Loews Corp. (Carolina Group) — LTR, CG (TO)
14. Northrop Grumman — NOC (MR)
15. Raytheon — RTN (MR)
16. Reynolds American Inc. — RAI (TO)
17. United Industrial Corporation — UIC (MR)
18. UST, Inc. UST (TO)
19. Vishay Intertechnology VSH (MR)
The United Methodist Church has a similar policy. Here is their list, including explantions:
ALLIANT TECH SYSTEMS (NYSE:ATK) is engaged with an Israeli company in the production of rubber-coated bullets. Such bullets are frequently used against Palestinians, as well as Israeli and international peace activists engaged in
peaceful demonstrations to protest Israel's confiscation of Palestinian land. Rubber bullets often blind, disfigure or kill those who are hit by them. Alliant is also engaged in other contracts that support the Israeli military, which enforces the occupation. The company produces fuses for cluster bombs and Guided Multiple Launch Rocket Systems.
BLOCKBUSTER (NYSE:BBI) has kiosks in illegal settlements on occupied Palestinian land. These settlements violate the Fourth Geneva Convention and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Companies providing services tothese settlements, which violate international law, contribute to their growth and appeal for Israelis. They make it harder to withdraw Israelis from the occupied territories, an essential step for any lasting peace agreement with Palestinians.
BOEING (NYSE:BA) has been a major supplier of the F-15 Eagle and the AH-64 Apache attack helicopter to Israel. These aircraft have been used to attack Palestinians in the Occupied Territories, resulting in many civilian casualties. Boeing makes missile systems, F-15 software, Apache Helicopters, and Joint Direct Attack Munitions (JDAM), a guided air-to-surface weapon.
CATERPILLAR (NYSE:CAT) supplies bulldozers to the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF). The IDF uses these to destroy Palestinian homes, orchards and olive groves in the Occupied Territories. They are also used to clear Palestinian land for illegal Israeli settlements, segregated roads and the "Separation Barrier." Despite years of corporate engagement by investors, Caterpillar is expanding its role in the occupation, recently announcing a joint venture with InRobTech to develop unmanned remote-controlled bulldozers for Israel.
CEMENT ROADSTONE HOLDINGS (CRH) (NYSE: CRH) is an Ireland-based multinational. CRH benefits from a monopoly on cement production within Israel through its 25% holding in the Israeli group Mashav Initiating and Development Ltd., which is the holding company for Nesher Cement. Nesher claims on its website to be Israel’s sole producer of cement. Cement is being used in the construction of the Separation Wall inside the West Bank, which the International Court of Justice has ruled illegal. Cement is also used to build settlements on Palestinian land.
GENERAL DYNAMICS (NYSE:GD) Land Systems in the USA manufactures the GD 883 diesel engine for Israel’s Merkava 4 battle tanks. It has supplied about 1,000 M60A3 Main Battle Tanks to Israel. These tanks are frequently used against Palestinians in the occupied territories. It also produces equipment used on the F16 Fighting Falcon Jets sold to Israel. General Dynamics will be the general contractor for the production of 3,500 MK-84 "general purpose" bombs, spares and repair parts for Israel in a sale proposed by the Pentagon in April, 2007.
GENERAL ELECTRIC (NYSE:GE) supplies the propulsion system for Israel's AH-64 Apache Assault Helicopter, which is used in Israeli attacks on Palestinian towns. It also possesses contracts with Israel to sell engines for a variety of military aircraft. In addition, GE possesses several Israeli service contracts for engineering support and testing.
GLOBECOMM SYSTEMS INC (GSI) (New York) (NASDAQ: GCOM) in partnership with Tadiran Spectralink of the Elisra Group (Israel), has a contract to supply the IDF with equipment and facilities for communication between all branches of the IDF ground forces. The system includes mobile stations installed on HMMWV vehicles. These vehicles are used by the IDF in the occupied territories.
ITT CORPORATION (NYSE:ITT) provides the Israeli Defense Forces with intensifier tubes for night vision goggles and has previously provided battlefield communication radios. Night vision goggles are used by pilots, co-pilots and crews of fixed wing and rotary wing aircraft, especially helicopter crews. They enable Israel to attack refugee camps and villages in the middle of the night, the time when many of these raids and assaults take place. Battlefield communication radios allow the military to communicate with troops over a secure channel.
LOCKHEED MARTIN (NYSE:LMT) is the single biggest overseas supplier for the Israeli armaments industry. It has received at least $4.4 billion since 1995 for supplying arms, including missile systems and fighter planes, to Israel. It has many ongoing contracts, including manufacturing F-16I fighter bombers used by the IDF against Palestinians. Lockheed Martin Missile and Fire Control in Orlando, Florida produces the Hellfire missile system for Apache attack helicopters used by Israel against Palestinians. According to a military trade publication, Israel’s main battle tank, the Merkava MK-4 is produced by the Lockheed Martin Skunk Works Group.
MAGAL SECURITY SYSTEMS (NASDAQ:MAGS) is an Israeli company that is providing intrusion detection fencing for the separation wall. It is listed in a government of Israel web site as one of the contractors engaged in the construction of the wall.
MOTOROLA (NYSE:MOT) is engaged in a 400 million NIS ($93 million) project to provide radar systems for enhancing security at illegal West Bank settlements deep inside Palestinian territory. Motorola also has a $90-million contract to provide the Israeli army with an advanced "Mountain Rose" cell phone communications system. Its wholly owned subsidiary in Israel has a contract to develop encrypted wireless communications featuring vehicle-mounted antenna that will enable military use in the occupied territories and other remote areas.
NORTHROP GRUMMAN (NYSE:NOC) collaborates with Lockheed Martin in producing the Israeli F-16I Sufa (‘Storm') aircraft by providing the AN/APG-68 (V)9 multimode radar that provides for high-resolution ground mapping. With Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman also produces the Longbow System which, when installed in the Apache helicopter, greatly enhances the Apache’s lethality. The Longbow system includes fire control radar and the Hellfire Missile. In 2000 and 2001, Congress was notified of more than $500 million and $509 million respectively in pending Apache Longbow attack helicopter sales to Israel.
OSHKOSH TRUCK CORPORATION (NYSE:OSK) through contracts worth hundreds of millions of dollars, supplies mobility tactical trucks to the Israeli Military. These include cargo trucks with winches, wreckers and tractors. This type of equipment is used by the Israeli military in the occupied territories. Israel also has a $145 million contract with Oshkosh Truck Corp to build more than 900 armor kits for Israel’s Medium Tactical Vehicles.
RAYTHEON (NYSE:RTN) is a major arms contractor to the Israeli military. It supplies Patriot, Sparrow, Sidewinder, Maverick and TOW missiles. The Maverick is a precision, air-to-ground missile that is used against small mobile and hard targets. Missiles are frequently used against Palestinians in crowded residential areas such as refugee camps. They are also used in targeted assassinations of Palestinians without trial, evidence or the opportunity for defense.
SILICON GRAPHICS (SGI) (NASDAQ:SGIC) has a contract to provide Israeli Air Force F-15 pilots with visual system training. SGI’s system will also allow training for F-16 pilots using night vision goggles and sensors. An SGI graphics system serves as the image generator for the Israeli Air Force's UH-60/CH-53 Helicopter Aircrew Weapon Systems Trainer. These aircraft have been used in attacks on Palestinians in the occupied territory.
TEREX (NYSE:TEX) subsidiary American Truck Company (ATC) signed a $54 million agreement to supply 302 medium tactical trucks and associated logistical support to the Israeli army. Terex also supplied TATRA trucks used by the Israeli army to mount artillery systems during the time it owned a controlling interest in that company. Terex owns Amida Industries, which manufactures mobile floodlight towers used by the Israeli Army in the Occupied Territories. It also owns Terex Demag Cranes which are leased in Israel through Riwal, the major crane supplier for Israel’s separation wall. Terex’s ATC still has a contract with the Israeli army for training, service and spare parts.
UNITED TECHNOLOGIES (NYSE:UTX) produces Blackhawk helicopters which are used by the Israeli military to attack Palestinian cities, refugee camps and villages. Many civilians have been killed in these attacks. On February 1, 2001, United Technologies Sikorsky Division announced a $211.8 million contract with the Israeli Air Force. United Technologies Pratt and Whitney Division produces engines for Israel’s F-15 and F-16 aircraft, which are used against Palestinians. In 2005, Israel awarded Pratt and Whitney a contract worth up to $600 million for fleet management of these engines over the next 10 years.
VEOLIA ENVIRONNEMENT (NYSE:VE) owns Connex. Connex is a central partner in a new $500 million light rail system designed to link Jerusalem to the illegal settlements of the occupied West Bank. It owns 5% of the consortium building the system and secured a contract to operate the system for the next 30 years.
VOLVO (NASDAQ:VOLV) bulldozers have been photographed and videotaped destroying Palestinian homes. They have also been used in Israel’s construction of the Separation Wall, which is on Palestinian land and has been declared illegal by the International Court of Justice. Mayers Cars and Trucks in Israel is a Volvo distributor, and according to Israeli sources is one of the main providers of construction equipment for the settlements and the wall.
The US Campaign to End the Occupation (www.endtheoccupation.org) project is focusing on divestment and boycotts of products by Motorola, which supplies electronic technology to the IDF, and Caterpillar which supplies the massive D9 bulldozers that have destroyed over 18,000 Palestinian homes and over a million Palestinian olive and fruit trees and killed International Solidarity Worker Rachel Corrie from Olympia, Washington in 2003.
The Israeli Bar Association, the Engineer Association in Israel, Intel, and Philip Morris are recommended for divestment and/or boycott by Zochrot (www.zochrot.org), an Israeli NGO opposing the occupation and the "memoricide" of Arab history in Palestine, and the Palestinian group Badil advocating right of refugee return.
Ilan Pappe and others call for academic and cultural boycotts. Here is the statement of the Palestinian Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel (PACBI, www.pacbi.org) :
CALL FOR ACADEMIC AND CULTURAL BOYCOTT OF ISRAEL
Whereas Israel’s colonial oppression of the Palestinian people, which is based on Zionist ideology, comprises the following:
Denial of its responsibility for the Nakba -- in particular the waves of ethnic cleansing and dispossession that created the Palestinian refugee problem -- and therefore refusal to accept the inalienable rights of the refugees and displaced stipulated in and protected by international law;
Military occupation and colonization of the West Bank (including East Jerusalem) and Gaza since 1967, in violation of international law and UN resolutions;
The entrenched system of racial discrimination and segregation against the Palestinian citizens of Israel, which resembles the defunct apartheid system in South Africa;
Since Israeli academic institutions (mostly state controlled) and the vast majority of Israeli intellectuals and academics have either contributed directly to maintaining, defending or otherwise justifying the above forms of oppression, or have been complicit in them through their silence;
Given that all forms of international intervention have until now failed to force Israel to comply with international law or to end its repression of the Palestinians, which has manifested itself in many forms, including siege, indiscriminate killing, wanton destruction and the racist colonial wall;
In view of the fact that people of conscience in the international community of scholars and intellectuals have historically shouldered the moral responsibility to fight injustice, as exemplified in their struggle to abolish apartheid in South Africa through diverse forms of boycott;
Recognizing that the growing international boycott movement against Israel has expressed the need for a Palestinian frame of reference outlining guiding principles;
In the spirit of international solidarity, moral consistency and resistance to injustice and oppression,
We, Palestinian academics and intellectuals, call upon our colleagues in the international community to comprehensively and consistently boycott all Israeli academic and cultural institutions as a contribution to the struggle to end Israel’s occupation, colonization and system of apartheid, by applying the following:
Refrain from participation in any form of academic and cultural cooperation, collaboration or joint projects with Israeli institutions;
Advocate a comprehensive boycott of Israeli institutions at the national and international levels, including suspension of all forms of funding and subsidies to these institutions;
Promote divestment and disinvestment from Israel by international academic institutions;
Work toward the condemnation of Israeli policies by pressing for resolutions to be adopted by academic, professional and cultural associations and organizations;
Support Palestinian academic and cultural institutions directly without requiring them to partner with Israeli counterparts as an explicit or implicit condition for such support.
Palestinian Federation of Unions of University Professors and Employees Palestinian General Federation of Trade Unions; Palestinian NGO Network, West Bank; Teachers’ Federation; Palestinian Writers’ Federation; Palestinian League of Artists; Palestinian Journalists’ Federation;
General Union of Palestinian Women; Palestinian Lawyers’ Association;
Many other Palestinian federations, associations, and civil society organizations.
Declaration of Israeli citizens in support of BDS against the occupation
We, Palestinian and Jewish citizens of Israel join the call put out by civil society organizations in the Occupied Palestinian Territories and in other countries to support Boycott, Divestment, and Sanction (BDS) actions against institutions, companies and individuals sustaining the Israeli occupation and profiting from it. The tight cooperation between the high echelons in the military and business sectors in Israel produces and reproduces conditions of exploitation towards Palestinian and Israeli workers, women, and minority groups. We watch with great concern as militarism gains new strongholds within Israeli society and we are well aware of the relationship between the violent oppression of Palestinians in the OPT and the spreading of violence within Israel.
As citizens devoted to the promotion of peace and democracy in the region, we are especially bewildered at the international community's decision to punish the Palestinians and withhold funds from the PA, after the Palestinian people exercised their democratic right to elect the government of their choice. At the same time, the international community continues, through economic investments in Israel, to actively support Israel's daily violations of international law and accelerated colonization of the occupied territories. We fear the potentially irreversible damage created by Israeli and international policy, and realize that the occupation will truly end only when its cost becomes higher that its gain for Israeli society. We especially stress that a critical stance against the occupation, including explicit BDS actions taken by individuals and organizations, are not Anti-Semitic or Anti-Israel. We stand against all forms of racism and oppression and support and encourage BDS actions as a legitimate and necessary form of non-violent resistance.