|
by Peter A. Belmont / 2012-10-17
© 2012 Peter Belmont
As to Israel’s occupations of the West Bank and Golan Heights, the world is fairly agreed on two somewhat contradictory propositions.
First, settlements and settlers are present in occupied territories in violation of international law and agreements—in a word, “illegally”.
Second, there is something slightly (but only slightly) unpalatable about importing and permitting sale of products made in these (illegal) settlements.
Now, the USA and UK and the AIPAC’s of this world have reduced the vigor of the first proposition to a mere mumble. The nations say it but they do not act on it.
So what we see—and this reflects the second proposition above—is a highly diluted “action”, namely, the demand that Israel accurately label products made by Israelis within occupied territories so that consumers can decide whether or not to buy things made in illegal settlements (but the word “illegal” probably will not be used!) and so that nations can refuse to grant such imports those special trade preferences which they extend to Israeli products not made in occupied territories.
This requirement of proper labeling (on the part of very few countries) is a distraction—unless seen more positively as a “foot in the door”—raising the question about why it is so hard for nations to act more strongly.
It is a distraction because by it, Israel persuades nations to discuss the very weakest of matters (labels and tariffs) rather than the stronger issue of refusal to import illegally made goods or the even stronger issue of imposing (trade) sanctions to require Israel to come into compliance with international law.
What we do not see is refusal to allow any import whatever on any tariff terms of stuff made by Israelis in occupied territories.
And we especially do not see refusal to allow import of ALL Israeli products.
In short, the nations tepidly and infrequently describe the settlements as illegal and then take no steps whatever to shut them down, despite having undertaken (when they signed the Fourth Geneva Convention) to “respect and ensure respect” for the Convention “in all circumstances”—it being a violation of the convention for the occupying country to introduce its citizens (other than army) into occupied territories.
What I’d like to see would be real action—a la BDS—by large numbers of nations (if not by UNSC or UNGA) to compel Israel to comply with the Convention in the sense —inter alia—of removing all settlers and dismantling the wall and all settlement buildings within a (short) time certain, all under pain of penalties (sanctions) set forth in advance by the nations issuing the demand for compliance.
|
