IPSC Stall in Dublin - Supporting Palestinian Human Rights

by TD - Ireland-Palestine Solidarity Campaign Sun Nov 25, 2007 16:03

The mountain went into labor, then it gave birth to a rat (Arab proverb)
"Let me, O let me bathe my soul in colours; let me swallow the sunset and drink the rainbow"
(From a November 8, 1908 letter to Mary Haskell from Lebanese poet, Kahlil Gibran).

From Annapolis, from the forthcoming hollow conference of straw men, no exultation of joy and hope is going to be shouted for Palestine, only, by and by, the continuing "Obliteration of an entire people by slow systematic methods of suffocation, outright murder and the stifling of everyday life" (Edward Said) and the obscene "attempt once again the fraud perpetrated on the American people and the United Nations that Israel is sincere in wanting peace" (William A. Cook) http://counterpunch.org/cook11232007.html

However, Galway IPSC is not prepared to stand idly-by wringing our hands witnessing the shabby theatrics of Oslo; Deja Vu MK2 from afar, instead, yesterday, we manned a stall outside Lynch's castle, Shop street for seven hours; dispensing information leaflets encouraging shoppers to boycott Israeli goods retailed for instance by Atlantic Homecare, Woodie's DIY and B&Q and Israeli agricultural foodstuffs sold by Tescos, Dunnes and Supervalu and harvesting signatures for our Boycott Israeli Blood Diamonds petition to the Retail Jewellers of Ireland.

Only a guaranteed false dawn and bum rush for Palestine over in Annapolis, but at least, in Galway, we work towards the realization of Arthur Rimbaud's hope for the future; the time we are enamoured of, the New Jerusalem, where all hearts meet, all wines flow?.

No "Nollaig Shona" for Palestine this Xmas, only Israel's ever-tightening Iron Fist around her throat?

by Nodin Sun Nov 25, 2007 22:43

Fair play. Keep up the good work.

by Nodin Sun Nov 25, 2007 22:45

Is this to be a regular thing..?

by Michael Martin Sun Nov 25, 2007 23:48

For more information about Israeli politics click on link

by the digger Mon Nov 26, 2007 08:39

If Palesitnians hadn't insisted on wearing clothing by semtex and detonating themsleves in cafes, bars and buses (the not-so-smart bombs) then the wall would not have been necessary.

And if Hamas recognised the State of Israel, and called a cease fire it too would have been at the Annapolis conference. It won't so it won't.

When the Palestinians manage to produce a leader whom Israel can regard as a partner for peace then a solution can be arrived at. Just as they did with Egypt, Jordan & Syria. In their absence, nothing will change.

by Nodin Mon Nov 26, 2007 09:22

That is not 'information', michael, its a petition by a right wing "no surrender" style grouping.

by Nodin Mon Nov 26, 2007 09:49

As the Palestinian people have been denied recourse to any lawful means of ending the occupation, its unsuprising that their desperation has resulted in such extreme methods. You don't seem to have anything to say about the Israeli colonisation of the West Bank or Arab East Jerusalem, but then again it always seems to be the intent of the right to avoid showing Arab violence in its proper context..

Besides, he wall is far more to do with reinforcing territorial gains and subduing the population of the OT than insuring security, otherwise why does it not follow Israels recognised borders?

by Frank Miller Mon Nov 26, 2007 09:59

The only future for Israel and Palestine is a two-state solution.
Palestinian attacks against Israel must cease and terrorist groups must disarm and all Palestinians must recognise that Israel exists. In return Israel must dismantle Jewish settlements in the West Bank just as it dismantled and evacuated settlements in Gaza.
Israel's Arab neighbours must also recognise the state of Israel and stop funding extremist groups in Palestine who attack Israel.

Demonizing Israel and turning a blind eye to Palestinian terrorism has never and will never achieve anything.

The other outstanding issues such as the return of Palestinian refugees, dedrawing borders, etc. can only be raised in an environment of mutual trust which does not yet exist while conditions that sustain the conflict continue.

by redjade Mon Nov 26, 2007 13:46

'We also hosted a petition calling on the Retail Jewellers of Ireland to refuse to stock Israeli Blood Diamonds.'

There are no 'Israeli Blood Diamonds' - the diamonds come from Africa and some Diamond companies are Israeli, but not all, and some of the companies that cut and market them are Israeli.

If this campaign is not clear in its rhetoric it will attract every anti-semite looney-tune in the world to its cause.

And, as I have said in past comments, this is a hijacking of the Blood Diamonds issue - where in the photos above or in the propaganda handed out does the IPSC explain that Blood Diamonds are primarily an issue about Africa and how diamond mining and its trade funds the many wars there? - And, that the diamond trade - 'bloody' or not - does not fund the Israel/Palestine conflict (except, perhaps, by paying Israeli taxes.).

I would like to see the IPSC provide evidence that these 'Israeli Blood Diamonds' that the Retail Jewellers of Ireland's stores sell are in actually violation of the Kimberley Process?

It looks to me that the IPSC is using a historically jewish stereotype - selling diamonds - to hijack the good reputation of another political movement - the effort to stop the trade in Blood Diamonds - for the IPSC's own political purposes.

As an activist who supports Palestinian human rights and a Palestinian state, I object to this.

Also: the IPSC's press release says: ''Those targeted by the campaign include religious leaders, politicians, journalists, trade unionists, business leaders, jewellers, farmers, doctors, nurses, civil society organisations, musicians, artists, actors and others.''

I am curious if the IPSC has released a list that names these targets? Especially the farmers, doctors and nurses.

Photo Image from:
Visualizing Otherness: Nazi and other use of visual representation
http://www.chgs.umn.edu/histories/otherness/otherness1-....html

related links:
• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blood_diamonds

• http://www.israelidiamond.co.il/English/searchResultsGl...0&y=0

• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kimberley_Process

• http://www.kimberleyprocess.com/

• http://web.amnesty.org/pages/ec-diamonds-eng

1941 Booklet 'The Jews in the Netherlands' showing Jews in the diamond trade

by David L - IPSC Mon Nov 26, 2007 14:37

Hi Redjade, I think we've had this conversation before - but what the heck.

About 'hijacking': As far as I know the African blood diamonds campaign worked. 98% or some similar figure of the diamond sold in Ireland adhere to the Kimberley process. This is good news, but also means AFAIK that there isn't any extant campaign on African Diamonds. We certainly haven't been contacted by any activist group on this issue - if we had, rest assured, we would take their concerns very seriously.

About antisemitism - the reason we are part of this growing international campaign (check out this link: http://nyc.indymedia.org/en/2007/11/92735.shtml) is not because we think it'd be a really good idea to forward some medieval stereotype about Jews, come on! It's because diamonds are such a massive part of the Israeli economy (c 37% of industrial exports), as well as a commodity that responds to such campaigning. We're just trying to campaign smart here.

I take your point about not letting right wing racist loonies take part in our campaign. But in fairness, I think we do that already.

by Nodin Mon Nov 26, 2007 21:06

I have no problem with criticism of the facts behind the campaign. However I fail to see how throwing in the implication of anti-semitism - followed by an image from Nazi propaganda- does anything for your case. The boycott is to do with the state of Israel, and firms therein. There is no call for a boycott of Jewish owned businesses elsewhere.

by Mike Novack Mon Nov 26, 2007 22:50

"The boycott is to do with the state of Israel, and firms therein. There is no call for a boycott of Jewish owned businesses elsewhere."

Hinges somewhat on which definition is used for "boycott".

Over here, we distinguish "primary boycott", "secondary boycott", "tertiary boycott", etc. and only the first is legal and for most of us over here, only the first sort is proper (in other words, we, and here I mean to include some of us activists, see a "secondary boycott" as making a POLITICAL demand that is independent of the issues of the primary boycott -- the implied threat being "join our boycott or else we boycott you")

But in your tradition, no such distinction. There is of course good reason for that in the history of the original "boycott" which gave the tactic its name (those aiding/abetting the target hadn't been doing so before -- they actually were "joining the fray on the oither side").

Why does this matter? Well suggesting that a "boycott of Israel" isn't going to be a "boycott of Jews" because the Jews COULD agree to sever all connection with Israel and so escape being included in the boycott is specious. You KNOW that they will not.

by JohnHM Mon Nov 26, 2007 23:07

a. “Agrexco” is an agricultural produce marketing company, partially owned by the Government of Israel serving agricultural producers in Israel, West Bank (including Jordan Valley) and Gaza Strip.
b. It deals with approximately 50% of Israel’s agricultural produce intended for export, the balance of Israel’s exports are handled by over a hundred other agricultural export marketing companies.
c. The Company also serves several hundreds of Palestinian agricultural producers in the Gaza strip, with whom it has worked for some 16 years, and this notwithstanding Israel’s withdrawal from Gaza.
d. Agrexco is not involved with Palestinian exporters in the West Bank.

B. Agrexco Services
a. Agrexco, itself, neither grows any agricultural products nor does it provide picking or packaging services.
i. Picking in Gaza is done by the Palestinian family of the growers or their employees
ii. Packing services are provided by the growers themselves or independent packing houses who comply with the international standards demanded by British supermarkets and other UK customers.
iii. In the UK, Agrexco enters marketing arrangements with its customers for the export from Israel and the import into the UK of agricultural produce from both Israel and Gaza.
b. Agrexco markets Palestinian produce under the trade name “Coral” which it differentiates from produce originating in Israel.
c. It also organises meetings between growers (both Israeli and Palestinian) and wholesale buyers in Europe and elsewhere.
d. Notwithstanding that Israel has withdrawn completely from Gaza, Agrexco makes its export marketing services available to Gazaan agricultural growers and their produce.

C. Marketing Operations
a. Agricultural produce amounts to approximately 2% of total Israeli GNP.
b. In addition to its Israeli clients, Agrexco is but one of many companies which serve some hundreds of Palestinian small farmers in Gaza who are organised in four co-operatives, each comprising between 100-200 producers.
c. Currently there are no Israeli growers in Gaza. However, Agrexco serves a relatively small number of Israeli producers in eight West Bank agricultural settlements (including the Jordan Valley).
d. Israeli producers in the West Bank account for less than 2% of total Israel agricultural produce designated for export.
e. Palestinians farmers voluntarily choose to work with Agrexco. They are not compelled to use its services nor the export services of any other Israeli marketing companies.
f. Palestinians are free to export the produce via Egypt (Cairo) which involves some four- five hours travel time.
g. However, when security conditions permit them to do so, they prefer to have their produce shipped through Israel to Ashdod seaport or Ben Gurion airport.
h. Regretfully, and to the disadvantage of the Palestinians growers, Palestinian Hamas violence and rocket fire emanating from Gaza has caused considerable physical damage to the Israeli town of Sderot and to other Israel civilian targets, including the Karni transfer point - the main exit gate from Gaza - such that the border had to be closed. Palestinian violence is the cause economic hardship to Palestinian growers, not the Israeli occupation.
i. In addition, Hamas militant operations in the Palestinian growing areas of Beit Hanoun and Beit Lahiya have also caused the economic loss to Palestinian growers of approximately 2000 metric tonnes of strawberries that could have been exported from that area.
D. Employment
a. Agrexco complies with Israeli employment laws as regards minimum wage, social and welfare conditions which are applied to all employees both Israelis and Palestinians and regardless of whether they are Jewish, Christian or Muslim.
b. Agrexco is responsible for ensuring that growers and the packing houses comply with British ethical trading rules as regards the employment of children.

E. Economic Consequences of Boycott on Palestinians
a. The implementation of any agricultural produce boycott on Agrexco will have a very significant economic effect on Palestinian farmers.
b. Because of Hamas terror, Israel has been compelled to replace many of its Palestinian agricultural workers with foreign workers. She now employs some 26, 000 Thais in their place.
c. Regardless of the effectiveness of any boycott, Palestinian farmers already suffer because of the policy of their leadership in general and specifically:
1. notwithstanding (i) the removal of all Israeli civilian settlements from the Gaza Strip; (ii) the transfer of previously owned Israeli hothouses to Palestinian control; (iii) the withdrawal of IDF army personnel and (iv) the forced transfer of many Israeli citizens from Gaza to within Israel, the continued Palestinian bombardment of Israeli communities within the Green line with Kassam rockets and mortars has failed to raise the level of Palestinian economic independence and welfare;
2. the expenditure of staggering amounts of money on the purchase of increasing quantities of weaponry and explosives smuggled into Gaza from Egypt by Palestinian militant extremists, deprives moderate Palestinians of the chance to improve their economic and social conditions as well as realising their political aspirations.

by Nodin Mon Nov 26, 2007 23:12

"Why does this matter? Well suggesting that a "boycott of Israel" isn't going to be a "boycott of Jews" because the Jews COULD agree to sever all connection with Israel and so escape being included in the boycott is specious. You KNOW that they will not. "

But where above has anyone said that Jewish business would be selected purely on the grounds of being Jewish? Again, you're trying to kick the round peg into the strangely twisted cross-shaped hole. There is a large Jewish diaspora outside of Israel, and theres no call to target them on the grounds of their religon.

Nor do I see why a boycott should not be applied because a business based in Israel may be run by a Jew/Jews. I don't recall cries of racial/sectarian prejudice being raised when there was calls for a boycott of the Chinese hosted olympics, or of Burma...There was a call for a boycott of Concrete Roadstone and nobody cried that we were guilty of paddy-bashing...the facts of the matter are that while the occupation of the West Bank and Arab East Jerusalem go on, acts of protest against the Israeli state are as valid as they would be against any other.

by Nodin Mon Nov 26, 2007 23:28

Its normal to credit where and what you c&p'd from, 'John'.

And doesn't "partially" owned seem a bit of spin, when we consider the 50% holding the Israeli state has in that company?

by David L - IPSC Tue Nov 27, 2007 09:38

It's a long long copy and paste that John did, just to hammer home the apartheid analogy.

I'm old enough to remember the boycott of South Africa and being told it would only harm the blacks who are poor enough, sure. The argument was somewhat undermined by the universal support for boycott among black South African unions.

It's the same in Palestine, growers unions, the federation of trade unions, all the major elements of civil society - they all support the boycott and urge us to do the same. It's a non-violent, moral and effective form of action. One that everyone can take part in. As Nodin says it's nothing to do with antisemitism, everything to do with basic solidarity for Palestinians.

by David L Tue Nov 27, 2007 09:40

Hi, small correction on the diamonds thing. Diamonds are closer to 30% of Israel's industrial exports, not 37%, which I originally said. Still massive though!

by TD - IPSC Tue Nov 27, 2007 18:27

On today's Democracy Now is a transcript of Noam Chomsky's recent address to "a packed audience at Boston’s historic Old South Church" in which he vented the view that peace in Palestine will be effected by people organising and resisting; to eventually prevail over U.S.-Israeli “Rejectionism,” and not through the hollow charade of Annapolis; a "conference emptied of all meaning long before it convenes."

by Sceptic Tue Nov 27, 2007 21:25

It would have been much more interesting to have Tutu's take on it rather than the predictably bilious Noam.

by TD - IPSC Wed Nov 28, 2007 11:14

"Sceptic," no contest; Chomsky's incisiveness over Tutu's self-indulgent ramblings, anyday.?

by Naomi Kaplan Wed Nov 28, 2007 12:15

"The (Annapolis) conference simply generates new and ever-more superfluous and intricate promises which Israeli leaders can commit to and yet somehow evade. An exercise in legal obfuscation at its best: we won't build new settlements, we'll just expropriate more land and expand to account for their "natural growth," until they resemble towns, not colonies, and have them legitimized by a US administration looking for some way to save face. And then we'll promise to raze outposts"

"As recently as September, Israel expropriated 1,100 dunams (272 acres) of Palestinian land in the West Bank to facilitate the development of E-1, a five-square-mile area in the West Bank, east of Jerusalem where Israel plans to build 3,500 houses, a hotel and an industrial park, completing the encirclement of Jerusalem with Jewish colonies, and cutting it off from the rest of the West Bank".
(Laila El-Haddad, Electronic Intifada, 23 November 2007)

by JohnHM Mon Dec 03, 2007 01:05

My post was for information - you will all believe what you want to do anyway .
Israel is not going to wither due to your boycott
Play gesture poltics if you want but that wont improve the Arabs' well being
or bring about the collapse of the State of Israel
QED.

by JohnHM Mon Dec 03, 2007 01:09

I saw some herbs in a supermarket last week --the Rosemary was product of Israel and the Dill was product of West Bank