The Israeli government sees the idea of a settlement boycott as a farce because it knows how impossible it would be to stop even a targeted boycott from bleeding right through the Green Line it’s been working so hard to erase.
Palestinians wave flags during a protest against the expansion of the Ma’ale Adumim settlement, Al Eizariya, West Bank, February 13, 2014. (photo: Tali Mayer/Activestills.org)
A year after the European Union published guidelines for labeling Israeli settlement products, France last week published its own regulations obligating importers and retailers to label all settlement goods — not just noting that a product comes from the West Bank but that it comes from an Israeli settlement in the West Bank.
Related stories
Israel’s seemingly disproportionate objections to the European labeling regime is difficult to understand for many, especially considering that the EU has for decades differentiated between Israel and its settlements in the occupied territories. The EU free trade agreement with Israel, for instance, does not apply to Israeli settlements, and every other treaty and agreement makes the same distinction.
In France, Israel’s objections are even more confounding considering that actual boycotts of Israel are against the law in that country. So why is Israel making such a big deal out of the settlement product labels?
The brouhaha isn’t actually about labels. It’s about the next logical step of a labeling regime or even a boycott of settlement products: boycotting, divesting and sanctioning entities that do business in or with the settlements.
That deeply worries Israeli decision makers because in reality there is no differentiation between the economy of Israel and the settlement economy. On the ground, in the financial system, and in countless other ways, there is no Green Line as far as the Israeli economy is concerned.
The same Israeli banks that give homeowners and real estate developers mortgages and loans in Tel Aviv also finance the development and purchase of homes in West Bank settlements. The same cellular companies that provide service in Haifa build cellular towers in illegal settlement outposts in the West Bank. The same supermarkets and pharmacies and gas stations that serve Be’er Sheva also have branches in settlements throughout the West Bank. And the same police department that patrols the streets of Caesarea also enforces segregation on the streets of Hebron.
Jewish settlers clean the newly harvested grapes at a winery in the West Bank settlement of Gush Etzion, September 8, 2014. (Gershon Elinson/Flash90)
Boycotting a farmer from Tekoa, a winery in Psagot, or a factory in Mishor Adomim might make the decision to locate a business beyond the Green Line less profitable, and perhaps even spur a decision to move shop. If global financial institutions were to cut ties with the Israeli banks that finance construction in those same settlements, however, the effect on the Israeli economy could be far more devastating.
If cellular companies were unable to sign roaming agreements overseas, petrol companies unable to buy gasoline, retailers unable to import goods — then a settlement boycott might start to make the settlement enterprise a liability for all of Israel, on both sides of the Green Line.
That is not happening, though. Even with the European guidelines and labeling regimes and differentiation mechanisms, the settlement enterprise is still more of an asset than a liability. As Noam Sheizaf explained here, in many ways the occupation is actually a source of income and profit for Israel.
Israeli companies extract natural resources like stone, gravel and water from the West Bank. Instead of having to purchase land, military seizure orders are used to increase the housing supply and build segregated highways, creating subsidized commuter suburbs for Jerusalem and Tel Aviv. And the occupied Palestinian population becomes a virtual captive market for Israeli products.
Palestinian protesters together with international and Israeli activists break into Rami Levi supermarket, located in the Sha’ar Binyamin settlement, to protest the Israeli occupation and to call for a boycott against Israelis settlements, October 24, 2012. (photo by: Yotam Ronen/Activestills.org)
Israel is worried about a settlement boycott because not only is the settlement economy virtually inseparable from the Israeli economy, the occupation is part of the Israeli economy. Blurring whatever remains — or once existed — of the line distinguishing the two has been one of the Netanyahu government’s greatest projects.
As I noted earlier this month, a government interested in eventually withdrawing from the West Bank to allow the creation of a Palestinian state would not speak openly about annexing major settlements or the majority of the Palestinian territories; it wouldn’t be announcing plans to lay rail lines connecting settlements to Jerusalem. A prime minister interested in withdrawing from the West Bank wouldn’t say he is the best friend the settlements will ever have.
The truth is that Israel’s settlements are not only an inextricable part of the Israeli economy, they have become an inextricable part of Israel, at least as far as the current leadership sees things. Israeli leaders see the idea of a limited boycott of the settlements alone as a farce because they know it would bleed right through the Green Line they’ve been working so hard to erase.
For additional original analysis and breaking news, visit +972 Magazine's Facebook page or follow us on Twitter. Our newsletter features a comprehensive round-up of the week's events. Sign up here.
R5
This basically makes the argument against boycotting settlements, as far as the US public is concerned, and probably most Europeans too. You won’t find consensus around boycotting those who “profit from” the occupation, since this idea is open to interpretations that BDS activists have already adopted which are beyond the pale. Its frustrating that +972 is working harder than ever to marginalize the moderates and pragmatists who might some day be capable of making real change. You’re closer allies to the settlers than the centrists. I’ve said this for years and the increasing polarization on Israel/Palestine keeps proving me right. You think you can run an economic bulldozer over Israeli Jews’ instinct to preserve their security and way of life. Like your delusional, self-important sponsors, you are utterly wrong.
karel von Mcdaniel
Adverse possession is the premise of settlements. Settlement has as configured a characterization of a benignity when outright plunder is the true name for the event. The US has cloaked similar policies, viz. Standing Rock, as the inscrutable, incontestable,state supported functioning of a democratic regime. Derivative wealth, whether Sunoco shareholders or “settlers”, is not an a priori, does not suppose, yet presumes, a defense for its existence, and is not to be moderated, but quashed by available means. Stand Up for Standing Rock and the People of Palestine
Bruce Gould
People make money from the occupation – “How Israel Is Gradually Privatising Its Occupation of Palestine”, from Global Research:
“For years, these checkpoints were manned by personnel from the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) and the Israeli Border Police. But starting in January 2006, gun-toting private security guards joined the soldiers and police. Today, there are 12 checkpoints in the West Bank and two on the Gaza border that use such guards. Israel is slowly privatizing its occupation..The country’s military establishment is both privatizing the weapons sector and selling this technology abroad. Israeli writer and activist Jeff Halper argues in his book War Against the People: Israel, the Palestinians and the Global Pacification (2015) that the occupation isn’t a burden for Israel but a “resource,” because it gives the Jewish state the opportunity to test weapons and surveillance in the field on Palestinians..”
http://www.globalresearch.ca/how-israel-is-gradually-privatising-its-occupation-of-palestine/5554217
AJew
“the occupation isn’t a burden for Israel but a “resource,” because it gives the Jewish state the opportunity to test weapons and surveillance in the field on Palestinians..”
Oh dear. So why don’t the “palestinians” sign a peace deal with Israel and end the occupation? All they have to do is recognise Israel as the nation state of the Jewish people. But they don’t want to do that Bruce. Why? Why don’t they want to do it? Could it be because you people convinced them that if they keep the occupation going they have a path to total victory? That Israel would become another South Africa?
Of course Bruce, both you and I know that it won’t happen. We have never been, nor are we, nor will we ever be anything like South Africa. Why do you and people like you insist in fooling them Bruce?
Bruce Gould
“So why don’t the “palestinians” sign a peace deal with Israel and end the occupation? All they have to do is recognise Israel as the nation state of the Jewish people. But they don’t want to do that Bruce. Why? Why don’t they want to do it?”
Because doing that would undermine the rights of the Israeli-Palestinians even more. Because there’s nothing in international law that makes such a recognition meaningful. Because there’s no quid-pro-quo – Netanyahu has never announced what he will give in return; he only says that it’s “needed”. Because it’s so vague it would give Israel claim to areas it claims were given to The Jews by God. Duh.
AJew
Nonsense Bruce and you know that you speak nonsense.
There are hundreds of ethnic nation states in existence. Some oppress minorities (look up most Arab countries) some don’t.
Even if you think that Israel would be like the Arabs and would oppress it’s Arab minority even during peace time, it begs the question: what have they got to lose? Are you saying that under the current occupation regime, the Arabs are not oppressed? Even I admit that they are oppressed because being in the current state of war with them, if we wouldn’t oppress them they would murder even more Israeli civilians and committ even more terrorist acts against us than they already do.
So again, Bruce, what have they got to lose by signing a peace deal? They could only end up being better off, not worse off. Anything else is just an excuse. An excuse to continue their 100 year war against us and to try to achieve total victory over us. But that won’t ever happen. You do know that Bruce? Don’t you? So why are you coming up with such a pathetic excuse for not signing a peace deal?
AJew
“Because there’s nothing in international law that makes such a recognition meaningful.”
No but we insist on it if they want an end to the occupation. Why do we insist on it? We insist on it because by formally recognising the nation state of the JEWISH people they will signify that they give up their 100 year struggle to try to wipe the Jewish state off the map. Let me give you an analogy:
If you attack me with a shovel claiming that the clothes and shoes that I am wearing are yours, not mine, and that I stole them from you. If I manage to take the shovel off you and you start yelling that I am even a bigger thief now and that I must return the shovel to you immediately. Would you blame me if I would insist that before returning the shovel to you, you must promise not to attack me with it again? Would you blame me for it? If you would, and if you would be me and would be willing to return the shovel unconditionally, I guarantee that you’d end up stripped naked and badly beaten up.
“Because there’s no quid-pro-quo – Netanyahu has never announced what he will give in return;”
Excuse me? What planet are you on? The quid quo pro would be the end of the occupation and the formation of a Palestinian state on the West Bank and Gaza. What more do you want? Do you too want what the Palestinian Arabs still want? Our withdrawal from Israel proper too? Well Bruce, that ain’t gonna happen.
Tommy Goldberg
“All they have to do is recognise Israel as the nation state of the Jewish people.”
You don’t even believe this yourself, do you? Recognizing an explicitly Jewish state (instead of simply recognizing Israel, which the P.A. has long done) was NEVER even an issue in all previous negotiations (before Bibi), which nevertheless fell apart. Why did those previous negotiations fail?
If Israeli governments are genuinely interested in negotiating a settlement (instead of merely the perception of working toward a settlement), they’re the worst negotiators in the world. If Israeli governments were in fact prepared to offer something anywhere close to what observers would consider a fair deal, why only offer it in secret, take-it-or-leave-it style, and snatch it away for years and years if the P.A. wants to mull it for a bit?
Why not just publish what you are about to offer? If fair and rejected by the P.A., world support for the Palestinian cause would justifiably collapse.
i_like_ike52
It was Olmert, not Netanyahu, who first insisted on recognizing Israel as the state of the Jewish people. The reason he demanded it was because he was prepared to accept virtually all the territorial demands of the Palestinian, accepting the “right of return of the refugees at least in principle , and including giving up the Jewish holy places like the Western Wall and Jewish Quarter of the Old City in Jerulaem, and realizing that would not be popular, he wanted for the Palestinians to go on record as officially accepting what was left of Israel being part of a Jewish state and ending all further claims. Since the Palestinians will never recognize any Jewish rights in the country, and since this non-recognition is more important than merely “ending the (1967) occupation”, but not ending the 1948 occupation, they will never agree to such terms. The status quo is preferable to them.
Carmen
Thanks for this link; I’m going to share this far and wide. Follow the money and find the answer to the continuation of the status quo. Money really is the root of most, if not all, evil.
Mike Hamblett
Yep, the only way to be sure is to boycott all Israeli products. BDS achieved a miracle in South Africa – peacefully.
betz55
Demographic trends mean that Israel can’t have it all.
It can’t be a Jewish state, a democratic state, and a state in control of its whole historical land.It can only have two of its objectives at a time.
Israel can be Jewish and territorial — but not democratic.
Or it can be democratic and territorial — but not Jewish.
Or finally, it can be Jewish and democratic — but not territorial.
The Palestinians formally recognized both the reality of the state of Israel and “its right to live in peace and security” as per the September 9, 1993 letter from Chairman Arafat to Prime Minister Rabin and the subsequent double amendment of the PLO’s Charter in 1996 and 1999. The ridiculous ‘Jewish State’ request by nothingyahoo is a red herring designed to stop all negotiations. Period.
Please tell me, how do you get 20 percent of your population that is subjugated by Zionism to subscribe to Zionism?
What they cannot be expected to do is to renege on their past, deny their identity, and give up on what they believe is their history. They cannot be expected to become Zionists.
The Palestinians cannot be expected to do is to renege on their past, deny their identity, and give up on what they believe is their history. They cannot be expected to become Zionists. Would a jew give up their religion? No? Why should the Palestinians.
AJew
Let’s see. Let’s see what the take home message from what Betz55 says:
1. Betz seems to be predicting a dire future for us. He says: Listen Israelis: ‘heads’ you lose or ‘tails’ the Arabs win.
2. Hey Israelis, you have to be considerate of Arab sensitivities but Arabs don’t have to be considerate to your sensitivities.
Ok, we hear ya, Betz. But hey we don’t agree with you or the rules that you seem to want to impose on us. Do you blame us? You don’t have to answer my rhetorical question, Betz.
Lewis from Afula
Yes, it cam be Jewish, Democratic and cover all the Land.
Once France and other West European states start mass repatriations of their Arabs, Israel will can join in?.
The situation in Europe is slowly deteriorating. Did you know that there were major riots in Central Paris last night?
Of course not, the mainstream news outlets do not report these things!