Donate Shop Register


Clarity on Israel Anti-Boycott Act

Huffpost
Steve Sheffey, Contributor
August 10, 2017

The Israel Anti-Boycott Act was introduced to reinforce bipartisan consensus that boycotting Israel is inimical to U.S. foreign policy interests. The Act simply extends existing U.S. law prohibiting participation in boycotts led by foreign governments against Israel to include boycotts led by international governmental organizations such as the United Nations and the European Union.

The Act should hardly be controversial; the current law passed in 1977. Yet three objections have been raised: that the new law would infringe on free speech, that the new law is confusingly written, and that the new law extends the prohibition to goods manufactured in the West Bank.

The American Civil Liberties Union believes that the law unconstitutionally impairs free speech, but the ACLU is wrong. Both this bill and existing law prohibit specific commercial conduct, not free speech. Any person and any company is free to boycott Israel and to advocate for boycotts of Israel under current law and the proposed law. But cooperation with foreign governments, and under the new law, with international governmental organizations, is prohibited. The same conduct that would be prohibited if done independently of a foreign government is prohibited if done at the behest of a foreign government. Intent matters; intent is a common element of criminal conduct, including hate crimes.

The current prohibition against cooperating with foreign governments to boycott Israel has withstood First Amendment challenges, and so has hate crime legislation. If current law is constitutional, then so is the proposed law.

Some have argued that the new law is hard to understand because it includes numerous cross-references, deletions, and additions. But that is how laws are written, and how they have to be written to fit into existing statutory framework. To suggest that the law was written this way to make it hard to follow reflects either disingenuity or ignorance of the legislative process. Aside from the sloppiness of its legal analysis, perhaps the most disturbing part of the ACLU's position is its benign description of the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions movement, which is a close paraphrase from the description on the BDS website. The BDS movement seeks to delegitimize Israel and advocates for policies that would effectively eliminate Israel as a Jewish state. One would have thought that intellectual honesty would have compelled the ACLU to at least mention the bipartisan concerns about BDS that motivated the Israel Anti-Boycott Act, but one would have been wrong.

The proposed legislation covers boycotts of goods manufactured on the West Bank. But one can vigorously support a two-state solution and see settlements as an obstacle to peace, as I do, and still understand why boycotts of the West Bank are counterproductive. In practice, boycotts of West Bank goods will hurt Israelis and Palestinians on both sides of the green line. More important, those who advocate boycotting West Bank goods assume that all that is needed to reach a two-state solution is pressure on Israel.

Jews and Palestinians are two peoples, each with claims to all of Israel and all of the West Bank. A two-state solution will require both Jews and Palestinians to relinquish their claims to land that they believe is rightfully theirs. Peace will only occur when both sides recognize and act on this reality. Putting pressure only on Israel, as if Israel can unilaterally solve this problem, will only stiffen Israeli resistance and encourage Palestinian intransigence. The path to peace lies in bringing the two sides together and building trust, not in pressuring only one side, as if only that side is wrong and as if that side can act without a partner willing to reciprocate. And yet under the proposed legislation, any American would be free to advocate for and participate in just such a boycott. All that would be prohibited is commercial conduct in compliance with foreign-organized boycotts of Israel.

By including within its purview the West Bank, the Israel Anti-Boycott Act does not legitimize West Bank settlements or represent a change in U.S. policy; the bill itself provides that it shall not “be construed to alter the established policy of the United States or to establish new United States policy concerning final status issues associated with the Arab-Israeli conflict, including border delineation, that can only be resolved through direct negotiations between the parties.”

One can legitimately ask if the proposed legislation could be drafted more clearly or to what extent it responds to a real threat. Those issues can and should be debated in Congress. But the progressive and peace communities should not oppose this bill based on the specious grounds that have thus far been advanced.

Steve Sheffey, Contributor, is a lifelong pro-Israel activist, a progressive Democrat, and will never turn down a cup of coffee or a scoop of chocolate ice cream.



Read the original article here. 

Other stories
1/15/2019
Unfortunately, we really aren`t surprised. Tlaib is turning out to be the exact person we ...
1/15/2019
Congresswoman Tlaib, how can you claim to be on the side of the victim, but then become th...
1/15/2019
Al-Awda co-founder Abbas Hamideh swings back at Criminal Zionists...
1/14/2019
A petition has been launched on the Stop Antisemitism website calling for University of No...
1/14/2019
Anyone who propagates hateful messages is free to express their opinions as they wish, but...
1/14/2019
Jewish Voice for Peace (JVP) tweeted out a defense of Palestinians` “right to resist...
1/10/2019
StandWithUs calls on the University of North Carolina - Asheville (UNCA) to clearly and ex...
1/8/2019
As ambassador, he worked to strengthen the ties between the U.S. and Israel, and was a vis...
1/8/2019
StandWithUs Philadelphia held its third annual Defenders of Israel gala dinner at the Nati...
1/7/2019
(Los Angeles -- January 7th, 2019) -- StandWithUs is proud to announce the launch of Trust...
1/7/2019
StandWithUs, in partnership with the Adam “Veritas” Rosen Foundation, launched...
1/6/2019
StandWithUs supports Israel`s pursuit of $250 billion in compensation for Jewish Refugees...
1/4/2019
The Anti-Defamation League told the Journal in an email that the fact that nine students a...
1/3/2019
Representatives of Rescuers Without Borders (RWB), an Israeli organization that provides e...
12/31/2018
StandWithUs has a new initiative for middle school. “LINK: Discovering Your Israel C...
12/31/2018
The StandWithUs 2019 Israel Fellows - From across the country and society, Israel`s futur...
12/24/2018
If you happen to be Jewish, it`s not just the big things like having to walk by the anti-I...
12/21/2018
The West Hollywood City Council tabled a proposed resolution condemning Airbnb for de-list...
12/21/2018
Ten UC chancellors signed a statement denouncing academic boycotts of Israel at the urging...

 

About Us
Get Involved
Resources
Shop For Israel
Social Media