Reps. Mike Lawler (R-N.Y.) and Josh Gottheimer (D-N.J.) introduced a bipartisan bill to amend the existing U.S. Anti-Boycott Law, which would make it clear that boycotts by international governmental organizations (IGOs), like the United Nations, are covered by the law.
Why some see that legislation as controversial is baffling.
The original U.S. Anti-Boycott Law was passed in 1979. It was enacted in response to the notorious Arab League boycott of Israel, and, among other things, was designed to protect America’s ally, Israel.
The law declares it is the policy of the United States “to oppose restrictive trade practices or boycotts fostered or imposed by any foreign country against other countries friendly to the United States or against any United States person.” The use of the terms “fostered” and “foreign country” is cogent. Neither of these terms is precisely defined, unlike, for example, the term “foreign state,” which is expressly defined in the U.S. Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act.
The legislative history of the Anti-Boycott Law supports a broad interpretation of these words to be as inclusive as possible and to avoid the subterfuge of using nonstate actors to evade the law’s provisions. The law was intended to cover non-government organizations like the Arab League and, hence, the use of these more expansive terms.
A foreign source must merely foster the unsanctioned boycott to trigger application of the law; it is not required to control the person in the United States who is participating in the boycott.
With an intent to comply with or support the unsanctioned foreign boycott, one need only refuse, or agree to refuse, to do business with the boycotted country or company to violate the law. This applies to individuals (including foreign nationals), corporations and unincorporated associations that are resident in the United States.
This would, therefore, include ongoing efforts against Israel fostered by the Iranian regime, directly or indirectly. That includes their myriad agents, proxies, allied non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and other organizations, such as designated Foreign Terrorist Organizations Hamas and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, as well as Samidoun, which was just sanctioned by the U.S. Treasury Department.
I can’t help but wonder about the ignorance or insensitivity of many of the dilettante boycotters who have joined with such abhorrent terrorists. The avowed purpose of waging this economic war, better known as the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement (BDS), against Israel and its people is to delegitimize and destroy the State of Israel and ethnically cleanse it of Jews. Don’t they realize they have become the useful dupes of the terrorist Hamas and Iranian regimes?
In recent years, BDS efforts have been redoubled as a part of the pro-Hamas movement on college campuses and elsewhere. On July 9, 2024, U.S. Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines issued a statement saying: “In recent weeks, Iranian government actors have sought to opportunistically take advantage of ongoing protests regarding the war in Gaza, using a playbook we’ve seen other actors use over the years. We have observed actors tied to Iran’s government posing as activists online, seeking to encourage protests, and even providing financial support to protesters.”
The Anti-Boycott Law also expressly prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, religion, sex or national origin. Accordingly, “U.S. persons” may not treat U.S. citizens overseas any differently from those in the United States. In this regard, consider the approximately 500,000 Americans living in Israel (including the approximately 60,000 reportedly living in Judea and Samaria), who are entitled to be free of any discrimination under the law, including being the target of boycotts.
The 1924 Anglo-American Convention, a treaty between the United States and Great Britain, aimed to define the rights of each government and its nationals in British Mandatory Palestine. Under U.S. law, it assures Jews, even American Jews, of their right to live in Israel. Oslo II also permits building and living there. The fact that sponsors of the boycott incorrectly deem their living in Israel to be a violation of so-called Palestinian rights under international law is irrelevant and indicative of their unlawful intent. They are not entitled to make up and execute their own contrived foreign policy or otherwise discriminate against a U.S. citizen in Israel.
The U.S. Department of Commerce oversees enforcement of U.S. Anti-Boycott Law, including against individuals and entities participating in a boycott fostered by a foreign source not approved or sanctioned by the U.S. government.
BDS is antisemitic and foolish. Just like every other unsanctioned foreign boycott, an IGO-fostered boycott of Israel should be covered under the provisions of the U.S. Anti-Boycott Law. It should not matter whether it’s the original Arab League or some other foreign-inspired alignment at the United Nations or one of its entities promoting or fostering a boycott of America’s ally Israel; it should be prohibited.