It's illegal for U.S. companies to boycott Israeli goods?

[Lanny_MacDonald]

Seems so according to this information.

http://www.bis.doc.gov/news/2002/umustcomply11_4_02.htm

Kind of ties your hands of you disagree with the politics going on and wish to take your business elsewhere. I wonder why legislation like this does not exist to protect relations with other countries?

[Nehkara]

Simply, I think the US has too much invested in Israel to abandon them... so they made sure no one in the US can.

[kermitology]

Originally Posted by Nehkara

Simply, I think the US has too much invested in Israel to abandon them... so they made sure no one in the US can.

Bingo..

[Bleeding Red]

"The antiboycott laws, however, apply to all boycotts imposed by foreign countries that are unsanctioned by the United States."

The antiboycott Laws "have the effect of preventing U.S. firms from being used to implement foreign policies of other nations which run counter to U.S. policy."

http://www.bis.doc.gov/AntiboycottCompliance/oacrequirements.html

(Thanks Lanny, you mentioned in another thread that one should always look beyond the single linked page)

The Arab boycott may have been the reason the laws were written, but it seems the laws apply to any "unsanctioned" boycotts.

Is the US-Cuba relationship a sanctioned boycott?

If Canada decided to boycott South Korean businesses I would think that the US laws protect them as well.

[Bring_Back_Shantz]

[quote=Bleeding Red]

Is the US-Cuba relationship a sanctioned boycott?
quote]

Well considering that it is the American Government that is boycotting Cuba, I'd go out on a limb and say that the American Government probably considers it a sanctioned boycott. BUt that's just me.

[Footscray]

Didn't alot of american companies boycott french goods (largely wines) going against these laws during the freedom fries embarassment?

[Bring_Back_Shantz]

Originally Posted by Footscray

Didn't alot of american companies boycott french goods (largely wines) going against these laws during the freedom fries embarassment?

I think you're missing the point. It's fine for a company to boycott a country but not if it is in support of another country boycotting it.

For example:

Let's say Canada is boycotting Spain for some reason, and the American government says "We agree with Canada, and we think it's okay for them to Boycott Spain"
In that case an American company is okay to stop buying whatever it is that Spain produces because it is an officially sanctioned boycott but the US is not officiall boycotting Spain. (Can't think of an example of this).

If however the American government said "We don't think Canada should do that because the pople of Spain are such courteous lovers"
At that point it is not a sanctioned boycott and American companies aren't allowed to boycott Spain. (This is what's going on right now)

If the American Government decided that they hated courteous lovers and said "We're boycotting Spain, becasue they want to cuddle all the damn time", then American companies would not be allowed to import anything from Spain at all, they'd have no choice (This is what's going on with cuba).

If the American government wasn't happy with Spain because they were supposed to be courteous lovers, but instead just wanted to watch the game, they could decide to call them a bunch of jerks, but not go so far as to boycott the, then American companies would be free to either import stuff from Spain, or boycott them as they saw fit. (this is what happend with France)

Clear?

[Lanny_MacDonald]

Originally Posted by Bleeding Red

"The antiboycott laws, however, apply to all boycotts imposed by foreign countries that are unsanctioned by the United States."

The antiboycott Laws "have the effect of preventing U.S. firms from being used to implement foreign policies of other nations which run counter to U.S. policy."

http://www.bis.doc.gov/AntiboycottCompliance/oacrequirements.html

(Thanks Lanny, you mentioned in another thread that one should always look beyond the single linked page)

The Arab boycott may have been the reason the laws were written, but it seems the laws apply to any "unsanctioned" boycotts.

Is the US-Cuba relationship a sanctioned boycott?

If Canada decided to boycott South Korean businesses I would think that the US laws protect them as well.

I don't see anything fro what you posted that makes it less illegal to boycott any country (Israel being the example) that the Feds deem as being friendly or not. It is still a fineable offense to boycott Israel, and those companies that do face a substantial fine. Seems kind of un-American does it not? Why should the government be able to tell you who you can and can't decide to do business with? If I wish to support a boycott of Israel, or Iran, or Sweden (****ing chicken Swedes!) why should I not be able to do so, and why should I be fined for executing my freedom of expression? I just found this to be yet another in a long line of contradictions in the system and one less reason for people to hate us for our freedoms.

[Footscray]

Originally Posted by Bring_Back_Shantz

I think you're missing the point. It's fine for a company to boycott a country but not if it is in support of another country boycotting it.

For example:

Let's say Canada is boycotting Spain for some reason, and the American government says "We agree with Canada, and we think it's okay for them to Boycott Spain"
In that case an American company is okay to stop buying whatever it is that Spain produces because it is an officially sanctioned boycott but the US is not officiall boycotting Spain. (Can't think of an example of this).

If however the American government said "We don't think Canada should do that because the pople of Spain are such courteous lovers"
At that point it is not a sanctioned boycott and American companies aren't allowed to boycott Spain. (This is what's going on right now)

If the American Government decided that they hated courteous lovers and said "We're boycotting Spain, becasue they want to cuddle all the damn time", then American companies would not be allowed to import anything from Spain at all, they'd have no choice (This is what's going on with cuba).

If the American government wasn't happy with Spain because they were supposed to be courteous lovers, but instead just wanted to watch the game, they could decide to call them a bunch of jerks, but not go so far as to boycott the, then American companies would be free to either import stuff from Spain, or boycott them as they saw fit. (this is what happend with France)

Clear?

I've got it, didn't read it through thoroughly enough, and very nice analogy might I add .

[Calgaryborn]

People have the freedom to boycott whom they wish. Only Companies can't boycott a particular country because of other foreign government's pressure.

I imagine this Arab league has pressured companies not to trade with Israel if they want access to their markets. A business might weigh the relatively small business opportunities in Israel against a much larger Arab world and choose the later. By making it a rule that no American business can enter into such a boycott the Arab league loses the ability to make american businesses choose. I suppose they could boycott all american products but, that defeats the purpose of the boycott. A smart move by America.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by Calgaryborn

People have the freedom to boycott whom they wish. Only Companies can't boycott a particular country because of other foreign government's pressure.

I imagine this Arab league has pressured companies not to trade with Israel if they want access to their markets. A business might weigh the relatively small business opportunities in Israel against a much larger Arab world and choose the later. By making it a rule that no American business can enter into such a boycott the Arab league loses the ability to make american businesses choose. I suppose they could boycott all american products but, that defeats the purpose of the boycott. A smart move by America.

It's a smart move to force private companies to make poor, by your own explanation, business decisions?

How is such a law enforced? How does one exactly "enter into a boycott"? You don't have to pay a fee, put up a sign or apply for a license to not buy, sell or trade with anyone else. If you want to join a boycott it's pretty easy -- just do it. Stop buying from, selling too or trading with whoever you are boycotting.

They hate us for our freedoms.

[Calgaryborn]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

It's a smart move to force private companies to make poor, by your own explanation, business decisions?

How is such a law enforced? How does one exactly "enter into a boycott"? You don't have to pay a fee, put up a sign or apply for a license to not buy, sell or trade with anyone else. If you want to join a boycott it's pretty easy -- just do it. Stop buying from, selling too or trading with whoever you are boycotting.

They hate us for our freedoms.

The Arab world wouldn't sustain a boycott against all American goods. They like stuff as much as us. Therefore the law makes their boycott ineffective.

The enforcement would be easy. Investigate any reported company which ships to Arab countries but, refuses to ship to Israel for comparative cost.

People talk on this board about America invading this country or that because of oil but, have you ever considered the influence these Arab countries have on Europe and China because of Oil. It seems to me that they have stronger reasons than American to choose a side based upon oil. Also, this notion that if Israel would give up the "occupied" lands that there would be peace is nonsense. As the leader of Iran said today the goal is the eradication of Israel. Ceasefires and concessions are only strategic steps to wards that ultimate goal.

[Lanny_MacDonald]

Originally Posted by Calgaryborn

The Arab world wouldn't sustain a boycott against all American goods. They like stuff as much as us. Therefore the law makes their boycott ineffective.

The enforcement would be easy. Investigate any reported company which ships to Arab countries but, refuses to ship to Israel for comparative cost.

People talk on this board about America invading this country or that because of oil but, have you ever considered the influence these Arab countries have on Europe and China because of Oil. It seems to me that they have stronger reasons than American to choose a side based upon oil. Also, this notion that if Israel would give up the "occupied" lands that there would be peace is nonsense. As the leader of Iran said today the goal is the eradication of Israel. Ceasefires and concessions are only strategic steps to wards that ultimate goal.

What are you talking about? Who cares if the Arabs decide to boycott American goods. The whole matter is that American companies cannot boycott Israeli companies or goods. It appears we aren't as free to express our opinions as so many like to think, especially when it comes to Israel. Why should Israel always be a special case?

On to oil, and the Arab influence over Europe and China, yeah, that makes all the sense in the world. I mean, all the fashion trends in both countries are leaning toward the burka and flowing robes! And its obvious that both the Europeans and the Chinese are nothing but Arab lapdogs, otherwise they would be invading middle eastern countries too!



I wouldn't be taking what Ahmadinejad said literally nor too seriously. The guy has been backed into a corner and is lashing out politically at one spot where he knows America will pay attention. He's holding America's precious Ming vase and is telling them that if they continue to come closer, he's going to smash it. Iran has more than enough to worry about at the moment without making major overtures toward Israel. They're surrounded by American forces and are as nervous as a long tailed cat in a room full of rocking chairs.

[Bleeding Red]

Originally Posted by Lanny_MacDonald

The whole matter is that American companies cannot boycott Israeli companies or goods. It appears we aren't as free to express our opinions as so many like to think, especially when it comes to Israel. Why should Israel always be a special case?

I'm not sure where CalgaryBorn was going with his last paragraph either.

So, the two issues are A) why are American Companies not free to do as they will (follow the boycott or not) and B) why is Israel getting special treatment?

as for B), well, in looking at law (as described on that website) it seems to me that Israel is the 'special case' here because no other country/institution (Arab League) is calling for a similar boycott of another country. Sure, the Arab League called for the boycott and the US responded with the antiboycott law, but I would think that if Austraila called for a boycott of US companies that did buisiness with South Korea, that the law would kick in for that as well.

As for the freedom issue (A), well there are laws prohibiting companies from doing all sorts of things - from minimum wage laws to polution laws.

I do not think that there is anything preventing you as an individual from joining a boycott - The United Church called for a boycott of Israeli products (and resolved to sell off any investments they had in companies that did business with Israel) - I do not think the law applies to them.

I do not know how they would enforce the antiboycott law on an independent consultant ro sole-practitioner (I think both can incorporate) who chose to not accept a client linked to Israel for fear of losing a client linked to the Arab League?

[RedMan12]

Originally Posted by Footscray

Didn't alot of american companies boycott french goods (largely wines) going against these laws during the freedom fries embarassment?

I remember that when I lived in the States. One ice cream store in NJ said "150 falvours but no French Vanilla"

[Azure]

Originally Posted by RedMan12

I remember that when I lived in the States. One ice cream store in NJ said "150 falvours but no French Vanilla"

LOL.

As wierd as that may sound, its always fun to bash the French.