|
NEWS
April 24th
2003
|
||
|
The Very Greedy Caterpillar On 16th March 2003 Rachel Corrie, a 23 year old US citizen was killed trying to prevent an illegal home demolition by the Israeli military. Rachel, a member of the International Solidarity Movement (ISM), was deliberately killed by an IDF soldier driving a Caterpillar D-9 bulldozer. The driver then backed up and ran over her again. Although Rachel is the first American to die in this way in Palestine she is only one of several civilians that have been killed there in recent years using Caterpillar bulldozers.1 On April 11th 2002, Jamal Fayed, a severely disabled 38 year old Palestinian was crushed to death when his home was bulldozed by the IDF. Although his family had shown the soldiers preparing to demolish the house proof that he was paralysed and unable to leave without their assistance, they refused to co-operate and the house was demolished with Jamal still inside. Five days earlier, in the old town of Nablus, eight members of another family, including three children, their pregnant mother and 85 year old grandfather were killed when the IDF bulldozed their home using a D-9.2 According to the US Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation 'CAT equipment is being used daily in the commission of war crimes and violations of human rights.'3 Bulldozers have been used by the Israeli military to carry out housing demolitions to achieve Israeli strategic and demographic objectives whilst systematically violating the human rights of the Palestinian people.4 It has been estimated that, since 1967, over 7,000 home demolitions have occurred across the occupied territories, leaving some 50,000 Palestinians homeless. Israeli bulldozers have also been used to destroy agricultural land in Palestine, thus depriving Palestinians of the opportunity to support themselves. For example, more than 385,000 olive trees are reported to have been uprooted by Israeli troops and settlers during the current intifada, using Caterpillar equipment.5 According to SUSTAIN (Stop US Tax-funded Aid to Israel Now), the vast majority of home demolitions are directed against civilians who have not been charged with terrorism or any other crimes. The pretext for the demolitions, which can occur with as little as 24 hours notice, is generally that the demolished homes were built without permits. However, these permits are apparently notoriously difficult for Palestinians to obtain, costing as much as $20,000 and with applications taking as long as five years to process.6 In practice, housing demolitions provide a means to 'persuade' Palestinians to move away from areas where Israel wishes to consolidate its own presence. Apparently, the majority of Palestinian homes that have been demolished have been situated near existing Jewish settlements or bypass roads. The demolitions therefore serve to prevent territorial contiguity between Palestinian population centres, with obvious implications for the borders of any future Palestinian state. The rationale behind the demolitions has also been expanded to include the 'collective punishment' of families and associates of suicide bombers, even when they have not been found guilty of any crime themselves.7 This violates both International human rights law and the essence of Israeli civil law, since it constitutes extra-judicial punishment. The Fourth Geneva Convention explicitly forbids 'the demolition of houses or destruction of other private property of individuals residing in occupied territories'(Article 53) as well as collective punishment (Article 33).8 When Caterpillar began doing business with Israel, it could scarcely have known that its bulldozers would be used to commit human rights abuses. Now however, such violations are hardly isolated or unexpected 'excesses' by the Israeli military, but the predictable outcome of established Israeli policy. However, despite having received detailed documentation of the crimes being committed using its equipment and despite appeals from churches, human rights organisations and thousands of individuals, the Caterpillar corporation has refused to take responsibility for the way that its equipment is being used. As Benjamin Cordani, the company's Media Representative for Social Responsibility puts it “we do not and cannot base sales on a customer's intended use for our product...We follow the US government's direction on international sales and have a process in place to ensure that we follow all laws and guidelines.”This callous 'market takes precedence' argument is in stark contrast to the company's professed commitment on its website to 'enabling positive and responsible growth around the world' and its claim to 'believe in the value of social and environmental responsibility.'9 So far the company has refused to even meet with members of SUSTAIN and other organisations campaigning on this issue. Groups have therefore called for a boycott of the Caterpillar (CAT) brand, which includes some consumer products such as boots and t-shirts which are sold through a number of high-street stores in the UK.10 This is by no means the first time that the company has come under fire because of its unethical behaviour. The US publication the Multinational Monitor branded the company one of the 'ten worst corporations' of 1996 and 1992 because of alleged 'union busting' and workers rights violations in the US.11 The company is also the subject of a boycott call from a number of different organisations due to its investments in Burma. In addition, the company has aggressively sought construction contracts with the Chinese government for the notorious Three Gorges Dam Project. This massive hydroelectric project is causing massive displacement in the region, destroying entire towns and causing catastrophic environmental damage.12 Despite Caterpillar's appalling track record, campaigners are adamant that their campaign against Caterpillar's complicity in the IDF's demolition policy is one that they can win. SUSTAIN point out that Caterpillar's sales to the IDF only constitute a small proportion of its global business and that a demand for the company to 'publicly refuse any more sales to the IDF is one they can accept without doing any substantial damage to their bottom line.' Since a large part of the company's business is with the Arab world it could be that the company has far more to lose in risking business with other Middle Eastern countries, should the boycott grow, than it does in losing Israeli custom.13 With enough public pressure, Caterpillar could be forced to metamorphose into a rather more ethical beast. For more information about Caterpillar and the Israel boycott in general contact the Palestine Solidarity Campaign on 0207 700 6192 or visit www.palestinesolidaritycampaign.org . 1 DC SUSTAIN (2003) Press Release: Caterpillar supplies
bulldozer used to kill American peacekeeper: activists demand an end
to sales to Israeli defence forces, 17/3/03, www.sustaincampaign.org
, viewed 11/4/03 |