Simple Solution to Decades-Long Murder: Boycott Corps. in Israel

“A boycott would be totally legitimate. The wall and the settlements have been deemed illegal by the International Court of Justice and we should boycott any company which does business, any architects that participate - anyone facilitating these human rights violations and war crimes.”

Eyal Weizman, Israeli director of the Centre for Research Architecture, Goldsmith's College, London.

Oliver Duff, Rob Sharp, and Eric Silver, “Architects threaten to boycott Israel over ‘apartheid’ barrier,” Independent UK, 2/10/06.

The recent proposal that Norway boycott Israeli goods has provoked passionate debate. In my view, a rational examination of this issue would pose two questions: 1) Do Israeli human rights violations warrant an economic boycott? and 2) Can such a boycott make a meaningful contribution toward ending these violations? I would argue that both these questions should be answered in the affirmative.

Norman G. Finkelstein, “Why an Economic Boycott of Israelis Justified,” Aftenposten, 1/14/06.

At the invitation of the Presidents, Mr John Reynolds (Chair of the EIAG) addressed the Synod.

The Bishop of Worcester moved the Report. The Synod voted to take note of the Report.

Mr Keith Malcouronne (Guildford) moved:

That this Synod:

(a) heed the call from our sister church, the Episcopal Church in Jerusalem and the Middle East, for morally responsible investment in the Palestinian occupied territories and, in particular, to disinvest from companies profiting from the illegal occupation, such as Caterpillar Inc, until they change their policies;

(b) encourage the Ethical Investment Advisory Group to follow up the consultation referred to in its Report (GS 1604) with intensive discussions with Caterpillar Inc, with a view to its withdrawing from supplying or maintaining either equipment or parts for use by the state of Israel in demolishing Palestinian homes &c;

(c) in the light of the urgency of the situation, and the increased support needed by Palestinian Christians, urge members of the EIAG to actively engage with monitoring the effects of Caterpillar Inc's machinery in the Palestinian occupied territories through visiting the Episcopal Church in Jerusalem and the Middle East to learn of their concerns first hand, and to see recent house demolitions;

(d) urge the EIAG to give weight to the illegality under international law of the activities in which Caterpillar Inc's equipment is involved; and

(e) urge the EIAG to respond to the monitoring visit and the further discussions with Caterpillar Inc by updating its recommendations in the light of these.’

Following debate, the Synod carried the motion.

Synod voted against extending the time available for this debate.

General Synod of the Church of England, Ethical Investment: Report by the Ethical Investment Advisory Group, 6 February 2006.

“Caterpillar may be a company being used for dreadful purposes across the world, but the problem is not Caterpillar. The problem is the situation in the Middle East and the government of Israel.”

Rt Rev John Gladwin, Bishop of Chelmsford.

Jonathan Petre, “Williams backs bid to disinvest in firms that aid Israeli ‘occupiers,”” Telegraph UK, 2/07/06.

“It is not the amount of money that is important. It is a symbolic way of speaking for those who, for example, have had their homes demolished.”

Rt Rev Riah Hanna Abu El-Assal, Anglican Bishop of Jerusalem.

Jonathan Petre, “Church may black firms over Israeli ‘occupation,’” Telegraph UK, 6/23/05.

See also Neela Banerjee, “Anglicans Vote to Divest From Concerns in Israel-Occupied Areas,” New York Times, 2/09/06.