17 dec 2013
PLO Executive Committee member, Dr. Hanan Ashrawi, praised the recent announcement by Dutch water company, Vitens, to end its cooperation with Israel's national water company, Mekorot, calling it a "necessary and moral decision", PLO's Negotiations Affairs Department said in a press release Monday.
Mekorot is responsible for a number of violations of international law within the occupied State of Palestine. This includes the pillage of shared water resources and the denial of Palestinian access to their own water resources, in order to sustain Israel's illegal settlements.
"This is a significant step. In a statement, Vitens stressed that it attaches great importance to integrity and abides by national and international law and regulations. The company should be praised for turning its principled position into positive action. I also commend the Dutch government for its clear official policy on discouraging economic links with the illegal Israeli settlement enterprise, which is in line with domestic, European and international law."
"It has been suggested by some that Mekorot is named in the recent deal signed by Israel, Jordan and the occupied State of Palestine. I have been assured that this is not the case," Ashrawi stated. "This is a company which is complicit in denying a whole population some of its most fundamental human rights."
Ashrawi also welcomed the UK Department of Trade and Industry's recent publication of guidelines warning businesses about the risks of economic links with settlements. "We hope that the British government will now follow in a similar vein to the Dutch government, by advising British companies to end cooperation with settlements."
Ashrawi concluded, "Such steps demonstrate integrity and respect for international law. They distinguish Israel from its illegal activities over the Green Line and therefore help to realize the two-state solution, which the international community endorses, and in which it has invested heavily. These measures constitute a natural translation of both law and policy. We call on other States, municipalities and private companies to follow such examples."
Mekorot is responsible for a number of violations of international law within the occupied State of Palestine. This includes the pillage of shared water resources and the denial of Palestinian access to their own water resources, in order to sustain Israel's illegal settlements.
"This is a significant step. In a statement, Vitens stressed that it attaches great importance to integrity and abides by national and international law and regulations. The company should be praised for turning its principled position into positive action. I also commend the Dutch government for its clear official policy on discouraging economic links with the illegal Israeli settlement enterprise, which is in line with domestic, European and international law."
"It has been suggested by some that Mekorot is named in the recent deal signed by Israel, Jordan and the occupied State of Palestine. I have been assured that this is not the case," Ashrawi stated. "This is a company which is complicit in denying a whole population some of its most fundamental human rights."
Ashrawi also welcomed the UK Department of Trade and Industry's recent publication of guidelines warning businesses about the risks of economic links with settlements. "We hope that the British government will now follow in a similar vein to the Dutch government, by advising British companies to end cooperation with settlements."
Ashrawi concluded, "Such steps demonstrate integrity and respect for international law. They distinguish Israel from its illegal activities over the Green Line and therefore help to realize the two-state solution, which the international community endorses, and in which it has invested heavily. These measures constitute a natural translation of both law and policy. We call on other States, municipalities and private companies to follow such examples."
|
|
The American Studies Association’s membership has voted decisively in favor of an academic boycott on Israel, the association announced Monday. "It represents a principle of solidarity with scholars and students deprived of their academic freedom and an aspiration to enlarge that freedom for all, including Palestinians," a Dec. 4 statement said. According to The New York Times, which reported the boycott Monday, the action — the first time the group has called for an academic boycott of any nation's universities — makes the group the largest of its kind to back a movement aiming to isolate Israel because of its treatment of Palestinians.
The academic group said the boycott doesn't apply to "individual Israeli scholars engaged in ordinary forms of academic exchange," including |
conferences, lectures, and research. It justified the boycott, saying it was "warranted given U.S. military and other support for Israel; Israel's violation of international law and U.N. resolutions; the documented impact of the Israeli occupation on Palestinian scholars and students"; and "the extent to which Israeli institutions of higher education are a party to state policies that violate human rights."
"There was an incredible swell of applause and enthusiasm for the speakers who supported the boycott," University of California-Riverside professor David Lloyd told Al Jazeera. "All expressed in different ways that this [boycott] was a fundamental matter of justice. This event indicates just how much things have shifted within the academy." Curtis Marez, the group's president and an associate professor of ethnic studies at the University of California, San Diego, told The Times that while other nations may have human-rights records worse than Israel's, "one has to start somewhere." Ex-Harvard president and former Treasury secretary Lawrence Summers slammed the boycott on the "Charlie Rose" show, saying the boycott singled out Israel and was "anti-Semitic in effect."
"My hope would be that responsible university leaders will become very reluctant to see their university's funds used to finance faculty membership and faculty travel to an association that is showing itself not to be a scholarly association but really more of a political tool," Summers said on the Dec. 10 program. The American Association of University Professors, with 48,000 members, is also opposed to academic boycotts, saying they "strike directly at the free exchange of ideas." Both The Times and Al Jazeera noted the vote appears to reflect a trend on U.S. campuses. Al Jazeera pointed out the specific growth of a group known as Students for Justice in Palestine.
"There was an incredible swell of applause and enthusiasm for the speakers who supported the boycott," University of California-Riverside professor David Lloyd told Al Jazeera. "All expressed in different ways that this [boycott] was a fundamental matter of justice. This event indicates just how much things have shifted within the academy." Curtis Marez, the group's president and an associate professor of ethnic studies at the University of California, San Diego, told The Times that while other nations may have human-rights records worse than Israel's, "one has to start somewhere." Ex-Harvard president and former Treasury secretary Lawrence Summers slammed the boycott on the "Charlie Rose" show, saying the boycott singled out Israel and was "anti-Semitic in effect."
"My hope would be that responsible university leaders will become very reluctant to see their university's funds used to finance faculty membership and faculty travel to an association that is showing itself not to be a scholarly association but really more of a political tool," Summers said on the Dec. 10 program. The American Association of University Professors, with 48,000 members, is also opposed to academic boycotts, saying they "strike directly at the free exchange of ideas." Both The Times and Al Jazeera noted the vote appears to reflect a trend on U.S. campuses. Al Jazeera pointed out the specific growth of a group known as Students for Justice in Palestine.
16 dec 2013
Some 40 human rights advocates gathered Saturday in front of the Leviev Diamond store on Manhattan’s upscale Madison Avenue and sang parody holiday carols protesting diamond magnate Lev Leviev’s construction of Israeli settlements. A press release by Adalah–NY, the New York campaign for the Boycott of Israel, said many Christmas holiday shoppers, “bundled against the cold, paused to listen to the carolers and appeared surprised but pleased by their human rights message.”
The protest came days after popular mobilizations against an Israeli government plan to displace tens of thousands of Palestinian Bedouin citizens of Israel contributed to the plan’s cancellation, and amidst growing global recognition of the efficacy of the international boycott movement.
Andrew Kadi from Adalah-NY, said when his organizations started in 2007 protested campaigns against Leviev, it was one of the only groups in the US advocating for a boycott of Israel.
“This year our protest was endorsed by 12 groups in New York City alone, a clear sign of the spreading support for boycott, divestment and sanctions against Israel,” he said.
A week earlier, Adalah-NY and other New York groups held a protest calling for a boycott of SodaStream due to the company’s involvement in Israeli settlements.
Protesters at Leviev sang songs including “Stealing Palestinian Land” to the tune of “Winter Wonderland,” and “I Made a Little Settlement” to the tune of “Dreidel, Dreidel, Dreidel.”
Another song, to the tune of “God Rest Ye Merry Gentlemen,” included the lyrics, “The people of these villages said heed the boycott call / With international pressure to help Apartheid fall / Each time we sing out in the cold their courage we recall / Oh justice for Palestinian, women and men / The question is not if but when.”
Song lyrics highlighted the fact that Oxfam America and UNICEF, along with CARE, the government of the United Kingdom, New Zealand’s Superannuation Fund, and Hollywood stars have all sought distance from Leviev’s companies over their human rights record.
The government of Norway recently rescinded a ban on investing in Leviev’s company Africa Israel, but has said it is looking into the issue after learning of Africa Israel’s ongoing settlement construction.
Leviev’s companies are currently building homes in the Israeli settlement of Gilo and developing the Zufim settlement on the land of the West Bank village of Jayyous. They have built thousands of settlement homes for Jews only on Palestinian land in the Israeli-occupied West Bank.
All Israeli settlements violate international law as well as seize vital Palestinian land, dividing the West Bank into disconnected Bantustans, reminiscent of apartheid South Africa.
Leviev’s business ethics have come under fire worldwide. A young Angolan woman stopped at the New York protest and spoke with a demonstrator about Leviev’s operations in her country, saying, “They steal everything from us.”
In the diamond industry in Angola, Leviev’s mine security companies have been accused of acts of “humiliation, whipping, torture, sexual abuse, and, in some cases, assassinations.” Leviev was forced to shut down his diamond polishing plant in Namibia following accusations that his employee was smuggling diamonds.
In New York City, Leviev’s companies have helped to gentrify neighborhoods in Brooklyn and Manhattan.
Now a Leviev subsidiary, Danya Cebus, plans to build high-priced apartments in East Harlem for the company HAP Investments, which aims to reap profits by gentrifying Harlem and Washington Heights.
The protest came days after popular mobilizations against an Israeli government plan to displace tens of thousands of Palestinian Bedouin citizens of Israel contributed to the plan’s cancellation, and amidst growing global recognition of the efficacy of the international boycott movement.
Andrew Kadi from Adalah-NY, said when his organizations started in 2007 protested campaigns against Leviev, it was one of the only groups in the US advocating for a boycott of Israel.
“This year our protest was endorsed by 12 groups in New York City alone, a clear sign of the spreading support for boycott, divestment and sanctions against Israel,” he said.
A week earlier, Adalah-NY and other New York groups held a protest calling for a boycott of SodaStream due to the company’s involvement in Israeli settlements.
Protesters at Leviev sang songs including “Stealing Palestinian Land” to the tune of “Winter Wonderland,” and “I Made a Little Settlement” to the tune of “Dreidel, Dreidel, Dreidel.”
Another song, to the tune of “God Rest Ye Merry Gentlemen,” included the lyrics, “The people of these villages said heed the boycott call / With international pressure to help Apartheid fall / Each time we sing out in the cold their courage we recall / Oh justice for Palestinian, women and men / The question is not if but when.”
Song lyrics highlighted the fact that Oxfam America and UNICEF, along with CARE, the government of the United Kingdom, New Zealand’s Superannuation Fund, and Hollywood stars have all sought distance from Leviev’s companies over their human rights record.
The government of Norway recently rescinded a ban on investing in Leviev’s company Africa Israel, but has said it is looking into the issue after learning of Africa Israel’s ongoing settlement construction.
Leviev’s companies are currently building homes in the Israeli settlement of Gilo and developing the Zufim settlement on the land of the West Bank village of Jayyous. They have built thousands of settlement homes for Jews only on Palestinian land in the Israeli-occupied West Bank.
All Israeli settlements violate international law as well as seize vital Palestinian land, dividing the West Bank into disconnected Bantustans, reminiscent of apartheid South Africa.
Leviev’s business ethics have come under fire worldwide. A young Angolan woman stopped at the New York protest and spoke with a demonstrator about Leviev’s operations in her country, saying, “They steal everything from us.”
In the diamond industry in Angola, Leviev’s mine security companies have been accused of acts of “humiliation, whipping, torture, sexual abuse, and, in some cases, assassinations.” Leviev was forced to shut down his diamond polishing plant in Namibia following accusations that his employee was smuggling diamonds.
In New York City, Leviev’s companies have helped to gentrify neighborhoods in Brooklyn and Manhattan.
Now a Leviev subsidiary, Danya Cebus, plans to build high-priced apartments in East Harlem for the company HAP Investments, which aims to reap profits by gentrifying Harlem and Washington Heights.
Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas said he rejected a boycott of (Israel) on December, 9, infuriating Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) leaders, The Star reported. “No, we do not support the boycott of Israel,” Abbas told South African reporters.
“But we ask everyone to boycott the products of the settlements. Because the settlements are in our territories. It is illegal,” Abbas added.
“But we ask everyone to boycott the products of the settlements. Because the settlements are in our territories. It is illegal. … But we don’t ask anyone to boycott Israel itself. We have relations with Israel, we have mutual recognition of Israel,” Abbas added.
According to Ali Abunima, a co-founder of Electronic Intifada, a Palestinian US-based platform committed to combating the pro-Israeli, and pro-American spin, "it is unclear what Abbas meant by 'mutual recognition'"
"While Abbas and the Palestine Liberation Organization have recognized Israel, Israel does not recognize a Palestinian state or indeed any Palestinian rights whatsoever and continues to aggressively steal Palestinian land," Abunima said.
Abbas’s comments conflict “with the Palestinian national consensus that has strongly supported BDS against Israel since 2005,” BDS movement co-founder Omar Barghouti told Electronic Intifada.
Barghouti said Abbas does not speak for the Palestinian people.
“There is no Palestinian political party, trade union, NGO network or mass organization that does not strongly support BDS,” he said.
“Any Palestinian official who lacks a democratic mandate and any real public support, therefore, cannot claim to speak on behalf of the Palestinian people when it comes to deciding our strategies of resistance to Israel’s regime of occupation, colonization and apartheid.” Barghouti stressed.
“But we ask everyone to boycott the products of the settlements. Because the settlements are in our territories. It is illegal,” Abbas added.
“But we ask everyone to boycott the products of the settlements. Because the settlements are in our territories. It is illegal. … But we don’t ask anyone to boycott Israel itself. We have relations with Israel, we have mutual recognition of Israel,” Abbas added.
According to Ali Abunima, a co-founder of Electronic Intifada, a Palestinian US-based platform committed to combating the pro-Israeli, and pro-American spin, "it is unclear what Abbas meant by 'mutual recognition'"
"While Abbas and the Palestine Liberation Organization have recognized Israel, Israel does not recognize a Palestinian state or indeed any Palestinian rights whatsoever and continues to aggressively steal Palestinian land," Abunima said.
Abbas’s comments conflict “with the Palestinian national consensus that has strongly supported BDS against Israel since 2005,” BDS movement co-founder Omar Barghouti told Electronic Intifada.
Barghouti said Abbas does not speak for the Palestinian people.
“There is no Palestinian political party, trade union, NGO network or mass organization that does not strongly support BDS,” he said.
“Any Palestinian official who lacks a democratic mandate and any real public support, therefore, cannot claim to speak on behalf of the Palestinian people when it comes to deciding our strategies of resistance to Israel’s regime of occupation, colonization and apartheid.” Barghouti stressed.
Just released by the American Studies Association:
The members of the American Studies Association have endorsed the Association’s participation in a boycott of Israeli academic institutions. In an election that attracted 1252 voters, the largest number of participants in the organization’s history, the majority of votes (66%) supported the boycott.
The election was a response to the ASA National Council’s announcement on December 4 that it supported the academic boycott and, in an unprecedented action to ensure a democratic process, asked its membership for their approval. Please see the ASA website for a collection of supporting documents, including FAQs, and boycott guidelines.
One year ago, the ASA Executive Committee was asked to consider a resolution from the Academic and Community Activism Caucus of the Association. The EC then forwarded the resolution to the National Council and, following a lengthy period of careful deliberations, the Council unanimously voted to draft a revised resolution and to recommend members endorse it.
The resolution is in solidarity with scholars and students deprived of their academic freedom and it aspires to enlarge that freedom for all, including Palestinians. The ASA’s endorsement of the academic boycott emerges from the context of US military and other support for Israel; Israel’s violations of international law and UN resolutions; the documented impact of the Israeli occupation on Palestinian scholars and students; the extent to which Israeli institutions of higher education are a party to state policies that violate human rights; and finally, the support of such a resolution by a majority of ASA members.
The National Council engaged and addressed questions and concerns of the membership throughout the process. During the open discussion at the recent convention, members asked us to draft a resolution that was relevant to the ASA in particular and so the Council’s final resolution acknowledged that the US plays a significant role in enabling the Israeli occupation of Palestine. Members asked for clarification about how the resolution would affect the ability of ASA members to engage with colleagues in Israel, and the Council developed guidelines specifying that collaboration on research and publications between individual scholars does not fall under the ASA boycott. Members asked us to deliberate carefully and consider diverse opinions and the Council thus deliberated for 8 days. Members asked that we create spaces for discussion and the Council established a lively Facebook page. Finally, members asked the National Council to put the resolution to a vote and the Council listened.
The ASA National Council thanks all who took seriously the task of debating and discussing the resolution. As the nation’s oldest and largest association devoted to the interdisciplinary study of American culture and history, the Association’s mission includes the ongoing study and discussion of pressing issues faced by the US and the world. As part of that process and in keeping with the ASA’s commitment to academic freedom, we are thus pleased to announce plans to bring Israeli and Palestinian academics to the 2014 national convention in Los Angeles.
The ASA National Council
(via Mondoweiss)
For more info, please see the original article below
The members of the American Studies Association have endorsed the Association’s participation in a boycott of Israeli academic institutions. In an election that attracted 1252 voters, the largest number of participants in the organization’s history, the majority of votes (66%) supported the boycott.
The election was a response to the ASA National Council’s announcement on December 4 that it supported the academic boycott and, in an unprecedented action to ensure a democratic process, asked its membership for their approval. Please see the ASA website for a collection of supporting documents, including FAQs, and boycott guidelines.
One year ago, the ASA Executive Committee was asked to consider a resolution from the Academic and Community Activism Caucus of the Association. The EC then forwarded the resolution to the National Council and, following a lengthy period of careful deliberations, the Council unanimously voted to draft a revised resolution and to recommend members endorse it.
The resolution is in solidarity with scholars and students deprived of their academic freedom and it aspires to enlarge that freedom for all, including Palestinians. The ASA’s endorsement of the academic boycott emerges from the context of US military and other support for Israel; Israel’s violations of international law and UN resolutions; the documented impact of the Israeli occupation on Palestinian scholars and students; the extent to which Israeli institutions of higher education are a party to state policies that violate human rights; and finally, the support of such a resolution by a majority of ASA members.
The National Council engaged and addressed questions and concerns of the membership throughout the process. During the open discussion at the recent convention, members asked us to draft a resolution that was relevant to the ASA in particular and so the Council’s final resolution acknowledged that the US plays a significant role in enabling the Israeli occupation of Palestine. Members asked for clarification about how the resolution would affect the ability of ASA members to engage with colleagues in Israel, and the Council developed guidelines specifying that collaboration on research and publications between individual scholars does not fall under the ASA boycott. Members asked us to deliberate carefully and consider diverse opinions and the Council thus deliberated for 8 days. Members asked that we create spaces for discussion and the Council established a lively Facebook page. Finally, members asked the National Council to put the resolution to a vote and the Council listened.
The ASA National Council thanks all who took seriously the task of debating and discussing the resolution. As the nation’s oldest and largest association devoted to the interdisciplinary study of American culture and history, the Association’s mission includes the ongoing study and discussion of pressing issues faced by the US and the world. As part of that process and in keeping with the ASA’s commitment to academic freedom, we are thus pleased to announce plans to bring Israeli and Palestinian academics to the 2014 national convention in Los Angeles.
The ASA National Council
(via Mondoweiss)
For more info, please see the original article below
Update: There’s been a ton of response to the vote today.
The New York Times has a thorough story on the vote that says boycott is catching on– “a growing movement to isolate Israel over its treatment of Palestinians”– even though some allege anti-Semitism.
The Times actually mentions the BDS movement (usually marginalized) and notes that a measure is coming up at the Modern Language Association next month to criticize Israel for its restrictions on Palestinian movement. And the Times suggests that PA President Mahmoud Abbas came out against the ASA resolution (though that’s not quite what he did).
Also, Jeffrey Goldberg, discounting the historical use of boycott to fight injustice, says the vote smells of anti-Semitism:
I believe that we will one day see groups such as the ASA call for the boycott of American institutions and individuals who support Israel. Such a campaign would represent a logical extension of the boycott ratified this weekend. Yes, a boycott of businesses owned by pro-Israel American Jews would have a special odor about it, but really, doesn’t the ASA boycott have something of the same smell?
Original post: This press release just went out from the American Studies Association:
ASA MEMBERSHIP ENDORSES ACADEMIC BOYCOTT OF ISRAEL
The members of the American Studies Association have endorsed the Association’s participation in a boycott of Israeli academic institutions. In an election that attracted 1252 voters, the largest number of participants in the organization’s history, the majority of votes (66%) supported the boycott. The election was a response to the ASA National Council’s announcement on December 4 that it supported the academic boycott and, in an unprecedented action to ensure a democratic process, asked its membership for their approval. Please see the ASA website for a collection of supporting documents, including FAQs, and boycott guidelines.
One year ago, the ASA Executive Committee was asked to consider a resolution from the Academic and Community Activism Caucus of the Association. The EC then forwarded the resolution to the National Council and, following a lengthy period of careful deliberations, the Council unanimously voted to draft a revised resolution and to recommend members endorse it.
The resolution is in solidarity with scholars and students deprived of their academic freedom and it aspires to enlarge that freedom for all, including Palestinians. The ASA’s endorsement of the academic boycott emerges from the context of US military and other support for Israel; Israel’s violations of international law and UN resolutions; the documented impact of the Israeli occupation on Palestinian scholars and students; the extent to which Israeli institutions of higher education are a party to state policies that violate human rights; and finally, the support of such a resolution by a majority of ASA members.
The National Council engaged and addressed questions and concerns of the membership throughout the process. During the open discussion at the recent convention, members asked us to draft a resolution that was relevant to the ASA in particular and so the Council’s final resolution acknowledged that the US plays a significant role in enabling the Israeli occupation of Palestine. Members asked for clarification about how the resolution would affect the ability of ASA members to engage with colleagues in Israel, and the Council developed guidelines specifying that collaboration on research and publications between individual scholars does not fall under the ASA boycott. Members asked us to deliberate carefully and consider diverse opinions and the Council thus deliberated for 8 days. Members asked that we create spaces for discussion and the Council established a lively Facebook page. Finally, members asked the National Council to put the resolution to a vote and the Council listened.
The ASA National Council thanks all who took seriously the task of debating and discussing the resolution. As the nation’s oldest and largest association devoted to the interdisciplinary study of American culture and history, the Association’s mission includes the ongoing study and discussion of pressing issues faced by the US and the world. As part of that process and in keeping with the ASA’s commitment to academic freedom, we are thus pleased to announce plans to bring Israeli and Palestinian academics to the 2014 national convention in Los Angeles.
The ASA National Council
The boycott vote had been anticipated inside the organizational Jewish community, which was “glum” but prepared to downplay the vote’s consequences.
The ASA also released these stirring statements with its announcement. Scholars cite the genocide of Native Americans, Jim Crow, Vietnam War protests, and the teachings of Edward Said as precedents for this historic decision.
ENDORSEMENTS
Eric Cheyfitz, Ernest I. White Professor of American Studies and Humane Letters, Cornell University:
“I am a Jew with a daughter and three grandchildren who are citizens of Israel. I am a scholar of American Indian and Indigenous studies, who has in published word and action opposed settler colonialism wherever it exists, including of course the Palestinian West Bank, Gaza, and East Jerusalem. It is worth noting in this respect that just as the myth of American exceptionalism seeks to erase the genocide and ongoing settler colonialism of Indigenous peoples here in the United States so the myth of Israeli exceptionalism seeks to erase Israeli colonialism in Palestine and claim original rights to Palestinian lands. It is from these personal and professional positions that I applaud the decision of the NC to support the academic boycott of Israel, which I support, and urge ASA members to affirm that support with their votes.”
Angela Y. Davis, Distinguished Professor Emerita, UC Santa Cruz:
“The similarities between historical Jim Crow practices and contemporary regimes of segregation in Occupied Palestine make this resolution an ethical imperative for the ASA. If we have learned the most important lesson promulgated by Dr. Martin Luther King — that justice is always indivisible — it should be clear that a mass movement in solidarity with Palestinian freedom is long overdue.”
Ashley Dawson, Professor, College of Staten Island; editor, AAUP Journal of Academic Freedom:
“I am in favor of the boycott. As someone born in South Africa during the darkest days of apartheid, I simply cannot cleave to an abstract notion of academic freedom that ignores the material inequalities that structure people’s rights to speak and to be heard. As Robin D. G. Kelley and Erica Lorraine Williams remind us in their eloquent commemoration of Nelson Mandela, Israel’s settler colonial policies have created conditions for Palestinians that bear close comparison with those meted out by the apartheid regime in my homeland. These conditions directly impinge on the academic freedom, as well as the life possibilities, of Palestinian intellectuals.” (From Editor’s closing Statement, AAUP Journal of Academic Freedom, 2013)
Robin D.G. Kelley, Gary B. Nash Professor of American History, UCLA:
“The ASA Resolution supporting a boycott of Israeli academic institutions has been grossly mischaracterized as an assault on academic freedom. On the contrary, it is one of the most significant affirmative acts any scholarly organization has proposed in defense of academic freedom since the anti-apartheid movement. Palestinian students and faculty living under occupation do not enjoy academic freedom, let alone the full range of basic human rights. Even the critics of the Resolution recognize this fact and are quick to proclaim their concern over Israel’s occupation and the plight of Palestinians. However, they argue that the boycott would, in turn, punish Israeli academics unfairly. But the truth is, Israeli scholars also suffer under the current status quo. They are denied genuine collaborative relationships with intellectuals in the Occupied Territories and Gaza, and Israeli intellectuals critical of the regime’s policies—most famously historian Ilan Pappe—have been harassed, censored, and in some cases forced into exile. Much like the academic boycott of South Africa during the apartheid era, the point of the resolution is to pressure academic institutions and the state, complicit in the policies of occupation, dispossession, and segregation to comply with international law and make real academic freedom possible. The lessons from South Africa are very clear: boycott forced complacent academics to rethink their personal and institutional relationship to apartheid, to talk to each other across the color line, and to better understand how their own work relates to social justice. If adopted, the ASA Resolution will create the conditions for genuine intellectual exchange, free of the state’s political imperative to legitimize the occupation, and grounded in a politics of inclusion, justice, and equality.”
David Lloyd, Distinguished Professor of English, UC Riverside:
“The resolution that ASA has endorsed responds to the call for boycott, divestment and sanctions made by the great majority of Palestinian civil society organizations. It represents the ASA’s recognition that in any act of global solidarity, we should follow the initiative of those who are oppressed, much as US civil society did in following the lead of the ANC in opposing South African Apartheid. The ASA is proud to be the second US academic organization to pass such a resolution and believes that in doing so it has significantly furthered the awareness that, no less than any other group, Palestinians scholars and students are fully entitled to enjoy the fundamental rights of academic and other universally recognized freedoms.
“The boycott targets institutions, not individual scholars. It leaves individuals free to enjoy the benefits of academic freedom, regardless of their nationality, ethnicity or religion, and seeks to extend those benefits to all scholars without condition. The boycott thus extends academic freedom to Palestinian scholars without denying it to Jewish scholars, Israeli or otherwise. It targets institutions on the basis of what they do not what they are: it does not target them because they are Jewish or Israeli, but because of their complicity in Israel’s systemic and ongoing violations of human rights and international law. These are practices, and therefore capable of termination or modification. What would be truly anti-Semitic would be to accept that all Jews are de facto identified with a single state and its policies.
“By definition, the study of America includes both the study of its own colonial and imperial past and the study of its international relations. No state has benefited more in recent decades from US material and political support than Israel and perhaps no people has been more continuously impacted by US global interests than the Palestinians. The US relation to Israel/Palestine is therefore not only a relevant but a pressing object of analysis for American Studies. The boycott resolution is in keeping with the Association’s long-standing ethical commitment to translating analysis into morally informed action (from condemnation of the war on Iraq to support for hotel workers).
“The ASA’s members have learnt and taught that every substantial advance in real and material freedom for people subject to racism, colonization and discrimination has come through intellectual analysis that finds expression in practice and in the alliance with social movements working for justice. No more than political freedom is academic freedom the private possession of the privileged. It has meaning only if it is translated into action and only if we are not afraid to translate our understanding into collective action for justice. The boycott is in fundamental agreement with these principles and therefore with those that inform the ASA.”
Lisa Lowe, Professor, Tufts University:
“The collective practice of non-cooperation with institutions has a long distinguished international history, and the ASA resolution on the academic boycott of Israel situates itself squarely in this tradition. Moreover, it is a mode of engaging both U.S. and Israeli publics to discuss, deliberate, and grapple with responsibility and complicity in the ongoing conditions suffered by Palestinian people in the occupied territories. By putting the resolution to a vote now, the ASA expresses its view that it is no longer possible for academics of conscience to stand on the sidelines. The vote on the resolution calls on us to reckon with our implication in the unjust treatment of this people, and of the many people, dispossessed and dehumanized by military occupation.”
Alex Lubin, Associate Professor of American Studies, American University of Beirut and on-leave, University of New Mexico:
“Academic freedom means very little when it takes place in a context of segregation and apartheid. Change came to the Jim Crow South not through academic dialogue, but through protest and, in some cases, through boycotts of the institutions that fostered segregation. Change came to South Africa’s apartheid system not through academic dialogue, but through protest, resistance, and an international boycott. Those of us who value academic freedom must always struggle to ensure that the world surrounding academia provides the basic human rights that enable academic life. (Published in the Nation, December 13, 2013)
“The boycott resolution is intended to address a profound case of discrimination against Palestinians and is consistent with the ASA’s previous endorsement of anti-racist positions in other areas. The resolution does not target Israelis, Jews, or any individuals; indeed, the ASA’s support for the boycott affirms its opposition to all forms of racial discrimination, including, but not limited to, anti-Semitism and Islamophobia.
“The boycott targets Israeli State institutions that violate Palestinian academic freedom. The resolution very clearly does not infringe on individuals’ academic or other freedoms. Israeli and Palestinian scholars will not only be welcome at future ASA conference, they will also be recruited. In this way, the ASA will make clear in words and deeds that while it will ask its members to not travel to, nor to establish institutional affiliations with, Israeli institutions the boycott is not against individuals.
“This has been a clarifying moment for the American Studies Association; indeed, it is a profound example of what the American Studies scholar, Gene Wise, once called a “paradigm drama.” Long-time ASA members and recent ones, graduate students and emeriti faculty, could be found on either side of this issue. While I feel strongly that the ASA made the right decision to support the boycott resolution, I recognize that many colleagues disagree. In no way should the passage of this resolution exclude or marginalize ASA members who opposed it. The boycott resolution is not about severing intellectual connections or shutting down conversation; it is about extending academic freedom and enabling free speech.”
David Palumbo Liu, Louise Hewitt Nixon Professor, Stanford University:
“People who truly believe in academic freedom would realize protesting the blatant and systemic denial of academic freedom to Palestinians, which is coupled with material deprivation of a staggering scale, far outweighs concerns we in the West might have about our own rather privileged academic freedoms.
“There is no restriction whatsoever of individuals’ academic freedom–this is a boycott by an academic organization against academic institutions in Israel. Individual ASA members are to follow their consciences; both Israeli and Palestinian scholars are invited to participate in ASA events.”
Fred Moten, Professor, University of California, Riverside:
“If, by academic freedom, we mean the unfettered exercise and exchange of speech, thought and research by every member of the global academic community, including both Israelis and Palestinians, then the ASA’s endorsement of the call for boycott and sanctions of Israeli academic institutions complicit in the administration of the illegal occupation of Palestinian lands is a significant advance in our assertion and protection of it. The responsibility of intellectuals is not only to exercise academic freedom but also to theorize and work to enact the conditions that make it possible, meaningful and universal. Thought is irreducibly social, irreducibly public, irreducibly human. When we callously accede to the exclusion of so many from the conditions that foster its free exercise we violate our own commitment to fulfill its responsibilities. The global history of settler colonialism is the history of the administration of such exclusion. Those of us who study the history and culture of the United States of America know that it has played and continues to play a major part in this tragic and brutal history, both within its own borders and everywhere it seeks to extend, consolidate and instrumentalize its power. In endorsing the call for boycott that first emanated from Palestinian civil society but is increasingly echoed by Israeli activists and intellectuals concerned with the moral and political sustainability of their country, we recognize that what it is to be a friend of the state of Israel and what it is to insist upon the right of the Jewish people to live and thrive in a just world are two entirely different things. There is and can be no such world in the absence of the Palestinians’ right to live and thrive as well. Israeli intellectuals Adi Ophir and Ariella Azoulay’s description of the occupation and its administration as a practice of incorporative exclusion is apt not only with regard to Israeli policy but with regard to American policy as well. My support of the ASA’s position is animated by the hope that this endorsement refreshes our capacity to think, speak and act against the structures and effects of incorporative exclusion that viciously shape and define the modern world.”
Barbara Ransby, Professor, University of Illinois at Chicago:
“Professional organizations and individual scholars not only have the right but the obligation to speak out against what we deem to be unethical practices by our institutions and the Academy in general. Moreover, it would be a gross violation of academic freedom to punish any individual professor for expressing his or her political views or critical analysis on a controversial issue. During the McCarthy era intellectuals were persecuted and blacklisted for their left-wing views. In the Jim Crow South faculty members lost their jobs for supporting the Civil Rights Movement and opposing racism and segregation. Censorship and political intimidation was wrong then and it is wrong now. Today many academics, after much reading, research, debate and deliberation, have decided to support BDS as a nonviolent response to the unjust treatment of our colleagues and counterparts, students and others living under Israeli Occupation in Palestine. I applaud and support the American Studies Association in its ethical stance on this issue, an issue which in the final analysis, is not mainly about Jews or Palestinians, but about justice.”
John Carlos Rowe, Professor, University of Southern California:
“I realize this is a controversial resolution, but it is in keeping with our activist history. It is not directed at individual citizens and academics in Israel, but at academic institutions that have been demonstrated time and again their complicity with state policies intended to discriminate against the Palestinian people. During the anti-Vietnam War demonstrations, we attempted and in some cases successfully closed American colleges and universities because they were part of the military-industrial complex. This resolution does the same kind of work. During the Divestment campaign to prevent retirement (and other) funds from being invested in companies doing business with Apartheid South Africa, we recognized the importance of what was at the time termed ‘symbolic action.’ (In fact, divestment resulted in real economic consequences for South Africa). This resolution does the same work.“
Neferti X. M. Tadiar, Professor, Barnard College:
“The overwhelming support for this resolution heralds a new era of anti-racist, anti-colonial solidarity. It signals an American Studies unafraid to challenge some of the most hallowed underpinnings of global empire, including the imperative to uphold formal freedoms regardless of the dispossession and violence on which those freedoms depend. It is evident that the resolution’s passing has already generated a level of intellectual inquiry, engagement and exchange that is invigorating not only for the academic field but also for the broader arenas of public debate and political action.”
Robert Warrior, Professor, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign:
“This resolution achieves the clarity of balance that Edward Said, who was one of my teachers in graduate school, modeled at the intersection of scholarship and imperialism. I am proud to have the leaders of our association not only endorse the Palestinian call to academic and cultural boycott, but to advance our understanding of how to do so through a long, clear, and democratic process that has invited broad and lively participation.”
The New York Times has a thorough story on the vote that says boycott is catching on– “a growing movement to isolate Israel over its treatment of Palestinians”– even though some allege anti-Semitism.
The Times actually mentions the BDS movement (usually marginalized) and notes that a measure is coming up at the Modern Language Association next month to criticize Israel for its restrictions on Palestinian movement. And the Times suggests that PA President Mahmoud Abbas came out against the ASA resolution (though that’s not quite what he did).
Also, Jeffrey Goldberg, discounting the historical use of boycott to fight injustice, says the vote smells of anti-Semitism:
I believe that we will one day see groups such as the ASA call for the boycott of American institutions and individuals who support Israel. Such a campaign would represent a logical extension of the boycott ratified this weekend. Yes, a boycott of businesses owned by pro-Israel American Jews would have a special odor about it, but really, doesn’t the ASA boycott have something of the same smell?
Original post: This press release just went out from the American Studies Association:
ASA MEMBERSHIP ENDORSES ACADEMIC BOYCOTT OF ISRAEL
The members of the American Studies Association have endorsed the Association’s participation in a boycott of Israeli academic institutions. In an election that attracted 1252 voters, the largest number of participants in the organization’s history, the majority of votes (66%) supported the boycott. The election was a response to the ASA National Council’s announcement on December 4 that it supported the academic boycott and, in an unprecedented action to ensure a democratic process, asked its membership for their approval. Please see the ASA website for a collection of supporting documents, including FAQs, and boycott guidelines.
One year ago, the ASA Executive Committee was asked to consider a resolution from the Academic and Community Activism Caucus of the Association. The EC then forwarded the resolution to the National Council and, following a lengthy period of careful deliberations, the Council unanimously voted to draft a revised resolution and to recommend members endorse it.
The resolution is in solidarity with scholars and students deprived of their academic freedom and it aspires to enlarge that freedom for all, including Palestinians. The ASA’s endorsement of the academic boycott emerges from the context of US military and other support for Israel; Israel’s violations of international law and UN resolutions; the documented impact of the Israeli occupation on Palestinian scholars and students; the extent to which Israeli institutions of higher education are a party to state policies that violate human rights; and finally, the support of such a resolution by a majority of ASA members.
The National Council engaged and addressed questions and concerns of the membership throughout the process. During the open discussion at the recent convention, members asked us to draft a resolution that was relevant to the ASA in particular and so the Council’s final resolution acknowledged that the US plays a significant role in enabling the Israeli occupation of Palestine. Members asked for clarification about how the resolution would affect the ability of ASA members to engage with colleagues in Israel, and the Council developed guidelines specifying that collaboration on research and publications between individual scholars does not fall under the ASA boycott. Members asked us to deliberate carefully and consider diverse opinions and the Council thus deliberated for 8 days. Members asked that we create spaces for discussion and the Council established a lively Facebook page. Finally, members asked the National Council to put the resolution to a vote and the Council listened.
The ASA National Council thanks all who took seriously the task of debating and discussing the resolution. As the nation’s oldest and largest association devoted to the interdisciplinary study of American culture and history, the Association’s mission includes the ongoing study and discussion of pressing issues faced by the US and the world. As part of that process and in keeping with the ASA’s commitment to academic freedom, we are thus pleased to announce plans to bring Israeli and Palestinian academics to the 2014 national convention in Los Angeles.
The ASA National Council
The boycott vote had been anticipated inside the organizational Jewish community, which was “glum” but prepared to downplay the vote’s consequences.
The ASA also released these stirring statements with its announcement. Scholars cite the genocide of Native Americans, Jim Crow, Vietnam War protests, and the teachings of Edward Said as precedents for this historic decision.
ENDORSEMENTS
Eric Cheyfitz, Ernest I. White Professor of American Studies and Humane Letters, Cornell University:
“I am a Jew with a daughter and three grandchildren who are citizens of Israel. I am a scholar of American Indian and Indigenous studies, who has in published word and action opposed settler colonialism wherever it exists, including of course the Palestinian West Bank, Gaza, and East Jerusalem. It is worth noting in this respect that just as the myth of American exceptionalism seeks to erase the genocide and ongoing settler colonialism of Indigenous peoples here in the United States so the myth of Israeli exceptionalism seeks to erase Israeli colonialism in Palestine and claim original rights to Palestinian lands. It is from these personal and professional positions that I applaud the decision of the NC to support the academic boycott of Israel, which I support, and urge ASA members to affirm that support with their votes.”
Angela Y. Davis, Distinguished Professor Emerita, UC Santa Cruz:
“The similarities between historical Jim Crow practices and contemporary regimes of segregation in Occupied Palestine make this resolution an ethical imperative for the ASA. If we have learned the most important lesson promulgated by Dr. Martin Luther King — that justice is always indivisible — it should be clear that a mass movement in solidarity with Palestinian freedom is long overdue.”
Ashley Dawson, Professor, College of Staten Island; editor, AAUP Journal of Academic Freedom:
“I am in favor of the boycott. As someone born in South Africa during the darkest days of apartheid, I simply cannot cleave to an abstract notion of academic freedom that ignores the material inequalities that structure people’s rights to speak and to be heard. As Robin D. G. Kelley and Erica Lorraine Williams remind us in their eloquent commemoration of Nelson Mandela, Israel’s settler colonial policies have created conditions for Palestinians that bear close comparison with those meted out by the apartheid regime in my homeland. These conditions directly impinge on the academic freedom, as well as the life possibilities, of Palestinian intellectuals.” (From Editor’s closing Statement, AAUP Journal of Academic Freedom, 2013)
Robin D.G. Kelley, Gary B. Nash Professor of American History, UCLA:
“The ASA Resolution supporting a boycott of Israeli academic institutions has been grossly mischaracterized as an assault on academic freedom. On the contrary, it is one of the most significant affirmative acts any scholarly organization has proposed in defense of academic freedom since the anti-apartheid movement. Palestinian students and faculty living under occupation do not enjoy academic freedom, let alone the full range of basic human rights. Even the critics of the Resolution recognize this fact and are quick to proclaim their concern over Israel’s occupation and the plight of Palestinians. However, they argue that the boycott would, in turn, punish Israeli academics unfairly. But the truth is, Israeli scholars also suffer under the current status quo. They are denied genuine collaborative relationships with intellectuals in the Occupied Territories and Gaza, and Israeli intellectuals critical of the regime’s policies—most famously historian Ilan Pappe—have been harassed, censored, and in some cases forced into exile. Much like the academic boycott of South Africa during the apartheid era, the point of the resolution is to pressure academic institutions and the state, complicit in the policies of occupation, dispossession, and segregation to comply with international law and make real academic freedom possible. The lessons from South Africa are very clear: boycott forced complacent academics to rethink their personal and institutional relationship to apartheid, to talk to each other across the color line, and to better understand how their own work relates to social justice. If adopted, the ASA Resolution will create the conditions for genuine intellectual exchange, free of the state’s political imperative to legitimize the occupation, and grounded in a politics of inclusion, justice, and equality.”
David Lloyd, Distinguished Professor of English, UC Riverside:
“The resolution that ASA has endorsed responds to the call for boycott, divestment and sanctions made by the great majority of Palestinian civil society organizations. It represents the ASA’s recognition that in any act of global solidarity, we should follow the initiative of those who are oppressed, much as US civil society did in following the lead of the ANC in opposing South African Apartheid. The ASA is proud to be the second US academic organization to pass such a resolution and believes that in doing so it has significantly furthered the awareness that, no less than any other group, Palestinians scholars and students are fully entitled to enjoy the fundamental rights of academic and other universally recognized freedoms.
“The boycott targets institutions, not individual scholars. It leaves individuals free to enjoy the benefits of academic freedom, regardless of their nationality, ethnicity or religion, and seeks to extend those benefits to all scholars without condition. The boycott thus extends academic freedom to Palestinian scholars without denying it to Jewish scholars, Israeli or otherwise. It targets institutions on the basis of what they do not what they are: it does not target them because they are Jewish or Israeli, but because of their complicity in Israel’s systemic and ongoing violations of human rights and international law. These are practices, and therefore capable of termination or modification. What would be truly anti-Semitic would be to accept that all Jews are de facto identified with a single state and its policies.
“By definition, the study of America includes both the study of its own colonial and imperial past and the study of its international relations. No state has benefited more in recent decades from US material and political support than Israel and perhaps no people has been more continuously impacted by US global interests than the Palestinians. The US relation to Israel/Palestine is therefore not only a relevant but a pressing object of analysis for American Studies. The boycott resolution is in keeping with the Association’s long-standing ethical commitment to translating analysis into morally informed action (from condemnation of the war on Iraq to support for hotel workers).
“The ASA’s members have learnt and taught that every substantial advance in real and material freedom for people subject to racism, colonization and discrimination has come through intellectual analysis that finds expression in practice and in the alliance with social movements working for justice. No more than political freedom is academic freedom the private possession of the privileged. It has meaning only if it is translated into action and only if we are not afraid to translate our understanding into collective action for justice. The boycott is in fundamental agreement with these principles and therefore with those that inform the ASA.”
Lisa Lowe, Professor, Tufts University:
“The collective practice of non-cooperation with institutions has a long distinguished international history, and the ASA resolution on the academic boycott of Israel situates itself squarely in this tradition. Moreover, it is a mode of engaging both U.S. and Israeli publics to discuss, deliberate, and grapple with responsibility and complicity in the ongoing conditions suffered by Palestinian people in the occupied territories. By putting the resolution to a vote now, the ASA expresses its view that it is no longer possible for academics of conscience to stand on the sidelines. The vote on the resolution calls on us to reckon with our implication in the unjust treatment of this people, and of the many people, dispossessed and dehumanized by military occupation.”
Alex Lubin, Associate Professor of American Studies, American University of Beirut and on-leave, University of New Mexico:
“Academic freedom means very little when it takes place in a context of segregation and apartheid. Change came to the Jim Crow South not through academic dialogue, but through protest and, in some cases, through boycotts of the institutions that fostered segregation. Change came to South Africa’s apartheid system not through academic dialogue, but through protest, resistance, and an international boycott. Those of us who value academic freedom must always struggle to ensure that the world surrounding academia provides the basic human rights that enable academic life. (Published in the Nation, December 13, 2013)
“The boycott resolution is intended to address a profound case of discrimination against Palestinians and is consistent with the ASA’s previous endorsement of anti-racist positions in other areas. The resolution does not target Israelis, Jews, or any individuals; indeed, the ASA’s support for the boycott affirms its opposition to all forms of racial discrimination, including, but not limited to, anti-Semitism and Islamophobia.
“The boycott targets Israeli State institutions that violate Palestinian academic freedom. The resolution very clearly does not infringe on individuals’ academic or other freedoms. Israeli and Palestinian scholars will not only be welcome at future ASA conference, they will also be recruited. In this way, the ASA will make clear in words and deeds that while it will ask its members to not travel to, nor to establish institutional affiliations with, Israeli institutions the boycott is not against individuals.
“This has been a clarifying moment for the American Studies Association; indeed, it is a profound example of what the American Studies scholar, Gene Wise, once called a “paradigm drama.” Long-time ASA members and recent ones, graduate students and emeriti faculty, could be found on either side of this issue. While I feel strongly that the ASA made the right decision to support the boycott resolution, I recognize that many colleagues disagree. In no way should the passage of this resolution exclude or marginalize ASA members who opposed it. The boycott resolution is not about severing intellectual connections or shutting down conversation; it is about extending academic freedom and enabling free speech.”
David Palumbo Liu, Louise Hewitt Nixon Professor, Stanford University:
“People who truly believe in academic freedom would realize protesting the blatant and systemic denial of academic freedom to Palestinians, which is coupled with material deprivation of a staggering scale, far outweighs concerns we in the West might have about our own rather privileged academic freedoms.
“There is no restriction whatsoever of individuals’ academic freedom–this is a boycott by an academic organization against academic institutions in Israel. Individual ASA members are to follow their consciences; both Israeli and Palestinian scholars are invited to participate in ASA events.”
Fred Moten, Professor, University of California, Riverside:
“If, by academic freedom, we mean the unfettered exercise and exchange of speech, thought and research by every member of the global academic community, including both Israelis and Palestinians, then the ASA’s endorsement of the call for boycott and sanctions of Israeli academic institutions complicit in the administration of the illegal occupation of Palestinian lands is a significant advance in our assertion and protection of it. The responsibility of intellectuals is not only to exercise academic freedom but also to theorize and work to enact the conditions that make it possible, meaningful and universal. Thought is irreducibly social, irreducibly public, irreducibly human. When we callously accede to the exclusion of so many from the conditions that foster its free exercise we violate our own commitment to fulfill its responsibilities. The global history of settler colonialism is the history of the administration of such exclusion. Those of us who study the history and culture of the United States of America know that it has played and continues to play a major part in this tragic and brutal history, both within its own borders and everywhere it seeks to extend, consolidate and instrumentalize its power. In endorsing the call for boycott that first emanated from Palestinian civil society but is increasingly echoed by Israeli activists and intellectuals concerned with the moral and political sustainability of their country, we recognize that what it is to be a friend of the state of Israel and what it is to insist upon the right of the Jewish people to live and thrive in a just world are two entirely different things. There is and can be no such world in the absence of the Palestinians’ right to live and thrive as well. Israeli intellectuals Adi Ophir and Ariella Azoulay’s description of the occupation and its administration as a practice of incorporative exclusion is apt not only with regard to Israeli policy but with regard to American policy as well. My support of the ASA’s position is animated by the hope that this endorsement refreshes our capacity to think, speak and act against the structures and effects of incorporative exclusion that viciously shape and define the modern world.”
Barbara Ransby, Professor, University of Illinois at Chicago:
“Professional organizations and individual scholars not only have the right but the obligation to speak out against what we deem to be unethical practices by our institutions and the Academy in general. Moreover, it would be a gross violation of academic freedom to punish any individual professor for expressing his or her political views or critical analysis on a controversial issue. During the McCarthy era intellectuals were persecuted and blacklisted for their left-wing views. In the Jim Crow South faculty members lost their jobs for supporting the Civil Rights Movement and opposing racism and segregation. Censorship and political intimidation was wrong then and it is wrong now. Today many academics, after much reading, research, debate and deliberation, have decided to support BDS as a nonviolent response to the unjust treatment of our colleagues and counterparts, students and others living under Israeli Occupation in Palestine. I applaud and support the American Studies Association in its ethical stance on this issue, an issue which in the final analysis, is not mainly about Jews or Palestinians, but about justice.”
John Carlos Rowe, Professor, University of Southern California:
“I realize this is a controversial resolution, but it is in keeping with our activist history. It is not directed at individual citizens and academics in Israel, but at academic institutions that have been demonstrated time and again their complicity with state policies intended to discriminate against the Palestinian people. During the anti-Vietnam War demonstrations, we attempted and in some cases successfully closed American colleges and universities because they were part of the military-industrial complex. This resolution does the same kind of work. During the Divestment campaign to prevent retirement (and other) funds from being invested in companies doing business with Apartheid South Africa, we recognized the importance of what was at the time termed ‘symbolic action.’ (In fact, divestment resulted in real economic consequences for South Africa). This resolution does the same work.“
Neferti X. M. Tadiar, Professor, Barnard College:
“The overwhelming support for this resolution heralds a new era of anti-racist, anti-colonial solidarity. It signals an American Studies unafraid to challenge some of the most hallowed underpinnings of global empire, including the imperative to uphold formal freedoms regardless of the dispossession and violence on which those freedoms depend. It is evident that the resolution’s passing has already generated a level of intellectual inquiry, engagement and exchange that is invigorating not only for the academic field but also for the broader arenas of public debate and political action.”
Robert Warrior, Professor, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign:
“This resolution achieves the clarity of balance that Edward Said, who was one of my teachers in graduate school, modeled at the intersection of scholarship and imperialism. I am proud to have the leaders of our association not only endorse the Palestinian call to academic and cultural boycott, but to advance our understanding of how to do so through a long, clear, and democratic process that has invited broad and lively participation.”
10 dec 2013
Roger Waters, co-founder of Pink Floyd and a prominent supporter of the Palestinian call for boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) on Israel, has openly stated his support of the American Studies Association resolution, currently being voted on, to endorse a boycott of Israeli academic institutions while the occupation of the West Bank and Gaza continue, according to the Electronic Intifada.
Waters’ statement reads:
An Open Letter To All of You In The American Studies Association
I have been reading with growing interest about the American Studies Association’s up coming vote on their resolution to endorse an academic boycott on Israel.
I am just a simple musician, but I have been advocating a cultural boycott of Israel since 2007. I have no words to express my profound support for all of you in the academic world.
Your stand is fundamentally important because it is acknowledged that you can not only feel, but think as well. Steven Hawking’s refusal to go to Israel was a huge statement. We await your vote with bated breath.
Our movement is growing. Obviously we all believe in Universal Human Rights for all The People of the region, and/but we also all know that the Israeli occupation of the West Bank and siege of Gaza is just, plain, wrong.
So, not withstanding the opposition from the other lobby, which I know from personal experience can be formidable,
I stand, in solidarity with you, and the Palestinian people.
Your friend,
Roger Waters
According to the Electronic Intifada, the letter was sent by Waters’ manager, Jim Durning, at the request of ASA member Alex Lubin, associate professor of American Studies at the American University of Beirut and the University of New Mexico.
Waters’ statement reads:
An Open Letter To All of You In The American Studies Association
I have been reading with growing interest about the American Studies Association’s up coming vote on their resolution to endorse an academic boycott on Israel.
I am just a simple musician, but I have been advocating a cultural boycott of Israel since 2007. I have no words to express my profound support for all of you in the academic world.
Your stand is fundamentally important because it is acknowledged that you can not only feel, but think as well. Steven Hawking’s refusal to go to Israel was a huge statement. We await your vote with bated breath.
Our movement is growing. Obviously we all believe in Universal Human Rights for all The People of the region, and/but we also all know that the Israeli occupation of the West Bank and siege of Gaza is just, plain, wrong.
So, not withstanding the opposition from the other lobby, which I know from personal experience can be formidable,
I stand, in solidarity with you, and the Palestinian people.
Your friend,
Roger Waters
According to the Electronic Intifada, the letter was sent by Waters’ manager, Jim Durning, at the request of ASA member Alex Lubin, associate professor of American Studies at the American University of Beirut and the University of New Mexico.
A diplomatic spat has erupted between Israel and Romania after Bucharest reportedly refused to allow Romanian construction workers to be employed in settlements being built in the occupied West Bank.
The row, reported by Israel's military radio on Tuesday, comes in the wake of tensions between Israel and the European Union over new guidelines that bar EU funding for any Israeli entity operating in the occupied Palestinian territories.
Talks with Bucharest on importing Romanian manual labour broke down in 2012, the radio said, but resumed at Israel's initiative after a new Romanian government came to power in May that year.
Differences centre on Bucharest's request that Israel guarantee no Romanian construction workers would be employed on settlements on occupied Palestinian territory that are considered illegal under international law.
There was no immediate comment from the Romanian embassy in Tel Aviv.
It was Israel's second diplomatic row with an EU country this week, following a row with the Netherlands over a new security scanner to be installed on the Israel-Gaza border that Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte was to have inaugurated last Sunday.
The Dutch government had hoped the scanner would serve to facilitate an increase in the export of goods from Gaza to the West Bank, but Israeli officials accused the Dutch of trying to impose "political conditions".
Also on Sunday, Dutch Foreign Minister Frans Timmermans refused to accept an Israeli military escort around Palestinian-ruled areas of the West Bank city of Hebron.
The European Union guidelines, which go into effect in January, ban funding for and financial dealing with projects linked to Jewish settlements in the occupied West Bank and annexed East Jerusalem.
The row, reported by Israel's military radio on Tuesday, comes in the wake of tensions between Israel and the European Union over new guidelines that bar EU funding for any Israeli entity operating in the occupied Palestinian territories.
Talks with Bucharest on importing Romanian manual labour broke down in 2012, the radio said, but resumed at Israel's initiative after a new Romanian government came to power in May that year.
Differences centre on Bucharest's request that Israel guarantee no Romanian construction workers would be employed on settlements on occupied Palestinian territory that are considered illegal under international law.
There was no immediate comment from the Romanian embassy in Tel Aviv.
It was Israel's second diplomatic row with an EU country this week, following a row with the Netherlands over a new security scanner to be installed on the Israel-Gaza border that Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte was to have inaugurated last Sunday.
The Dutch government had hoped the scanner would serve to facilitate an increase in the export of goods from Gaza to the West Bank, but Israeli officials accused the Dutch of trying to impose "political conditions".
Also on Sunday, Dutch Foreign Minister Frans Timmermans refused to accept an Israeli military escort around Palestinian-ruled areas of the West Bank city of Hebron.
The European Union guidelines, which go into effect in January, ban funding for and financial dealing with projects linked to Jewish settlements in the occupied West Bank and annexed East Jerusalem.
5 dec 2013
The American Studies Association leadership announced, Wednesday, that its National Council has unanimously approved a resolution submitted by the Academic and Community Activism Caucus to endorse the Palestinian call for a boycott of Israeli academic institutions.
“We believe that the ASA’s endorsement of a boycott is warranted given US military and other support for Israel; Israel’s violation of international law and UN resolutions; the documented impact of the Israeli occupation on Palestinian scholars and students; the extent to which Israeli institutions of higher education are a party to state policies that violate human rights; and the support of such a resolution by many members of the ASA,” the council's announcement said.
The council is still seeking the support of the group’s entire body. Members have until December 16 to cast their vote. The resolution is very likely to pass given the amount of support it had at the conference, however if the majority of voters reject the decision, it will be withdrawn.
According to the announcement, the decision is limited to a refusal by the Association to enter into "formal collaborations with Israeli academic institutions, or with scholars who are expressly serving as representatives or ambassadors of those institutions, or on behalf of the Israeli government, until Israel ceases to violate human rights and international law."
The report added that the resolution "does not apply to individual Israeli scholars engaged in ordinary forms of academic exchange, including conference presentations, public lectures at campuses, or collaboration on research and publication. The Council also recognizes that individual members will act according to their convictions on these complex matters."
“We believe that the ASA’s endorsement of a boycott is warranted given US military and other support for Israel; Israel’s violation of international law and UN resolutions; the documented impact of the Israeli occupation on Palestinian scholars and students; the extent to which Israeli institutions of higher education are a party to state policies that violate human rights; and the support of such a resolution by many members of the ASA,” the council's announcement said.
The council is still seeking the support of the group’s entire body. Members have until December 16 to cast their vote. The resolution is very likely to pass given the amount of support it had at the conference, however if the majority of voters reject the decision, it will be withdrawn.
According to the announcement, the decision is limited to a refusal by the Association to enter into "formal collaborations with Israeli academic institutions, or with scholars who are expressly serving as representatives or ambassadors of those institutions, or on behalf of the Israeli government, until Israel ceases to violate human rights and international law."
The report added that the resolution "does not apply to individual Israeli scholars engaged in ordinary forms of academic exchange, including conference presentations, public lectures at campuses, or collaboration on research and publication. The Council also recognizes that individual members will act according to their convictions on these complex matters."
28 oct 2013
Mishor Adumim Industrial Zone. After the United States, Europe is the largest purchaser of Israeli products, some of which are produced in the illegal settlements
by Carolin Smith
Europe’s relationship with Israel and its occupation policies is not a straightforward one. The European Union does not acknowledge settlements as legal or part of Israel, yet European companies continue to profit from the economy of the occupation and siege.
Catherine Ashton, the High Representative for Foreign Affairs, does not tire of mentioning the European Union’s refusal to recognise Israeli settlements at official events: “The EU position on settlements, including in East Jerusalem, is clear: they are illegal under international law [and] an obstacle to peace.” However when it comes to taking concrete actions against the occupation, Europe’s role has thus far proven weak.
A recent example of this are the updated guidelines published by the European Commission in July of this year. When the EU announced that it would no longer support illegal Israeli settlements, the Washington Post headlined with “EU takes action”, whereas the majority of European newspapers instead decided to focus their coverage on the declared outrage of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who warned of a deep diplomatic crisis in the event the new guidelines are implemented.
According to the EU, Israeli institutions and organizations that are located inside or operate within territories beyond the 1967 borders will not be eligible for EU-grants, loans or prizes - such as scientific research projects - from 2014 onwards. Furthermore, they demand that in any future agreements with the EU, Israel formally declares that the West Bank, East Jerusalem and Golan Heights are not part of the State of Israel.
“The guidelines are a good message and a first step”, says Aneta Jerska from the European Coordination of Committees and Associations for Palestine (ECCP) in Brussels that represents Palestinian organizations at the European Union. However, she also states that: “The guidelines are very weak and have a lot of gaps. They are not valid for individual member states, the business sector and Israeli individuals.”
Now, only three months after the publication of the guidelines, there is a high risk that, as a consequence of Israel’s heavy bargaining, the new guidelines and conditions will be diluted. Jerska warns that: “Israel wants to achieve an agreement whereby they don’t need to sign a disclosure statement that the settlements are not part of Israel.” The ECCP is currently pressuring the EU not to fold in the face of Israel’s demands.
Even if the guidelines were fully implemented, one key problem would remain: the indirect involvement of European companies. The EU is Israel’s main trading partner; 34.4% of all imports come from, and a quarter of all exports (25.1%) go to Europe. After the United States, Europe is the largest purchaser of Israeli products, some of which are produced in the illegal settlements.
Settlement products however represent only a fraction of the occupation’s economy, “They constitute only a small percentage of the occupation industries. More important are the dozens of companies that build the infrastructure, provide services through machines or operate in the industrial settlements”, points out Rona Moran from Who Profits (www.whoprofits.org), an organization that investigates and researches the profiteers of the occupation.
Moran confirms that many of the 507 companies profiting from the occupation are European. The new fast-train project currently under construction in Israel has, for example, been the recipient of $1.9 billion of investment from European companies. This project represents a critical point in EU companies’ complicity in the occupation as the route of the train - connecting Tel Aviv and Jerusalem - crosses the Green Line and enters Palestinian territory for approximately six kilometres. Even the state-owned German railroad company “Deutsche Bahn” has contributed to the planning process. Only after the German Minister of Transportation interposed did Deutsche Bahn withdraw its assistance in 2011.
Despite the fact that this case has been discussed in the German public arena, some German companies are still engaged in the obviously unlawful railway project today. “Herrenknecht should get more attention”, says Moran. Herrenknecht is a German company based in Schwanau that produces the tunnel-boring machines used in the construction of the fast-train line, “We wrote them an email and informed them of the facts but they didn’t change anything. They know exactly how unlawful this project is”, explains Moran. “H+E Logistik” from Bochum, a full subsidiary of Herrenknecht, provides tunnel belt and conveyor systems as well.
“Some of the companies are multinational global players”, confirms Moran. Siemens, a noted German technology corporation, for instance, delivered traffic control systems for Israeli-only bypass roads in the West Bank. Furthermore, Siemens sold 118 passenger coaches to the Israeli railway corporation, which Who Profits believes will be used for the fast-train. The press department of Siemens, one of the largest technology companies in the world, did not respond to AIC enquiries into these accusations.
It is not only German companies that profit from the occupation, the Belgian Bank “Dexia Group“ holds the majority share of its Israeli branch, “Dexia Israel”, which provides loans to Israeli settlement municipalities. Announcements by the Bank of its intentions to sell its Israeli daughter company have not yet been realized, “They are always announcing the closure, but nothing happens”, says Rona Moran.
Another example is that of “Veolia Environment”, a French company that has been criticized for years because of its role in managing the landfills of settlement waste in the occupied Jordan Valley. Veolia also partially owns the firms that were contracted to build and run the Light Train in Jerusalem, CityPass consortium and Connex Jerusalem. The Light Train was constructed in order to connect illegal settlements to the city of Jerusalem. In 2010, Veolia said it would sell its shares, until now however, nothing has happened. Veolia, much like many other European companies, is still profiting from the occupation – and represents therefor, an obstacle to peace.
by Carolin Smith
Europe’s relationship with Israel and its occupation policies is not a straightforward one. The European Union does not acknowledge settlements as legal or part of Israel, yet European companies continue to profit from the economy of the occupation and siege.
Catherine Ashton, the High Representative for Foreign Affairs, does not tire of mentioning the European Union’s refusal to recognise Israeli settlements at official events: “The EU position on settlements, including in East Jerusalem, is clear: they are illegal under international law [and] an obstacle to peace.” However when it comes to taking concrete actions against the occupation, Europe’s role has thus far proven weak.
A recent example of this are the updated guidelines published by the European Commission in July of this year. When the EU announced that it would no longer support illegal Israeli settlements, the Washington Post headlined with “EU takes action”, whereas the majority of European newspapers instead decided to focus their coverage on the declared outrage of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who warned of a deep diplomatic crisis in the event the new guidelines are implemented.
According to the EU, Israeli institutions and organizations that are located inside or operate within territories beyond the 1967 borders will not be eligible for EU-grants, loans or prizes - such as scientific research projects - from 2014 onwards. Furthermore, they demand that in any future agreements with the EU, Israel formally declares that the West Bank, East Jerusalem and Golan Heights are not part of the State of Israel.
“The guidelines are a good message and a first step”, says Aneta Jerska from the European Coordination of Committees and Associations for Palestine (ECCP) in Brussels that represents Palestinian organizations at the European Union. However, she also states that: “The guidelines are very weak and have a lot of gaps. They are not valid for individual member states, the business sector and Israeli individuals.”
Now, only three months after the publication of the guidelines, there is a high risk that, as a consequence of Israel’s heavy bargaining, the new guidelines and conditions will be diluted. Jerska warns that: “Israel wants to achieve an agreement whereby they don’t need to sign a disclosure statement that the settlements are not part of Israel.” The ECCP is currently pressuring the EU not to fold in the face of Israel’s demands.
Even if the guidelines were fully implemented, one key problem would remain: the indirect involvement of European companies. The EU is Israel’s main trading partner; 34.4% of all imports come from, and a quarter of all exports (25.1%) go to Europe. After the United States, Europe is the largest purchaser of Israeli products, some of which are produced in the illegal settlements.
Settlement products however represent only a fraction of the occupation’s economy, “They constitute only a small percentage of the occupation industries. More important are the dozens of companies that build the infrastructure, provide services through machines or operate in the industrial settlements”, points out Rona Moran from Who Profits (www.whoprofits.org), an organization that investigates and researches the profiteers of the occupation.
Moran confirms that many of the 507 companies profiting from the occupation are European. The new fast-train project currently under construction in Israel has, for example, been the recipient of $1.9 billion of investment from European companies. This project represents a critical point in EU companies’ complicity in the occupation as the route of the train - connecting Tel Aviv and Jerusalem - crosses the Green Line and enters Palestinian territory for approximately six kilometres. Even the state-owned German railroad company “Deutsche Bahn” has contributed to the planning process. Only after the German Minister of Transportation interposed did Deutsche Bahn withdraw its assistance in 2011.
Despite the fact that this case has been discussed in the German public arena, some German companies are still engaged in the obviously unlawful railway project today. “Herrenknecht should get more attention”, says Moran. Herrenknecht is a German company based in Schwanau that produces the tunnel-boring machines used in the construction of the fast-train line, “We wrote them an email and informed them of the facts but they didn’t change anything. They know exactly how unlawful this project is”, explains Moran. “H+E Logistik” from Bochum, a full subsidiary of Herrenknecht, provides tunnel belt and conveyor systems as well.
“Some of the companies are multinational global players”, confirms Moran. Siemens, a noted German technology corporation, for instance, delivered traffic control systems for Israeli-only bypass roads in the West Bank. Furthermore, Siemens sold 118 passenger coaches to the Israeli railway corporation, which Who Profits believes will be used for the fast-train. The press department of Siemens, one of the largest technology companies in the world, did not respond to AIC enquiries into these accusations.
It is not only German companies that profit from the occupation, the Belgian Bank “Dexia Group“ holds the majority share of its Israeli branch, “Dexia Israel”, which provides loans to Israeli settlement municipalities. Announcements by the Bank of its intentions to sell its Israeli daughter company have not yet been realized, “They are always announcing the closure, but nothing happens”, says Rona Moran.
Another example is that of “Veolia Environment”, a French company that has been criticized for years because of its role in managing the landfills of settlement waste in the occupied Jordan Valley. Veolia also partially owns the firms that were contracted to build and run the Light Train in Jerusalem, CityPass consortium and Connex Jerusalem. The Light Train was constructed in order to connect illegal settlements to the city of Jerusalem. In 2010, Veolia said it would sell its shares, until now however, nothing has happened. Veolia, much like many other European companies, is still profiting from the occupation – and represents therefor, an obstacle to peace.
