- Isn't Imposing An Economic Boycott Over
A Group Of Citizens An Anti-Democratic Act?
- Isn't Boycotting The Settlements Similar
To The Nazis' Boycott On The Jews?
- Examples?
- How Do The Settlers Obstruct The Peace Process?
- Aren't These Generalizations?
- Didn't Many Of Them Settle On State Lands,
Property Of The Government Of Israel?
- Why Can't Jews Live In Palestinian Territory,
Just As The Arab Citizens Live In The State Of Israel?
- Doesn't The Call For Boycott Express Hate
For The Settlers?
- Won't The Boycott Harm The Palestinian Laborers
Currently Employed At The Settlements Industries?
- What's The Difference Between Ramla And
Ram'alla? The Kibbutzim, Moshavim And Towns In Israel Inside The Green
Line Are Also Sitting On Land Which Used To Be Arab?
- Don't You See Any Difference between Judea
and Samaria settlers and Golan Heights Settlers?
- How Can An Economic Boycott Help to Achieve
Peace?
- How Can I Contribute To The Success Of
The National Boycott?
1. Isn't Imposing An Economic Boycott Over A Group Of
Citizens An Anti-Democratic Act?
On the contrary. No other public action is more democratic.
An economic boycott is a non-violent act, enabling all citizens to express
their views through their available means, without imposing these views
on others, without the need for an organization or political identification.
Any man and woman may use their money as they wish in preferring one product
over another.
For instance: The Orthodox community imposes a permanent economic boycott
over products which do not carry a kosher certificate by their Court of
Justice (BADAZ). They also regularly boycott companies and banks who, in
their opinion, support the desecration of graves or the Shabath. No one
can prevent them from doing so. To us, destroying the peace and war mongering
are no better than eating pork is to the Orthodox.
Opponents of scientific experiments in animals boycott products made by
companies who utilize the results of these experiments.
We express our view, that the settlements are wreaking havoc over the State
of Israel - by boycotting their products. What could be more democratic?
2. Isn't Boycotting The Settlements Similar To The Nazis'
Boycott On The Jews?
By its nature, a boycott is an instruments of the powerless against
the powerful, used by those without access to the power mechanisms, who
are therefore forced to organize voluntarily from the grassroots. Indeed,
the Nazis have abused the boycott instrument to promote the causes of oppression
and racism, just as they have abused, on their way to power, the freedom
of speech, the electoral process, parliamentary activity and other democratic
means. But there is absolutely no similarity between the Nazi boycott and
other boycotts, just as there is no resemblance between a Nazi election
campaign and any election campaign by a democratic party.
Incidentally, the Jews beat the Nazis in declaring a global boycott over
Nazi Germany, immediately upon Hitler's rise to power. Had this boycott
succeeded, the Nazi regime may not have reached that far.
The boycott against the settlements products is a voluntary action by peace-loving
Israelis, setting out against settlers who possess a power mechanism that
is strong enough to coerce all of Israel's governments to date. They force
the government to foreclose Palestinian lands on their behalf, to send
thousands of soldiers and policemen to serve as their personal bodyguards,
and to grant them gigantic budget chunks of our tax money. Money robbed
from Israel's disadvantaged classes, development towns and poor neighborhoods.
The boycott over settlements products is a distinct tool of peace and justice
seekers, against the entire establishment of the settlements, whose essence
is racism, oppression and deprivation. In this respect, our boycott constitutes
yet another link in the global chain of similar boycott actions.
3. Examples?
All the democratic powers in the world have joined in totally boycotting
the racist regime in South-Africa. That boycott has eventually resulted
in the mobilization of political factors the world over, who have finally
overthrown the apartheid regime.
Gandhi, the Indian freedom fighter who preached against violence, employed
the economic boycott weapon.
For years progressive elements in the US have maintained a boycott against
California fruit growers, due to their shameful treatment of Mexican laborers.
This boycott has also proved successful.
Democratic organizations in the US are currently calling for a boycott
over the products of giant commercial corporations who exploit the work
of Asian children under appalling conditions.
4. How Do The Settlers Obstruct The Peace Process?
Ever since Moshe Levinger has deployed the first group of settlers
in Hebron, by ways of deception and mendacity (they promised the military
governor that they were only going there to conduct a Seder Pessach ceremony),
all the settlements are aimed at a single political objective: to forestall
any possibility of peace with the Palestinians. The opponents of peace
know very well that such peace could only be established if Israel allows
the Palestinian people to build their state in the West Bank and Gaza Strip.
The settlements were intended to create a reality which would preclude
the possibility of ever returning these territories to the Palestinians.
This objective is clearly manifested in the field: Most of the settlements
have been established on top of hills, like outguards overlooking the area,
also in order to provoke the Palestinians, whose villages are usually built
downhill.
The intention is to control, and so is the result. The implication: A small
minority in the Israeli public imposes its will on the entire state, and
dictates to the overwhelming majority an endless war.
5. Aren't These Generalizations?
True, not all settlers are of one piece. The orthodox-nationalistic-messianic
hard core has settled there to "create facts in the field", which
would render any compromise with the Palestinian unfeasible This group
has spawned ideological murderers such as Baruch Goldstein and Yigal Amir.
On the other hand, there are those who have settled in the Palestinian
Territories only "to find a quality of life", or splendid homes
for peanuts, or an easy life at the state's expense. Some have gone there
innocently, without giving it much thought.
All settlers, however, have one thing in common: They knew very well that
they were settling beyond the Green Line, on land taken by force from another
people. No one is forcing them to stay there. Each and every one of them
is free to leave and come back to the State of Israel. The government will
have to help them to do that, if they so demand.
6. Didn't Many Of Them Settle On State Lands, Property
Of The Government Of Israel?
"State Land" is a fabrication, invented in order to rob the
land from the Palestinians.
This property is the land reserves of Palestinian villages and towns -
land allocated for the natural expansion of these communities, for public
buildings, etc. During the Ottoman Rule, this property was usually registered
in the name of the Sultan, in order to prevent conflicts. The Sultan was
replaced by the British Mandate government, and later the Jordanian government.
After 1967, the Israeli Occupation Rule pretended to be the legal owner
of these lands. Handing these lands over to the settlers is plain pillage.
Without those lands Palestinian communities are unable to develop, provide
housing for the next generations, build schools and mosques, etc.
This is not the only law used as a legal tool by the land robbers. The
occupation authorities have utilized ancient laws and devised new ones,
"for by wise counsel thou shalt make thy settlements". For instance,
they used an Ottoman law stipulating that any lot of property where the
voice of a man standing at the center of the village cannot be heard, belongs
to the Sultan by default.
Many properties have been foreclosed under pretexts of "security needs"
and "public needs", construction of "bypass roads"
and so on.
Not only lands were stolen, water too. Huge of water, necessary for the
development of Palestinian agriculture as well simply for drinking, have
been handed over to the settlements. The settlers, who constitute less
than a tenth of the number of West Bank inhabitants, have received an amount
of water larger than that of the entire Palestinian population.
7. Why Can't Jews Live In Palestinian Territory, Just
As The Arab Citizens Live In The State Of Israel?
There's no place for this comparison. The Arab citizens of Israel have
been living on their land for generations. No one questions their right
over their land. The settlers, on the other hand, have been forcibly implanted
in our time on the land of another people.
The Palestinian leaders have repeatedly declared that they have no objection
in principle to Jews living in the Palestinian State, when it is established,
as peaceful citizens who accept the law of the land, just as the Christians
and the Muslims do. The Mayor of Hebron, for instance, has invited the
descendants of the Old Jewish settles in Hebron to return to the city.
According to him, Hebron residents will welcome orthodox Jews who honestly
wish to live and study the Holy Bible in the city that is sacred to them
too.
But the settlers do not even dream of living in Palestinian territory,
and the idea that they will ever accept the Palestinian citizenship and
Palestinian law is preposterous to them. They feel they are the Lords of
the Land, they will never consent to be someone else's "subjects",
certainly not a Palestinian government. Some of their leaders have announced
more than once that their purpose is to cause the ousting of the Arabs
from the entire territory of Greater Eretz-Israel, so that the Whole Eretz-Israel
would be 'strictly kosher' Jewish. Abroad, this is called "ethnic
purification".
8. Doesn't The Call For Boycott Express Hate For The Settlers?
We are not motivated by hatred. We are not boycotting the settlers,
but the products of the settlements.
We call upon the settlers to return to Israel, and raise their contribution
to the development of the State. Immediately following the Oslo Accords
we publicly urged Prime Minister Rabin to promptly announce that any settler
wishing to return to Israel willingly, shall receive a generous government
relocation grant.
Moreover: If these industries wish to continue manufacturing under Palestinian
law and administration, and if the Palestinian Authority (and eventually,
the government of the Palestinian State) will have no objections, there
will no longer be cause for a national boycott.
9. Won't The Boycott Harm The Palestinian Laborers Currently
Employed At The Settlements Industries?
This argument is often used against boycotts in general. It has been
used frequently against the international boycott on South Africa, saying
said that the sanctions harm not the racist regime, but the black laborers.
In response to this, the African National Congress, led by Nelson Mandela,
has issued an explicit call to disregard this argument, because the downfall
of the apartheid regime far outweighs any other consideration, even in
the eyes of the laborers themselves.
The exploitation of Palestinian labor, mostly under outrageous conditions,
cannot be used as a pretext against boycotting. If the boycott succeeds,
these industries will be forced to relocate in planned for implementation
under Israeli-Palestinian collaboration, where Palestinian laborers would
be able to earn their living.
10. What's The Difference Between Ramla And Ram'alla?
The Kibbutzim, Moshavim And Towns In Israel Inside The Green Line Are Also
Sitting On Land Which Used To Be Arab?
This is the settlers' most popular demagogic claim, and its ostensible
merit is merely illusive.
During a bloody historical conflict, which has been going on for over a
hundred years, many grievances, which deserve historical research and discussion,
have occurred on both sides. But following the war in 1948 a reality has
been created, which peace seekers in both nations, along with the entire
civilized world, have come to accept.
Like most borders in the world, the Green Line has been arbitrarily marked
by the events of the war and later agreements (As is well known, the Triangle
border was created following an agreement with King Abdalla of Jordan,
who handed over to Israel several Arab villages). But the world accepts
the principle, that existing borders - in our case, the borders set in
place since 1949 - shall remain intact, and may not be changed again through
war or occupation. This is also the basis for the UN resolution 242 and
the international conventions to which Israel is a party.
The overwhelming majority of the Palestinian people recognize the State
of Israel within the Green Line borders, and this recognition has been
confirmed when close to 90% of the Palestinians voted for Yasser Arafat
after his signing the Oslo Accords. On the other hand, no known Palestinian
has ever consented to peace which is based on appending any additional
territories to Israel.
11. Don't You See Any Difference between Judea and Samaria
settlers and Golan Heights Settlers?
In principle, there is no difference. Indeed, Golan Heights settlers
are usually less fanatic than "Yesha" settlers, and they did
go there at the consent of Labor governments (which is why some people
call them "mityashvim" (which in Hebrew sounds slightly more
favorable than the colonially-associated "mitnachalim"). But
they are both obstructing peace and bringing war to our door. Both are
occupying a plundered land.
The Syrian Highlands (as it has been called prior to the Six Days War)
was a densely populated area. The residents of dozens of Syrian villages
- myriads of people - live in Syria as refugees, longing to return to their
land. There is no chance of peace with Syria, our most dangerous neighbor,
without giving back the entire Golan Heights. Yitzhak Rabin has recognized
this fact when he notified the Americans that he was willing to give back
the entire Heights, back to the June 4 1967 line, in return for a full
peace.
The war currently waged in Lebanon, demanding precious victims almost daily,
is part of our conflict with Syria, that is, a direct result of our occupation
of the Golan Heights. And even that deadly toll is nothing compared to
the anticipated war with Syria, in which poisonous gas missiles will hit
the cities of Israel.
Nevertheless, a boycott is a democratic act by nature. Whoever maintains
that boycotting West Bank and Gaza Strip settlements is justified, but
boycotting the Golan settlements is not, should act accordingly. We do
not impose our opinions on anybody.
12. How Can An Economic Boycott Help to Achieve Peace?
The boycott shall give voice to the objection of the Israeli majority
to the settlements.
It will serve as a barrier against further investments in the settlements.
The government promises extreme benefits as incentives to investors, but
they would think twice before risking a boycott by large parts of the public.
The boycott will be a major tool for alleviating the frustration and sense
of helplessness, plaguing so many Israelis. The boycott conveys a general
message: You are not helpless. You can act. Your duty is not done at the
polls once every four years. You must act everyday to save the state and
its values.
13. How Can I Contribute To The Success Of The National
Boycott?
A lot.
Download the
list and when you do your shopping, Look at the product label to find
out its origin. Reject any product made in a settlement. Prefer any other
Israeli-made product, even if its price is slightly higher or its quality
slightly lower.
When in doubt, ask the store manager, preferably in a loud voice.
Draw the attention of other shoppers, as well as that of friends, neighbors
and other acquaintances, to products made in settlements, and explain the
issue to them.
Get a list of settlement-made products from the campaign headquarters (address
listed below), make photocopies and distribute the list as much as possible.
Identify additional settlement-made products and send us the details so
we can update the list. If possible, enclose the labels too, for documentation.
|
Gush Shalom