S. 720 isn’t about Palestinian rights,
it’s about everyone’s rights
This is the moment when we must act together
When indigenous people are still fighting to have their rights to their lands recognized in court, oppressed groups are intentionally and systematically targeted by the President of the United States, and Black and Brown communities are being incarcerated and killed at shocking rates, we as a people must coordinate and utilize all the instruments of nonviolence to produce sustainable social change. The power of economic boycotts, sanctions, and divestment has proven to an invaluable tactic in the pursuit of justice.
Movements of social change have leveraged the power of economic boycotts to successfully apply direct pressure on the beneficiaries of oppression and violence. Boycotts are neither modern nor localized, but rather historical and global. Their successful application has made them a legitimate, universal tactic. The boycotts of Nazi Germany during the 1930’s brought to light the horrendous trajectory of the Nazi regime. The arrest of Rosa Parks in December 1955 and the 13-month Montgomery bus boycott that followed proved to be not only a defining moment in the civil rights movement, but a watershed moment in US history. The international boycott of Apartheid South Africa demonstrated the power of a global movement working to end a cycle of violence inherent in racist systems. The power of economic boycott is not only recognized by nonviolent activists, but it is an adopted strategy for governments as an alternative method of war and a means of policy deployment. Barack Obama utilized economic measurements to strike a deal with Iran on their nuclear development program. Even the National Basketball Association used boycott this past year to reject discriminatory and oppressive policies in North Carolina and decided to move the NBA All-Star game from Charlotte. The utility and effectiveness of this nonviolent tactic is hardly up for debate.
Social activists have long utilized boycott, divestment and sanction strategies as a nonviolent tactic to pressure the Israeli government to follow and implement international standards of human rights and to end a belligerent military occupation of the Palestinian people. The movement has had broad success, ranging from churches, institutions, trade unions and municipalities.
It is within this context that everyone should be alarmed with introduction of S.720 & H.R.1697 — Israel Anti-Boycott Act. Championed by Sens. Ben Cardin (D-MD) and Rob Portman (R-OH), and Reps. Peter Roskam (R-IL) and Juan Vargas (D-CA), this bipartisan legislation aims to cut into the moment of human rights activists gains in their pursuit of securing human rights for Palestinians. According to the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), while it being an obvious direct attack on First Amendment Rights, the “legislation would broaden the law to include penalties for simply requesting information about such boycotts. Violations would be subject to a minimum civil penalty of $250,000 and a maximum criminal penalty of $ 1 million and 20 years in prison.”
In response to this legislation, the ACLU wrote to members of the House to urge them to oppose and refrain from co-sponsoring the Israel Anti-Boycott Act (H.R. 1697). One of their key points in the letter, that have gone under the radar in the analysis of the bill, is that there is already active legislation to combat anti-Semitism and other forms of racial discrimination in regards to business matters, which proponents of this bill have at times argued:
“The ACLU has long supported laws prohibiting discrimination, but this bill cannot fairly be characterized as an anti-discrimination measure, as some would argue. For example, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 already prevents businesses from discriminating against customers based on race, color, religion, and national origin. This bill, on the other hand, aims to punish people who support international boycotts that are meant to protest Israeli government policies, while leaving those who agree with Israeli government policies free from the threat of sanctions for engaging in the exact same behavior. Whatever their merits, such boycotts rightly enjoy First Amendment protection. By penalizing those who support international boycotts of Israel, H.R. 1697 seeks only to punish the exercise of constitutional rights.”
The fighting this law is not just about the realization of Palestinian human rights, it is about rejecting a dangerous precedent. This is not just an attack on one movement, but rather an attack on all movements. Had this law passed a hundred years ago, economic efforts against Nazi Germany would have been stunted. The trajectory of the Civil Rights Movement in the United States would have looked entirely different. The fate of South African Apartheid would be unknown and perpetual war would be our only option.
I’ve been working on and off in the Holy Land since 2005. I’ve worked with ICAHD, DCI-Palestine, and HIRN and the Holy Land Trust. If you like my work and would like to contribute, and have an extra 10 dollars a month? Make a small contribution. You can also email me back at codyorourke@gmail.com.
