'HUGE WIN FOR PALESTINIAN ACTIVISM': CANADIAN COURT RULES SETTLEMENT WINES CAN'T BE LABELLED "PRODUCT OF ISRAEL"

‘Huge win for Palestinian activism’: Canadian court rules settlement wines can’t be labeled “Product of Israel”

Yumna Patel on August 2, 2019 1 Comment

 

 

Psagot Winery, outside of Ramallah in the West Bank. (Photo: David Kattenburg)

 

    

A federal judge in Canada ruled earlier this week in favor of pro-Palestine activists that wines produced in Israeli settlements in the West Bank should not be able to carry “Product of Israel” labels.

 

The landmark ruling in Kattenburg vs. Attorney General of Canada was decided by Justice Anne Mactavish, who said in her decision that labeling settlement wines, made in the occupied West Bank, as products of Israel was “false, misleading and deceptive.”

Dr. David Kattenburg, an educator, social justice advocate, and longtime pro-Palestine activist, said he was overjoyed when the judge ruled in his favor on Tuesday, July 29th.

“We hit it out of the park,” he told Mondoweiss, adding that while he had faith in the Canadian justice system, he was anticipating a loss. “I was incredibly happy when I read the judge’s decision.”

Judge Mactavish’s decision stated the following:

“While there is profound disagreement between those involved in this matter as to the legal status of Israeli settlements in the West Bank, I do not need to resolve that question in this case. Whatever the status of Israeli settlements in the West Bank may be, all of the parties and interveners agree that the settlements in issue in this case are not part of the State of Israel. Consequently, labelling the settlement wines as “Products of Israel” is both inaccurate and misleading, with the result that [the decision by the Complaints & Appeals Office (CAO) of the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA)] affirming that settlement wines may be so labelled was unreasonable.”

She went on to affirm that “one peaceful way in which people can express their political views is through their purchasing decisions. To be able to express their views in this manner, however, consumers have to be provided with accurate information as to the source of the products in question.”

Mactavish concluded that due to their “misleading” nature, the labelling must be changed, a decision she left up to the CFIA.

“Canadian citizens, citizens in free societies have a right to truthful information upon which they can behave responsibly in democratic societies,” Kattenburg told Mondoweiss. “And the judge ruled that false labeling infringes on that right to exercise conscious consumer choices.”

“That’s why this decision is so amazing,” he said. “It reinforced the fact that Israel does not have the right to violate international law and conceal its violations to people who wish to hold them accountable.”

Years in the making

The judge’s decision on Tuesday was a long time coming for Kattenburg, who first filed a complaint back in 2017 to the Liquor Control Board of Ontario (LCBO), one of the world’s largest buyers and sellers of alcohol, when he noticed that the retailer was selling two brands of settlement wine labeled as products of Israel.

Label on a bottle of wine at the Psagot Winery, outside of Ramallah in the West Bank. (Photo: David Kattenburg)

“I thought, Israel is staking claims of sovereignty over stolen land on Canadian store shelves,” Kattenburg told Mondoweiss. “This is how I interpreted the ‘Product of Israel’ designation.”

But after getting no response from the LCBO, Kattenburg decided to file a complaint with the CFIA. After six months of deliberation, the CFIA announced its position that, yes, the wines were mislabelled.

The CFIA quickly reversed its decision, however, after immense pressure from Israeli government officials and pro-Israel organizations in Canada. Kattenburg called the quick reversal “obscene.”

So Kattenburg appealed the decision, only to be rejected. When he exhausted all other legal avenues, he filed his suit in federal court with the assistance of Attorney Dimitri Lascaris, who took the case pro bono.

When asked what motivated him to take the issue up to federal court, Kattenburg told Mondoweiss that he couldn’t ignore the fact that by allowing the LCBO to stock shelves with mislabeled settlement wine, “Canada, which declares settlements illegal, was essentially endorsing Israel’s annexation of the West Bank.”

“That was outrageous to me,” Kattenburg said. “These labels are not anodyne designations, like ‘product of France’ or ‘product of Chile’.”

“Labeling settlement wines as products of Israel is clearly a political statement, that ‘this land belongs to the Jews and is Israeli land.’”

Global impact

The judge’s decision is being celebrated by Kattenburg and other pro-Palestine activists as a huge win for global Palestinian advocacy.

“In effect, the federal court ruled that, without explicitly mentioning BDS, that boycotts are perfectly legitimate, and false misleading and deceptive labeling infringes on that right, which is amazing!” Kattenburg told Mondoweiss.

By saying that Canadians have the right to choose to purchase goods based on beliefs that are political and ethical in nature, the ruling “constitutes an endorsement of boycotts,” he said.

“This is huge for Palestinian activism in Canada, and around the world,” Kattenburg said, highlighting similar efforts being taken in the EU against the mislabeling of Israeli settlement wines.

“Some people think ‘oh it’s just wine labelling, what does it really matter? How is this going to  promote peace and justice in Palestine? But i think it’s a pivotal development. It drives a major wedge into Israel’s settlement enterprise.”

Kattenburg acknowledged that it will “take a whole lot more than judicial decisions like this to reverse Israel’s creeping annexation of the West Bank.”

“But pronouncements like this consolidate the view within the international legal community that settlements are flagrantly illegal and without effect.”

The fight continues

While Kattenburg is celebrating the court’s decision as a huge win, he knows the fight isn’t over yet.

The government has until September to file an appeal, and with federal elections coming up and continued pressure from the Israeli lobby, Kattenburg believes they are likely to appeal the judge’s decision.

NPR quoted Shimon Koffler Fogel, President and CEO of the Canadian-based Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs, as saying the judge’s ruling featured “substantive errors.”

“Current labelling practices are fully consistent with the Canada-Israel Free Trade Agreement, as well as Canadian and international law. This is why we are urging the Government of Canada to appeal this misguided ruling,” NPR quoted Fogel as saying, adding that the CEO “plans to consult with legal experts and seek intervenor status should the case be appealed.”

Kattenburg says he hopes that if the case goes up to the federal court of appeals, that the court uphold Judge Mactavish’s ruling.

“Truthful settlement labeling constitutes more than just correct labeling,” he told Mondoweiss. “It it constitutes or embodies a statement that the West Bank is not in fact a part of Israel, that the settlements are illegal, and that economic aid and support for the settlement enterprise is illegal under international law, and citizens have the right to act on that information.”

Kattenburg told Mondoweiss that he, along with his lawyers, are gearing up for a battle in the appeals court, promising to fight until the end.

“But we need people’s support,” he said, urging supporters of his case and the Palestinian cause to donate to his GoFundMe campaign, called “Label the Occupation.” The money will be spent on legal costs, while any unused  funds will be donated to not-for-profit Palestinian solidarity organizations in Canada.

Yumna Patel

Yumna Patel is the Palestine correspondent for Mondoweiss. Follow her on Twitter at @yumna_patel
Other posts by Yumna Patel.

HarryLaw on August 2, 2019, 4:00 pm

Well done Dr. David Kattenburg, I too took a case to the Wirral Magistrates Court in 2015 concerning falsely labelled wine from the Golan Heights, unfortunately the District Judge Abelson was an Israeli firster and questioned my assertion that Katzrin was in Syria, I told him it was not me who asserted that fact but the UNSC Resolution, he made a political decision not to proceed with the case. Earlier the Trading Standards Agency had asked for advice from the Food Standards Agency who advised the TSA and myself…

“I understand the point you are making but as you can imagine the situation is primarily a highly sensitive political issue and will not be resolved by the Agency refusing to allow the of such wine.
I regret therefore that we will not be taking any further action in respect of your complaint unless we are instructed to do so by aither the Foreign and Commonwealth Office or by DEFRA who are responsible for wine policy issues and represent the UK at the EU wine Management Committee”. Graham Finch Technical Inspector.

I took the case myself as a litigant in person as Section 6, Prosecution of Offenders Act allows me to, No help whatsoever from the Lawyers for Palestinian Human Rights, they wanted cash upfront. Here is a snapshot of my case……

The Indication of provenance detailed in Regulation EU 607/2009 Article 55 sets out the compulsory particulars required for third country wines [outside the European Community] and ‘Shall’ be indicated as follows:- For wines without protected designation of origin or geographical indication, one of the following:-

[1] “the words ‘wine of […..]’, ’produced in [….]’, or ‘product of [….]’, or expressed in equivalent terms, supplemented by the name of the member state or third country where the grapes are harvested and turned into wine in that territory.

As evidence I produced two bottles of wine with the offending labels. Both labels make at least two false representations:

1. ‘WINE OF ISRAEL’ and
2. PRODUCED AND BOTTLED BY GOLAN HEIGHTS WINERY 183 KATZRIN 12900 ISRAEL.

Despite the Israeli occupation of the Golan Heights, the sovereign territorial status of the Golan Heights is still regarded by the International community, including the UK government as Syrian territory, as set out in United Nations Security Council Resolution 497, of December 1981, which declared :- “That the acquisition of territory by force was inadmissible and that Israel’s decision to impose its laws, jurisdiction and administration in the Golan Heights is null and void and without legal effect”.

– “Sauvignon Blanc”’, indicates that the grapes were grown and harvested entirely in the Golan Heights. Under country of origin rules, originating products are determined, (in this case, grapes) by being wholly grown, harvested and turned into wine in that territory, therefore the wine is of Syrian origin.

The geographical territory, together with all the metrics by which country of origin is arrived at is the determinative factor, not the nationality of the exporter, if this was not the case the world trade system would collapse.

As an added factor, both labels when viewed as a whole show at least five other indicators which tend to confirm the false facts in 1 and 2 above as shown in Documents 5 and 6.

1. Golan Heights Winery with Galilee underneath, ‘Galilee’ is a region of Northern Israel.
2. The wine is Kosher for Passover; and is authenticated for the Jewish religious holiday of Passover by a Rabbi from the Northern Israeli City of Tiberias.
3. The web page http://www.golanwines.co.il indicates an Israeli country code [il]
4. Barcode first three digits 729 indicates Israeli origin, although not conclusive proof of origin.

ISRAEL'S LEGAL WARFARE ON BDS FOSTERS REPRESSION AND MCCARTHYISM ACROSS THE WORLD

• 
  

From Mondoweiss - 18 March 2016

Israel’s legal warfare on BDS fosters repression and McCarthyism across the world

 

A BDS logo

The global movement supporting the Palestinian people’s right to freedom, justice and equality has taken impressive steps into the political mainstream in recent years. Efforts by the Palestinian-led Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement to hold Israel accountable for its serious violations of international law and to end international complicity in these violations are more widely supported and impactful than ever before.

Israel’s current government, its most racist ever, has dropped all pretences of “enlightenment” and “democracy”. This has helped to expose Israel’s regime of occupation, settler-colonialism and apartheid to world public opinion like never before. In this context, and given the fast spread of BDS in recent years, Israel has tried hard but failed to slow down its gradually intensifying international isolation in the academic, cultural, sports and, to a lesser extent, economic sphere.

As a result, Israel, its lobby groups and its right-wing supporters have launched an unprecedented, well-funded global campaign to silence Palestinian narratives and criminalize BDS advocacy, especially in western countries. Israeli-induced attacks on free speech and civil rights in Europe, the US and Canada, among others, are fostering an ominous environment of bullying, intimidation and repression that has all the hallmarks of the era of McCarthyism in the US and the worst days of the apartheid regime in South Africa.

In a desperate attempt to suppress BDS from above, after losing many battles for the hearts and minds at the grassroots level, Israel and its pressure groups, including anti-Palestinian billionaires, are pressuring governments, legislatures and officials in the west to implement patently anti-democratic measures that threaten civil liberties at large. This should deeply concern not just activists supporting Palestinian rights, but all those who value civil liberties as well as progressive movements struggling for racial, gender, social, economic, indigenous and environmental justice.

The authoritarian measures adopted against BDS so far include the prosecution of BDS activists in France, like the recent arrest of an activist for wearing a BDS t-shirt; proposals to exclude organisations that support BDS in the US from public funding or contracts; the Canadian parliament’s condemnation of BDS and threats against Palestine solidarity groups; and the British government’s intimidation of local councils that have voted to support BDS measures, among other attacks on local democracy in the UK (more details on all these below).

Glenn Greenwald has described this well-orchestrated series of draconian measures as the “greatest threat to free speech in the West”. Yet Israel’s exceptionalism in some mainstream quarters in the west remains intact.

South African Archbishop Emeritus Desmond Tutu has once likened this singling out of Israel’s regime for unconditional military, political and financial support, not to mention protection from accountability, by the US and other western governments to placing Israel “on a pedestal” above every other state. Many people are afraid to criticize Israel’s policies, Tutu argues, because of the exceptionally intimidating methods used by its lobby.

BDS is an inclusive, anti-racist movement that is anchored in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and is opposed on principle to all forms of racism and discrimination, including anti-Semitism and Islamophobia. The BDS movement is advocating for Israel to be taken off “the pedestal” and held to account like other states committing similar crimes.

It is clear that Israel has been lobbying for and is directly behind these deeply worrying anti-democratic attacks that are intended to criminalize the advocacy of Palestinian rights. But they are also part of a growing trend in western countries of eroding civil liberties in the name of ‘security’, and of governments and unaccountable elites concentrating power in their hands and undermining democratic principles.

The Palestinian BDS National Committee (BNC), the broadest coalition in Palestinian society that is leading the global BDS movement, stands in full solidarity with BDS activists in France and elsewhere who are facing witch-hunts and persecution for their principled advocacy of Palestinian human rights.

While they may succeed in chilling freedom of expression at first, anti-democratic legislation and legal bullying cannot possibly hide or make more palatable Israel’s crimes against the indigenous Palestinian people.


 Ultimately, a fast increasing number of progressives and liberals around the world are learning about and condemning Israel’s ongoing siege of the occupied Gaza Strip, its incessant theft of Palestinian lands and resources, and its ongoing ethnic cleansing of entire Palestinian communities, especially in and around the Jordan Valley, East Jerusalem and the Naqab (Negev).

No Israeli propaganda or lawfare can whitewash its incarceration of millions of Palestinians in racially segregated ghettos, surrounded by walls, military watchtowers and checkpoints, its system of apartheid, or its denial of the UN-stipulated right of Palestinian refugees to return to their homes of origin.

We are encouraged by the Swedish foreign ministry’s statement re-affirming basic democratic principles by stating that BDS “is a civil society movement” and that “governments should not interfere in civil society organization views”. Sweden is now the first western country to openly break away from Israel’s incessant bullying and has taken a courageous step that other governments should follow.

We urge civil liberties groups, human rights organizations, people of conscience and public figures to join us in condemning and opposing government-led attacks on free speech and civil liberties that are being implemented in order to undermine civil society’s human rights advocacy initiatives on behalf of the Palestinian people.

We reiterate the call of the Palestinian Human Rights Organizations Council on governments to respect and protect the civil and political rights of their citizens and to meet their legal obligations in order to bring Israel’s violations to an end, instead of colluding with Israel and muzzling their own citizens in order to shield it from criticism and accountability.

We urge human rights organisations and other civil society entities worldwide, irrespective of their own views of BDS, to adopt the principled position of defending the right of people and organizations to engage in BDS campaigns.

BDS is inspired and inspiring. It is a movement that is inspired by our people’s long heritage of non-violent popular resistance, the South African anti-apartheid movement and the US Civil Rights movement, among others. It is in turn inspiring a whole generation of Palestinian and international activists, academics, artists, feminists, racial and social justice movements, LGBTQ advocates, and others, to speak truth to power in the pursuit of our respective inalienable rights. United, we shall overcome.

Palestinian BDS National Committee Secretariat
17 March 2016

France

In 2010, then justice minister Michèle Alliot-Marie issued an instruction to state authorities that  “Article 24, line 8 of the 1881 law on the press allows the punishment of citizens or organizations who call for the boycott of goods from a country whose policies they criticise” on the grounds that such a call constitutes discrimination. Since then, more than 30 activists have faced criminal charges over their participation in nonviolent BDS advocacy.

In October 2015, the Court of Cassation, France’s highest appeals court, issued a ruling stating that the call to boycott Israeli products on the basis of their “origin” is illegal. BDS calls for the boycott of Israeli products on the basis of complicity, not identity. Israeli companies are complicit in violating international law, and trade with Israel while it maintains its system of oppression against the Palestinians, as was the case with apartheid South Africa, is a form of support for its regime’s human rights violations.

Regardless, nearly all forms of BDS activism is France are focused on activities other than calling for a boycott of Israeli products and cannot in any way be considered illegal.

Using a false and arbitrary interpretation of the Court of Cassation ruling to claim that all activities in support of BDS are illegal, there have since have been a number of attempts by the police to prevent demonstrations in support of BDS from taking place. In early March, a solidarity activist was arrested simply for wearing a tshirt supportive of BDS, as was reported.

Prime Minister Manuel Valls recently stated that he would speak with the Ministry of Interior to discuss what further measures could be taken to repress BDS activism.

The Paris city council has passed a resolution condemning the BDS movement which also uses a false interpretation of the Court of Cassation ruling.

Despite all of this state-backed repression, the BDS movement in France continues to mobilise wide support, including through street demonstrations, for the end of international complicity with Israeli apartheid and settler colonialism.

US

According to the new Right to Boycott website, anti-BDS bills or resolutions have been introduced in 21 different states and in the US Congress.

On July 23, 2015, Illinois Governor Bruce Rauner signed the country’s first explicitly anti-BDS state law. This new law requires the creation of a state-run “blacklist” of foreign companies that heed calls for boycotting Israel and compels the state’s pension fund to divest from those companies.

The Combating BDS Act of 2016 introduced into the US Congress seeks to authorize state and local governments to divest assets from and prohibit investment in any entity that “engages in a commerce or investment-related boycott, divestment or sanctions activity targeting Israel.”

Bills introduced in Congress, New York, Illinois, and Maryland sought to defund or reduce government funding to colleges and universities that fund or subsidize activities and participation in groups, including the American Studies Association, that endorse academic boycotts of Israel.

In June 2015, President Obama signed the Trade Promotion Authority (TPA) into law. This broad free trade law included provisions opposing BDS and making it a principle trade objective during negotiations with the European Union for the United States to discourage “politically-motivated actions to boycott, divest from, or sanction” Israel and “Israeli-controlled territories”.

In reassuring BDS activists across the US, the legal advocacy group Palestine Legal affirms, “Boycotts have long played a significant role in U.S. history, and the Supreme Court has held that boycotts to effect political, social, and economic change are protected by the First Amendment of the Constitution. The call for a boycott of Israel is based on Israel’s human rights violations, and is intended to effect social and political change. The Constitution is the ‘law of the land,’ so federal, state, and local laws cannot take away your constitutional rights.”

UK

In October 2015, a governing Conservative party press release announced that the government would take steps to “prevent town hall boycotts” and prevent local councils and other public bodies from supporting the BDS movement or measures aimed at companies that participate in Israeli violations of international law.

The UK government press release announcing the measures included a number of smears against the BDS movement, falsely claiming that it calls for a boycott on the basis of ethnic identity. Justice Minister Michael Gove made similar smearsduring a recent speech.

The UK government’s measures have advanced through a policy note on public procurement and proposed changes to local government pension scheme regulations.

Public procurement: On 17 February 2016, the Cabinet Office published a Procurement Policy Note (PPN)1 that restates existing legal obligations regarding public sector procurement processes. It uses World Trade Organisation (WTO) rules to argue that public bodies cannot refuse to deal with a company because of its “country of origin”. However, the WTO Public Procurement agreement does allow for any measure enacted in order to “protect public morals”.

The government document is clearly designed to have a chilling effect and to intimidate councils into falsely thinking that they are no longer allowed to exclude companies that violate human rights from tender exercises. However, the document does not introduce new legal obligations or requirements for public bodies. Nor does the policy guidance note prevent local councils from excluding companies from tendering processes due to their role in human rights violations, confirmed to be perfectly legal by the previous government.

Local government pensions: On 25 November 2015, the government launched a consultation regarding new regulations for how local government invest pension funds. This includes a proposal to give the Secretary of State veto power over local authority investment decisions and states that the government will publish additional guidance making clear that investment decisions “should not pursue policies which run contrary to UK foreign policy”. That guidance has not yet been published.

These steps fatally undermine the government’s stated commitment to transfer power to local government and communities. They also represent a serious attack on local democracy and civil rights.

Canada

The Canadian parliament, led by Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s party, recently voted to condemn the global BDS campaign. The motion was put forward by the opposition Conservative Party but backed by most members of Trudeau’s governing Liberals.

The motion “calls upon the government to condemn any and all attempts by Canadian groups or individuals to promote the boycott, divestment and sanctions movement, which it describes as promoting the ‘demonization and delegitimization’ of Israel.”

This motion is the latest in a string of government-backed attacks on the BDS movement and infringements on free speech that have also seen government politicians condemning campus activism and smearing BDS as “anti-Semitic” and the signing of a cooperation agreement with Israel that included a specific commitment to fight the BDS movement.

About Palestinian BDS National Committee

The BDS National Committee (BNC) is the Palestinian coordinating body for the BDS campaign worldwide. For more information, visit www.bdsmovement.net/BNC.
Other posts by Palestinian BDS National Committee.

2 Responses

1. 

Ossinev

March 18, 2016, 10:10 am

Here in the UK can`t wait for the first challenge to government policy and the resultant publicity whatever the legal or “quasi legal” outcome. Next step individuals writing to their MPs querying the policy/decision. Following step use of the UK Government petition system to request that the policy be reversed.etc. All = publicity and raising of awareness of the issues and the situation in the Stolen and Blockaded Territories. And those cuddly Zionists do not repeat do not like any form of awareness or publicity or any form of direct light being shone on their nasty little Fascist cult colony. So what will be their next tactic ?.Don`t think they have got one really – looking forward to the denouement of their pathetic knee jerk anti BDS campaign. They really are up s..t creek without a paddle on this one.

BOYCOTT UGLY APARTHEID ISRAEL
SUPPORT BDS
TELL YOUR FAMILY AND FRIENDS ABOUT BDS
WRITE TO YOUR MP TO COMPLAIN ABOUT ATTEMPTS TO DELIGITIMISE BDS

Log in to Reply

2. 

xanadou

March 18, 2016, 10:40 pm

Nobody likes a bully. The growing revulsion at seeing the zios’ victims brutalised or reading about Palestinian babies burned and bombed, children brutalised by israeli law enforcement, cold-blooded killings of young men and women and the hopeless despair of generation after generation despairing of life in a concentration camp called israel-occupied-Palestine may not compel the cowardly politicians into action, but the once-overwhelming uncritical sympathy for israel is waning fast, especially among the youngest generation for whom the Jewish holocaust pales in comparison to the horror practised by the US and its Euro cohorts in present day ME against Muslims.
Sic transit gloria mundi…

ASYLUM SEEKERS - CRIMES OF POLITICIANS, MEDIA AND OTHERS

Asylum seekers are people who, because of circumstances in the countries from which they have fled, are trying to reach countries where they might be able to live safely and without fear such as they have experienced elsewhere.

To demonise people in these circumstances, which is what the media and politicians have done, is to show total disregard for human rights, and much of this in countries such as Australia, which are signatories to many of the United Nations Charters on Human Rights and the rights of people to seek and obtain - asylum in other countries.

It must never be forgotten that so many of those fleeing are from countries which have been attacked and invaded by Australia and the countries with which it is in unholy alliances.

Because the media in Australia are willing participants in demonising these people, citizens of Australia see these people - as portrayed - as queue jumpers, economic migrants and people who want to enter Australia illegally.

All of these assertions are lies and mostly are done for political gain by most politicians who are each trying to outdo the other in their viciousness against desperate and helpless people who are then incarcerated in concentration camps and treated as criminals of the worst sort when they haven't committed any crimes.

The concentration camps in places such as Nauru and Papua New Guinea - the Manus Island "detention" centre - are run by organisations employed under contract to the federal government and are renowned for the viciousness of their controls in these "camps".

On top of these human rights abuses - there is no end to man's inhumanity to men, women and children - many of the people assessed for security by ASIO and other arms of government, and "found" to be unsuitable for refugee status "because they pose security risks" are then returned to the countries from which they fled, facing arrest, torture, imprisonment and often murder.

Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Sri Lanka, Pakistan - just to name a few of those places where desperate people flee from - are countries in turmoil, having been invaded by foreign countries or have police state/dictatorship regimes and human rights abuse records where leaders of these regimes should be tried in the International Criminal Court.

Much has been recorded and written about human rights abuses in some of the countries mentioned, but for reasons which are not as yet clear, Sri Lanka seems to have escaped the media's attention until fairly recently, and when it does get mentioned, the Australian government staunchly defends it to the hilt, despite the appalling actions of its dictatorial and police state government. Memories of South Africa and the apartheid state? ....and currently Israel as another apartheid state - but we don't mention Israel!!! - it is always above reproach and one is an anti-semite if you mention the horrific human rights abuses against the Palestinians who, like the Tamils in Sri Lanka don't exist!

So to some articles which have at last started appearing in the main stream media, and here are two examples, one from Geoffrey Robertson, well known to many, dated March 2013, and the other from 28 April 2013:

ARTICLE NO. 1:

Justice crushed in Sri Lanka

March 6, 2013
By Geoffrey Robertson

Commonwealth countries risk a human rights nightmare if they capitulate to the Rajapaksa regime.

Illustration: Andrew Dyson.

The Commonwealth is sleepwalking towards a human rights disaster, if it goes ahead with November's Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting in Colombo, where it will be presided over by Sri Lanka's President Mahinda Rajapaksa. Perhaps emboldened by getting away with murder - the army slaughter of some 40,000 Tamil civilians in 2009 - his government has now moved to destroy the independence of the judiciary. It has sacked the Chief Justice for a decision that it finds inconvenient.

Chief Justice Shirani Bandaranayake, former dean of Colombo Law School and the first woman to be made a Supreme Court judge, is a highly respected jurist.

Last year she infuriated the government by declaring unconstitutional a bill introduced by the President's brother, the Minister for Economic Development, which would have centralised political power (especially at the expense of the northern, largely Tamil province) and would have given the minister wide-ranging powers to infringe civil liberties. So the government decided to remove her and 117 of its tame MPs introduced a bill to impeach her on 14 charges of alleged ''misconduct''.

The principle of judicial independence requires that no judge should be impeached for doing his or her duty, merely because the decision has upset the government. That is exactly what the Rajapaksa government has done in the case of Dr Bandaranayake.

Three of the charges accused her of misinterpreting the constitution. But it is a judge's job to interpret the constitution and she gave it a purposive construction with which most judges - in Australia and elsewhere - would have agreed. Indeed, with two colleagues who joined in her judgment she interpreted the meaning of a key word in the constitution by looking it up in the Oxford English Dictionary - a familiar source of linguistic enlightenment in courts throughout the Commonwealth. But not for these 117 MPs.

Before politicians sack a respected judge, they must at least afford her a fair trial. So to whom did the Speaker, Rajapaksa's elder brother, entrust this task? To a ''Star Chamber'' of seven cabinet ministers.

It sat in secret, refusing the Chief Justice's request to admit the public and refusing to have international observers. It declined to be bound by any rules about the prosecution bearing the burden of proof and it gave her no time to prepare any defence - she was presented with 1000 pages of evidence and told to be ready for a trial starting the following day.

The tribunal chairman told her expressly that it would allow no witnesses, whereupon she and her counsel walked out, despairing of any fair trial. The next day, in her absence and without notice to her, they called 16 witnesses whom she could not in consequence cross-examine.

The result was a foregone conclusion. She was found ''guilty'' on three charges of misconduct on evidence that could not stand up in any real court and could not in any event amount to ''misconduct'' under any sensible definition.

For example, the fact that her bank had addressed her as ''Chief Justice'' on her statements was regarded as an abuse of office justifying her removal. The Supreme Court quashed the Select Committee's findings of guilt, but the President refused to obey their orders.

The President sacked her and appointed the government legal adviser, who had no judicial experience, as Chief Justice in her place. Her impeachment was celebrated with a fireworks display from the Sri Lankan navy and with entertainment, feasting and fireworks supplied by the government.

The prospect of the Queen travelling as head of the Commonwealth to Sri Lanka to provide a propaganda windfall - a royal seal of approval - for the host President after his destruction of judicial independence would make a mockery of the core democratic values for which the Commonwealth is meant to stand.

Canada has already signalled it may refuse to attend what will be a showcase for the regime, but Bob Carr is determined that Australia will be there, a position that is sure to damage Australia's standing on human rights. Mauritius, an exemplary democracy, is willing to host CHOGM, and that's where it should take place.

Geoffrey Robertson, QC, is a former UN appeal judge and the author of Crimes Against Humanity. Read his report at

barhumanrights.org.uk

ARTICLE NO.2:

'Hypocritical' government ignoring Sri Lankan abuses: Greens

By Chris Johnson
April 28, 2013

Greens leader Christine Milne has accused the government of placing domestic politics ahead of human rights by refusing to boycott the coming Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting in Sri Lanka.

And Amnesty International says the violations there should be more seriously considered when Australia is forming refugee policies.

Its campaign co-ordinator, Ming Yu, said a new Amnesty International report to be released on Tuesday, titled Sri Lanka - Assault on Dissent, provided ample evidence that violations were escalating.

''We would encourage the Australian government to properly consider all the credible evidence that exists on this issue and take it into account when making their asylum seeker polices,'' Ms Yu said.

''Amnesty International would like to see Australia and the whole international community insist that if these kinds of human rights abuses continue then the government of Sri Lanka not host CHOGM or be awarded the Commonwealth chair.''

The Greens leader said it was hypocrisy on Labor's part to be sending asylum seekers back to Sri Lanka when its government continued to sponsor human rights violations - and turning a blind eye to those abuses by attending CHOGM was appalling.

Senator Milne said the Australian government was taking a ''hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil'' approach to events in Sri Lanka.

Her rebuke follows Foreign Minister Bob Carr's insistence on being at the November summit despite increasing rights violations.

Senator Carr told ABC's Lateline he was not convinced the Sri Lankan government was engaging in human rights abuses.

''I think some of the stories that have been put to us, when we've checked them out haven't been sustained,'' he said.

He also pointed to evidence of improvements in the country when it came to human rights and said boycotting CHOGM would be counter-productive. ''I think the concerns we've got about human rights in Sri Lanka are best met through engagement with that country,'' he said.

But Senator Milne, who last year visited Sri Lanka and heard of some of the atrocities committed there, said the Australian government's position could not be sustained.

She said Australia should follow Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper's example and refuse to attend the summit unless there were dramatic improvements in Sri Lanka.

Mr Harper does not believe claims made by the Sri Lankan government that it killed only Tamil Tiger rebels and not Tamil civilians.

He told his country's question period last week that without major reform in Sri Lanka he would not personally go to the meeting in Colombo.

''I know we are deeply troubled by the direction in Sri Lanka and the fact that Sri Lanka is, at this point, the host of the next Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting,'' he said.

''I know suggestions have been made of any number of countries who would be willing to host that.''

Senator Carr appeared to dismiss Canada's position and said all Commonwealth countries were expected to attend the summit.

''Apart from Canada, I can identify no other country in the 55-member Commonwealth that would not be represented at Colombo,'' Senator Carr said.

But Senator Milne said the government's excuse for not taking a stronger stance was weak.

It was trying to bring about change by engaging with Sri Lanka, which would work only if Australia was prepared to be blunt.

But the government wanted asylum seeker issues ''off its plate'' before the election and so would not properly engage Sri Lanka, she said.

''It really is a closed loop between the Australian government, the Sri Lankan government and the churn of asylum seekers, and no questions asked about what actually is going on in Sri Lanka as we speak,'' she said.

''If Australia, being on the UN Security Council, wants to be taken seriously in this region as a middle power, then we've got to be seen to be putting at the head of our agenda the strengthening of human rights.

''It should not be pushing it to the bottom of the agenda beneath domestic political considerations in relation to an election and asylum seekers.''

Prime Minister Julia Gillard did not comment, a spokeswoman saying there was nothing to add to Senator Carr's remarks.

Asylum seekers have been political footballs to politicians and human rights abuses have been ignored along the way. Concentration camps are run under contract by some of the worst organisations in the world - Serco and G4S are the two which come to mind - and everything that goes on in the camps is, as it were, behind closed doors - literally. People who have tried to go to Nauru and Manus Island to see for themselves what is going on there, find it almost impossible to get access, and this is yet another example of the way the federal government wishes to hide their disgrace from the public gaze.

They prefer to treat asylum seekers as "others" - people who are "different" from us - they are not white middle class anglos - they are - what???

Through our media and politicians we tell the Australian population that these people will take away their jobs, that they have these strange religions and customs which are alien to our "way of life" and we will become tainted by them!

The fact is, this is a country of migrants and asylum seekers and was ever thus after displacing and killing off the indigenous population and treating them with apartheid disdain to rot in their own "outback" concentration camps.

I started this petition some time ago when the federal government and its friendly opposition were vying with each other to see who could torture people who had already been traumatised by their persecution due to wars which Australia had been busy fighting in countries with which it had no right to be involved in.

People quickly lost interest in the issue because of other scandals blowing up around that time and subsequently the two concentration camps used by the Howard government were found to be useful for incarcerating those managing to get to Australia alive!

It is time to resurrect the petition and ask you to get your friends to sign it too. Thanks for your assistance in this humanitarian crisis.

Stop Australian Incarceration of Asylum Seekers

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/13/stop-australian-incarceration-of-asylum-seekers/

Target: Australians and International communities
Sponsored by: Mannie De Saxe, Lesbian and Gay Solidarity, Melbourne

Australia is trying to negotiate an off-shore solution to Asylum Seekers coming to Australia in boats which are not seaworthy, and which have already been responsible for many drownings offshore. The latest attempt is the so-called Malaysian solution involving Australia sending 800 asylum seekers to Malaysia in exchange for 2000 refugees in Malaysia. Both the Australian Government and its parliamentary Opposition are demonising people fleeing desperate situations in their countries of origin, mainly because of Australian military intervention in those countries.

The total numbers of asylum seekers trying to enter Australia is a miniscule number in terms of refugees and asylum seekers around the world, and most of the people in Australia illegally have arrived by plane!

Australia is signatory to United Nations conventions on refugees but is ignoring these UN documents in its political attempts to stop the demonised "boat people" ever setting foot in Australia.

Help to obtain justice for Asylum Seekers in desperate situations.

The situation has worsened with the federal government reopening the concentration camps on Nauru and Manus Island.

Get the government to close these camps now.

____________________________________________

To highlight the crimes committed by our governments in the name of "border protection" - lies if ever there WERE any! - come some more alarming stories from our infamous concentration camps. The following item was in The Age newspaper on 29 APRIL 2013:

Refugee advocates push to end detention

By Thomas O'Byrne
Demonstrators demand refugee rights.

Refugee advocates have rallied outside a Broadmeadows detention centre following two suicide attempts at the facility last week.

More than 200 people assembled outside the Melbourne Immigration Transit Accommodation site on Sunday, pushing for an end to mandatory detention. Organisers said their action was precipitated by the two attempted suicides last Wednesday, one involving a 17-year-old Iraqi boy.

Among the crowd was a former asylum seeker who said public support, in the form of letters and rallies, helped his fellow detainees deal with depression and suicidal thoughts. ''I did not have a name. I was number 27,'' he said, declining to be named. ''We were dehumanised.''

Rally organiser Lucy Honan said it was unfortunate it had taken the tragedies at the detention centre to shine a light on the issue. ''We want to send a message to the two major political parties that there are members in the community for whom this is an election issue,'' she said.

A documentary guide to ‘Brand Israel’ and the art of pinkwashing

30 NOVEMBER 2011

From Mondoweiss by email:

By Sarah Schulman on November 30, 2011

(Image: prettyqueer)

On Wednesday, November 23, 2011 I published an op-ed in the NY Times, (Israel and ‘Pinkwashing’). This 900 word piece attempted to contextualize Pinkwashing. Here is a more detailed documentary history of Brand Israel, Israel’s campaign to re-brand itself in the minds of the world, as well as the development of pinkwashing as a funded, explicit and deliberate marketing project within Brand Israel.

2005

According to the Jewish Daily Forward, in 2005 The Israeli Foreign Ministry, the Prime Minister’s Office and the Finance Ministry concluded three years of consultation with American marketing executives and launched “Brand Israel,” a campaign to “re-brand” the country’s image to appear “relevant and modern” instead of militaristic and religious.

“Americans don’t see Israel as being like the US,” explained David Sable, CEA and vice president of Wunderman, a division of Young and Rubicam that conducted extensive and costly branding research for Israel at no charge. His conclusion was that while Israel, as a brand, is strong in America, it is “better known than liked, and constrained by lack of relevance.” Sable elaborated, Americans “find Israel to be totally irrelevant to their lives and they are tuning out…particularly 18-34 year old males, the most significant target.”

Brand Israel intended to change this by selecting aspects of Israeli society to highlight and bringing Americans directly to them. They started off with a free trip for architectural writers, and then another for food and wine writers. The goal of these “and numerous other efforts” was to convey an image of Israel “as a productive, vibrant and cutting-edge culture.”

In July 2005, The Brand Israel Group (BIG) presented their findings to the Israeli Foreign Ministry.

2006

In 2006, they conducted a study of Israelis’ own perceptions.

2007

Collaboration between the Consulate General of Israel
and Maxim Magazine. (Image: Reaching the Public)

In 2007, The Foreign Ministry organized a Brand Israel Conference in Tel Aviv, which marked the official adaptation of the campaign. Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni, appointed Ido Aharoni to head Israel’s first brand management office and awarded him a 4 million dollar budget, in addition to the already established 3 million in annual spending on Hasbara (Hebrew for “explanation” or propaganda) and 11 million for the Israeli Tourism Ministry in North America.

In 2007 Israel began its wooing of young males by first niche marketing to heterosexual men. David Saranga, of the Consulate General of Israel initiated a project with Maxim Magazine, a photo shoot entitled “Women of the Israeli Defense Forces” which shows model-like Israeli women who had served in the army, in swimsuits. Saranga said,
“Approaching Maxim allowed us to gear our message to the younger generation, especially males, and towards a demographic that did not see Israel as relevant or identify particularly with Israel.”

Follow up study revealed that Maxim’s readers’ perceptions of Israel had improved as a result of the piece. Saranga was pleased but knew he had a lot of work ahead of him.
“Rebranding a country can take 20 years or more. It involves more than just generating more positive stories about Israel. The process has to be internalized and integrated, too. Israelis must share in and believe in what we promote.”

In 2007, The Electronic Intifada reported that Saatchi and Saatchi was also working for Israel, free of charge. David Saranga told PR Week that the two groups Israel was targeting were “liberals,” and people aged 16 to 30. Gideon Meir of Israel’s Foreign Ministry told Haaretz that he would “rather have a Style section item on Israel than a front page story.”

2008

In 2008 Aharoni’s office hired TNS, a market research firm, to test new brand concepts for Israel in 13 different countries. They also funded a pilot program called “Israel: Innovation for Life” in Toronto.

Aharoni predicted
“The execution of a program that will support the brand identity. This might include initiating press missions to Israel, or missions of community influentials; it could include organizing film festivals, or food and wine festivals featuring Israel-made products.”

This of course resulted in the “Spotlight Tel Aviv” program at the Toronto International Film Festival that caught the attention of John Greyson and Naomi Klein:

the film Greyson removed from the festival in protest.

In 2008, PACBI published a sample contract that Israeli artists signed with their government when the artist was “invited” to an international event, the kind of “invitation” that every Israeli artist craves and must have in order to establish a broad reputation.

The contract text reveals, interestingly, that this is not an “invitation” at all, but rather that it is the Israeli government that is inviting itself to international events. The artist is paid with a plane ticket, shipping fees, hotel and expenses by his/her own government. The contract does not assume any funding from the “host” country. In return, the template states:

“The service provider is aware that the purpose of ordering services from him is to promote the policy interests of the state of Israel via culture and art including contributing to creating a positive image for Israel.”

Yet…

“The service provider will not present himself as an agent, emissary and/or representative of the Ministry.”

2009

The challenge facing Brand Israel was huge. In the 2009 EastWest Global Nation Brand Perception Index, Israel was 192 out of 200, behind North Korea, Cuba and Yemen and just before Sudan.

That year the International Gay and Lesbian Travel Association announced an October Conference in Tel Aviv with the goal of promoting Israel as a “world gay destination.” Helem, a Lebanese LGBTQ organization, responded with a call for a Boycott.

“For some time now, Israeli officials and organizations such as the Aguda, who are cooperating closely with IGLTA, have been promoting LGBT tourism to Israel through false representations of visiting Tel Aviv as not taking sides, or as being on the “LGBT” side, as if LGBT lives were the only ones that mattered. It is implied that it’s okay to visit Israel as long as you “believe in peace,” as if what is taking place in Palestine/Israel is merely a conflict between equals, rather than an oppressive power relationship. Consistent with globalization’s tendency to distance the “final product” from the moral implications of the manufacturing process, LGBT tourists are encouraged to forget about politics and just have fun in a so-called gay-friendly city…

Even more importantly, Tel-Aviv’s flashy coffee shops and shopping malls, in contrast with the nearby deprived Palestinian villages and towns, serve as evidence that the Israeli society, just as the Israeli state itself, has built walls, blockades and systems of racist segregations to hide from the Palestinians it oppresses. The intersection of physical and societal separations and barriers have justly earned the term apartheid, referring to an historically parallel racist regime in South Africa against the indigenous Black population of that country. Leisure tourism to apartheid Israel supports this regime. It is not neutral, and it certainly is not a step toward real peace, which can only be based on justice.”

The four-hour symposium took place despite opposition. In their newsletter the Travel Association acknowledged and dismissed the protest. Using Palestinians, from the beginning to whitewash Israeli violations of their rights.

“It has been fascinating to us that Tel Aviv has an Arab community living in peace here with the Jewish community,” said IGLTA President/CEOJohn Tanzella, who spoke about the 1,400-member association. “We are meeting gay business professionals from all religions and backgrounds within the Middle East.”

Protests at the event focused on Israeli occupation of Gaza. “They were using our gathering as a means to make their concerns public with all the radio and TV that came to meet us,” Tanzella said. “We certainly welcome freedom of speech, but it should be noted that our focus is to support LGBT businesses around the world, wherever they might be located.
That same year, the Zionist organization Stand With Us told The Jerusalem Post, that they were undertaking a campaign “to improve Israel’s image through the gay community in Israel.”

The Foreign Ministry told Ynet that they would be sponsoring a Gay Olympics delegation “to help show to the world Israel’s liberal and diverse face.”

2010

January Conference

The January Conference of the Interdisciplinary Center Herzliya, The Lauder School of Government Diplomacy and Strategy and the Institute for Policy and Strategy brought together representatives of the Foreign Affairs Minstry, Haifa University, The Prime Minister’s Office, Reut Institute, and private communications companies to discuss: WINNING THE BATTLE OF THE NARRATIVE, reaffirming the need for re-branding.

The Conference had some very interesting findings:

– That many criticisms of Israel will stop when policy towards Palestinians is changed.

– Israel correlates with the terms “daring and independent” but not “fun and creative.

– 50% of people in western countries are disengaged and do not have an opinion on Israel, and can therefore be won over by marketing.

– “Narratives of victimhood and survival adapted by Israel over the years are no longer relevant for its diplomatic efforts and dialogue with the West. Nowadays Israel’s opponents capitalize on using the same narratives to achieve and mobilize support.”

– “People respond well when addressed in a familiar language that uses well-known terms and are susceptible to simple, repetitive, consistent messages.”

– “In order to succeed online, one has to detach one’s self from strictly official messages and to develop an online personality.”

By 2010, the Israeli Globe reported that The Ministry of Foreign Affairs had allocated 100 million Shekel (over $26,260,000) to branding.

“The Globe found that the activity will focus on the internet, especially on social networks. This is following research performed by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in which it found that surfers will show sympathy and identity with content that interests them, regardless of the identity of the political affiliation of the publisher.”

Also in 2010, Scott Piro, a gay Jewish Public Relations/Social Media professional, announced in a press release on his letterhead that Israel’s Ministry of Tourism, The Tel Aviv Tourism Board and Israel’s largest LGBT organization, The Agudah, were joining together to launch TEL AVIV GAY VIBE, an online tourism campaign to promote Tel Aviv as a travel destination for European LGBTS.

“Campaign Branding Tel Aviv Gay Destination Underway”

July 21, 2010 Ynetnews.com

By Danny Sadeh

With an investment of NIS 340 million (about $88.1 million), an International marketing campaign is being launched to brand Tel Aviv as an international gay vacation destination. The campaign will be run in England and Germany, two locations with considerable gay and lesbian Communities.

The campaign will include ads on gay community websites and magazines and will display everything the city has to offer by way of gay tourism.

Designated Facebook and Twitter pages will be created to support the effort and promote Tel Aviv as a new gay capital.

A new website has also been built, Gay Tel Aviv. It starts off like with with a sentence encapsulating the very essence of the campaign: “Rising from the golden shores of the Mediterranean, stands one of the most intriguing and exciting new gay capitals of the world.”

The decision to brand Tel Aviv as an international gay destination was supported by an international study conducted by Outnow, a leading company for Consulting, branding and marketing to the gay community. The company was responsible for branding Berlin as the gay capital of Europe, a move that significantly increased tourism to the city.

Etti Gargir, director of the VisitTLV organization, said that the Tourism Ministry and Tel Aviv Municipality invested NIS 170 million (about $44 million) each in the project.

“The increased discount flight capacity from England and Germany increases the capability of Tel Aviv to compete with other cities in Europe. This is in addition to the Outnow study that found Tel Aviv to be an attractive city to those who like culture, restaurants, nightlife and shopping.

“The study also showed that the city is good for any budget. In other words, there is a range of entertainment and accommodation options at prices that anyone can afford,” said Gargir.
About a month ago, Tel Aviv Municipality submitted an official application to host the International Gay Pride Parade in 2012.

The Tourism Ministry reported that it supports targeted marketing campaigns likely to increase tourism to Israel.

The article was appended with the following comments from readers (verbatim):

1. Surely nothing to be proud of. Shameful

2. Haredim!!!!

3. Gay avek also cute slogan (Yiddish for go away)

4. Thanks for warning now I know not

5. Yes by all means bring hordes of aids

6. Inviting destruction full speed

Etc.

By 2010, “Pinkwashing” was already in general use by Queer anti-Occupation activists. The phrase was coined in 1985 by Breast Cancer Action to identify companies that claimed to support women with breast cancer while actually profiting from their illness. In April, 2010 QUIT (Queers Undermining Israeli Terrorism) in the Bay Area, used the phrase “Pinkwashing” as a twist on “Greenwashing” where companies claim to be eco-friendly in order to make profit. Dunya Alwan attributes the term to Ali Abunimah, editor of Electronic Intifada at a meeting in 2010 saying “We won’t put up with Israel Whitewashing, Greenwashing or Pinkwashing.”

In April 2010, Brand Israel launched Israeli Pride Month in San Francisco. Not a grassroots expression by Israeli queers living in San Francisco, but an event instigated, funded and administered by the Israeli government. QUIT – an actual queer organization- used “Pinkwashing” in their campaign to counter the cynical use by the Israeli government, through its “Brand Israel” re-marketing project to use the presence of LGBT society in Israel as “proof” of its commitment to human rights.

2011

By March 2011, Ynet reported that for the first time, The Israeli stand at the International Tourism Fair in Berlin, encourages gay tourists to visit Tel Aviv. According to Tel Aviv Council Member Yaniv Weizman, $94 million of Israeli government money was invested in 2010 in promoting gay tourism to Tel Aviv. The money came from the Tel Aviv Municipality and Tourism Ministry.

According to Weizman:

“The gay tourist likes urban vacations, he forms attachments with the community in the cities he visits, enjoys partying and usually returns to places he had a good time in. This is established tourism which draws in young tourism and sets trends which other sectors of the population adopt.”

The Tel Aviv Tourist Association filed a formal request with the International Gay and Lesbian Travel Association to host World Pride in 2012.

In July, The Anti-Defamation League hosted StandWithUS’s Yossi Herzog speaking on gay rights in Israel and gay presence in the Israeli Defense Force.

In August, the Jerusalem Post reported that :

The Foreign Ministry is promoting Gay Israel as part of its campaigns to break apart negative stereotypes many liberal Americans and Europeans have of Israel. The initiative flies in the face of the swelling protests set against Jerusalem’s Gay Pride parade set for November 10. But even as its organizers are receiving anonymous threats of holy war against them, gay activist Michael Hamel is traveling in Europe and North America working on publicizing Gay Israel. A portion of his work, he told the Jerusalem Post by phone as he sat drinking coffee in a California airport, has the support of the Foreign Ministry. “We are working very closely with them,” said Hamel, who heads the AGUDAH, Israel’s LGBT organization…

Speaking on condition of anonymity, a Foreign Ministry official told the Jerusalem Post this week that efforts to let European and American liberals know about the gay community in Israel were an important part of its work to highlight this country’s support of human rights and to underscore its diversity in a population that tends to judge Israel harshly, solely on its treatment of Palestinians. Still, it is a topic that is so touchy he did not want his name used.

But David Saranga, who works in the New York consulate, was more open about the need to promote Gay Israel as part of showing liberal America that Israel is more than the place where Jesus once walked. The gay culture is an entryway to the liberal culture, he said, because in New York it is that culture that is creating “a buzz.”

Israel needs to show this community that it is relevant to them by promoting gay tourism, gay artists and films. Showing young, liberal Americans that Israel also has a gay culture goes a long (way) towards informing them that Israel is a place that respects human rights, as well, said Saranga.

In Sum

Pinkwashing is the cynical use of queer people’s hard-won gains by the Israeli government in an attempt to re-brand themselves as progressive, while continuing to violate international law and the human rights of Palestinians.

1. Is Israel pro-Gay? LGBT people are included in obligatory military service in Israel. To the American eye, this could look “progressive.” The state supports events like the Tel Aviv LGBT Film Festival. There are enclaves of Tel Aviv where being out in your complete and daily life is possible, and some people are able to do this. However, overall, Israel is a profoundly homophobic society. The dominance of religious fundamentalists, the sexism and the proximity to family and family oppression makes like very difficult for most people on the LGBT spectrum in Israel.

According to Aeyal Gross, Professor of Law at Tel-Aviv University, “Gay rights have essentially become a public-relations tool” while “conservative and especially religious politicians remain fiercely homophobic.”

2. How Homophobic is Palestine? The Occupied Palestinian Territories are homophobic, sexist arenas. The goal of Pinkwashing is to justify Israel’s policies of Occupation and Separation by promoting the image of a lone oasis of progress surrounded by violent, homophobic Arabs- thereby denying the existence of a Queer Palestinian movements, or of secular, feminist, intellectual and queer Palestinians. By ignoring the multi-dimensionality of Palestinian society, the Israeli government is trying to claim racial supremacy that in their minds justifies the Occupation. Yet, nothing justifies the occupation. “While Palestinians in Israel, Jerusalem, and the Occupied Territories of the West Bank and Gaza constitute one community,” says Haneen Maikay, director of alQaws: For Sexual and Gender Diversity in Palestinian Society. “Our different legal statuses and the different realities of each of these locations – including, for example, restrictions on the freedom of movement of Palestinians from the West Bank and Gaza – severely constrain our ability to meet as a community.”

Why Queers Are Susceptible to Pink Washing

What makes LGBT people and their allies so susceptible to Homonationalism and Pinkwashing is the emotional legacy of homophobia. The vast majority of Queers have had profound oppression experiences, often in the searing realm of Family, reflected by the lack of legal rights, and reinforced by distorted representations in Arts and Entertainment. The relative civil equality of white gays in The Netherlands and Germany has only been achieved within a generation, and still does not erase the pain of familial and cultural exclusion. As a consequence, many people have come to mistakenly assess how advanced a country is by how it responds to homosexuality.

Yet, in a selective democracy like Israel, the inclusion of LGBT Jews in the military, or the relative openness of Tel Aviv are not accurate measures of broad human rights. By deliberately Pinkwashing, the Israeli government ends up exploiting both the Israeli and Palestinian LGBT communities to cynically claim broad personal freedom that the on-going Occupation insistently belies.

A version of this post originally appeared at prettyqueer.com.

About Sarah Schulman

Sarah Schulman is the author of 17 books, most recently THE GENTRIFICATION OF THE MIND : Witness to a Lost Imagination (U of Cal Press), TIES THAT BIND: Familial Homophobia and Its Consequences (The New Press) and the novel, THE MERE FUTURE (Arsenal Pulp Press.) She is co-founder, with Jim Hubbard of his film UNITED IN ANGER: A History of ACT UP, and the ACT UP Oral History Project (ww.actuporalhistory.org) Sarah is a Distinguished Professor of the Humanities at the City University of New York, College of Staten Island.