Israel Matzav

Friday, June 12, 2015

Orange: Just another company of French anti-Semites

I'm sure you'll all be shocked to hear that Orange, which just last week was railing about pulling out of Israel because we 'occupy territory' services just about every other occupied territory in the world. This is Eugene Kontorovich.

To be sure major French companies, like Total, are quite active in Moroccan-occupied Western Sahara, with the apparent approval of the French government. But it turns out that Orange itself directly and openly operates in occupied territory. Orange provides cell phone service in Nagorno-Karabakh, an area of Azerbaijan that has been occupied by Armenia since seizing it in a bloody 1992-94 war. The U.N., along with the E.U. and U.S., considers the area occupied territory. Nonetheless, Armenian settlers have moved into the occupied territory in in significant numbers, amid constant complaints from Baku and others.

Nor is this Karabakh some long-forgotten frozen conflict. Fighting broke out this year across the line of control, killing dozens, and a full scale war over the occupied territory is looming.

In other words, Orange, and the French government, is committing what a senior French official just described as a war crime. Indeed, by the theoretical international law standards applied to Israel, Orange’s behavior in Armenia is particularly egregious. Having cell phone towers in the West Bank (the purported crime of Orange’s Israeli licensee) does not involve any recognition of Israeli sovereignty or any judgement about the status of the territory.

On the other hand, Orange’s website touting its Karabakh service refers to the territory as “NKR”, or the Nagorno-Karabakh Republic. This refers to the self-proclaimed, entirely unrecognized state (akin to the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus) which is entirely controlled by Armenia. U.N. Resolutions have specifically called for the “nonrecognition” of the NKR. Orange’s Armenian website also calls the area “Artsakh,” the ancient name for the region favored by Armenia nationalists. It would be as if Orange, instead of complaining about, boasted of its “service in Judea and Samaria.” Indeed, Orange cravenly calls NKR a “country,” despite the clear admonition of its own government and UN against recognition of what is universally regarded as Azerbaijani territory. It would be as if Orange boasted of its service in the “Golan Heights of Israel.”

Orange proudly advertises its Nagorno-Karabakh service on the homepage of its Armenia site. A press release announcing the service said its goal is make things more “convenient” for Armenians traveling into the occupied territory. And the service is done in cooperation with a local telecom firm based entirely in, and dedicated to primarily serving, the occupied territory.

In an even more amazing twist, given the French attitude towards the West Bank, Orange supports fundraising for Armenian settlements in Karabakh.

Unlike its Israel service, which is operated by a local company that merely licenses the trademark, Orange Armenia is directly run by the French-based company, and headed by a French executive, Francis Gelibter. Orange itself is quarter-owned by the French government. So France has, just this year, begun participating in what its own senior foreign ministry officials call a war crime when Israel does it.

Damned French anti-Semitic hypocrites. Read the whole thing.

Labels: BDS, cell phone, feckless French, French anti-Semitism, hypocrisy, Orange

Wednesday, June 10, 2015

Our own worst enemy

The recent uproar over remarks (later walked back) by the President of the French international phone conglomerate Orange about how he would shut down operations in Israel if he could, was the result of pressure applied by Leftist Israeli NGO's financed (via the New Israel Fund) by European governments and American Jewish Federations. Ronn Torossian reports (Hat Tip: Richard A).

What prompted these statements? Several NGOs that lead the boycott against Israel in Europe, including the Israeli organization “Who Profits from the Occupation?” issued a report in France intended to pressure Orange.

Who Profits accused Partner (the Orange Brand partner in Israel), of aiding war efforts during Operation Protective Edge, participating in the Adopt a Soldier project, and offering discounted service rates to IDF soldiers.

"Who Profits from the Occupation?" is a project launched in 2006 by Coalition of Women for Peace, an organization which has received funding from the New Israel Fund.

In 2013, following the growth and establishment of a research center under the auspices of "Who Profits", the project registered as an independent organization, and today they run joint activities as sister organizations. "Who Profits" is one of the leading organizations in the Anti-Israel boycott campaign and manages a website with a database on companies that invest or are involved in projects located over the Green Line or in Israeli security companies.The website encourages international companies and foreign countries to divest themselves of such investments.

...

In short, the NIF provided funding to Coalition of Women for Peace during the launch of the "Who Profits" project, one of the leading organizations in the boycott campaign against Israel. The damage caused by the activities of Coalition of Women for Peace continues to have repercussions to this day.

Shamefully, certain American Jewish extremists including The Jewish Communal Fund, Alisa Doctoroff, President of UJA-Federation, the Leichtag Foundation and others donate significantly to The New Israel Fund, thus supporting and encouraging boycotts against Israel.

Shameful is not a strong enough word.

Indeed.

Labels: BDS, boycott divest sanction, Jewish anti-Semitism, Jewish Federations of North America, New Israel Fund, New York Jewish Federation, Orange, self-hating Jews, UJA-Federation

Sunday, June 07, 2015

And then there were two: South Carolina says 'no' to BDS (and Orange stays in Israel)

Jews make up a mere 0.3% of its population, so they obviously have little or nothing to do with it, but the State of South Carolina has become the second American state to ban BDS.

Last month, the Illinois state legislature unanimously approved a bill barring the state from investing its pension funds in companies that boycott Israel. The legislation put a hefty price tag on participation in BDS: It ensured that taxpayer money would not go toward supporting companies that join forces with a movement widely understood as seeking to abolish the world’s only Jewish state.

Yesterday, South Carolina became the second state to join this anti-BDS brigade by passing a law that bars state agencies from contracting with any business that boycotts others “based on race, color, religion, gender, or national origin.” The last item on the list—”national origin”—effectively encompasses boycotts of the state of Israel, but is not limited to them. Both bills enable citizens to ensure that their taxes are not used to indirectly bolster a movement they oppose.

Eugene Kontorovich, a professor at Northwestern University School of Law who consulted with the drafters of South Carolina’s bill, explained the rationale for this sort of legislation in The Washington Post:

A major tactic of BDS is to attempt to get state universities and other governmental entities to cut ties with Israel. There is no doubt that BDS proponents are within their constitutional rights to seek governmental action against companies in response to the alleged bad deeds of Israel’s government. But this constitutional protection is not one-sided, and cuts both ways. Supporters of Israel can seek government action in response to the alleged bad deeds of the boycotters.
Given the ease with which Illinois and South Carolina passed their laws, it seems likely that similar pro-Israel bills will be brought to the floors of other state legislatures in the future. At the same time, Congress has approved an anti-BDS amendment to the negotiating guidelines for the Trans-Pacific Partnership treaty it is currently debating.

In other weekend news, the French cellular company Orange announced that they won't be leaving Israel after all.

"Orange does not support any form of boycott, in Israel or anywhere else in the world," Richard said in comments emailed to news agency Agence France Presse and confirmed by an Orange spokesman.

"Our decision on the use of the brand is motivated - as it is all over the world - solely by our brand strategy. Let me make it very clear that the Orange Group is in Israel to stay."

Orange is present in Israel via Orange Business Services, Internet television unit Viaccess-Orca, and Orange laboratories.

Richard had been quoted by media reports as saying at a news conference in Cairo on Wednesday that he was willing to withdraw the Orange brand from Israel "tomorrow morning".

An Orange spokesman said there had been a "huge misunderstanding", and that Richard had not been referring to exiting the country.

In a recording of excerpts of the conference emailed by the spokesman, Richard said Orange had negotiated a termination date in the contract regarding the use of the Orange brand.

"Now...we have the capacity to terminate this contract in the future," he said. "Our intention is to terminate the contract. Our intention is as soon as possible from a contractual point of view and preserving our interests of course, our intention is to withdraw Orange brand from Israel."

He added: "Our group policy is not to license our brand when we're not the operator... There isn't a single country in the world where we do that, so there's no reason to do it in Israel either... We want to control our brand."

Partner said the only link between it and Orange was the brand, used by the Israeli company since 1998.

But the cellular phone company brand will not be known as 'Orange' anymore. Fine with me.

Labels: BDS, boycott divest sanction, Orange, South Carolina

Friday, June 05, 2015

Orange CEO 'apologizes' but they're leaving anyway

The CEO of French international cell phone company Orange has apologized for anti-Israel remarks that he made in Egypt on Wednesday. This is from the first link.

“I spoke with the CEO of Orange, Stephane Richard, and I told him that the people of Israel are angered and hurt by his statements,” Deputy Prime Minister Silvan Shalom wrote on his Facebook page. “I told him how it saddened me that he had turned into a tool in the struggle against Israel and that he had lent a hand to the assault by Israel-haters who are trying to harm Israel not just militarily but economically.”

“Richard apologized for his remarks that he made during a conference in Egypt and told me that he is a friend of Israel,” Shalom wrote. “He claimed that his comments were not properly understood and that he spoke only about the economic aspect [of his decision].”

“He apologized on behalf of himself and the company for the remarks, and he said that they condemn all forms of boycotts,” the deputy prime minister wrote.

But Orange isn't staying here (and their brand name is worthless here anyway).

French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius sought to calm a row with Israel on Friday, saying France opposed any boycott of the Jewish state but stressing that Orange, which plans to end its license deal there, was free to define its own policy.

"While it is up to the president of the Orange group to define the commercial strategy of its company, France is firmly opposed to any boycott of Israel," he said in a statement.

And the apology is not much of an apology.

"Moreover, the position of France and the European Union on settlements is consistent and widely known." France in June 2014 issued a warning to French investors that investments in Israeli settlement areas carried legal risks, a move which already raised concerns in Israel.

Look for the BDS'ers to claim victory.

Shabbat Shalom everyone.

Labels: BDS, cell phone, French anti-Semitism, Orange

When is occupation 'occupation'?

Northwestern University law professor Eugene Kontorovich points out some of the hypocrisy in the way that the French government (25% shareholder) is relating to the Israeli 'occupation' of Judea and Samaria, as compared with how it relates to the Moroccan occupation of Western Sahara and the Turkish occupation of Cyprus.

On Wednesday the CEO of the French telecom firm Orange announced that he sought to “drop” his business in Israel, done through an Israeli subsidiary. Speaking at a meeting in Cairo, he emphasized that this was action was mostly to win the “trust” of Arab countries. But there was also a suggestion that this is because the Israeli affiliate has some cellular antennae across the Green Line.

The French Ambassador to the U.S., (and formerly Israel), defended the Orange CEO’s statement on Twitter:‘

“4th Geneva convention : settlement policy in occupied territories is illegal. It is illegal to contribute to it in any way.”

That statement is entirely baseless. Even if settlements are illegal, there is no ban on business in the territories, or with settlers. Certainly there is no tertiary obligation to not do business with businesses that have some tangential business in such territory. All this is demonstrated extensively in my new paper, some of which I tried to share with Amb. Araud.

...

The Orange incident, and the Ambassador’s legal claim, are also bad news for a number of French companies, like the oil giant Total, which is active in Moroccan-occupied Western Sahara against the vociferous protests of the indigenous Sawahari people. (There are many other examples, like Michelin in Turkish-occupied Cyprus.) The French government has never criticized any of these controversial activities in any way. But if the Ambassador’s legal claim is right, he has provided the basis for war crimes prosecutions of France’s leading executives.

Amb. Araud responded to my question by revealing that he had no idea one of his country’s largest companies was engaged in an major project that, by his account, is a war crime.

The Ambassador, after blocking me, revealed that his international law claims are not really about international law:

I speak of one occupied territory. I am answered on other territories. I conclude that everybody agrees on what I say on the former.
In other words, no fairs to cite precedents and practice. But of course, if you are talking about international law, “other territories” are entirely relevant. First, for something to be law, it has to be a rule that applies to similar situations. And for it to be international, well, those situations will involve different countries.

So we have a diplomat blocking a university professor on Twitter for pointing out that he was mistaken. And not for the first time, we have proof that those who oppose the Israeli 'occupation' of Judea and Samaria are incapable of passing Natan Sharansky's 3D test.

Read the whole thing.

Labels: anti-Semitism, French anti-Semitism, Morocco, Natan Sharansky, occupation, Orange, Turkish occupation of Cyprus, Western Sahara

Orange to sever links to Israeli affiliate

French mobile communications giant Orange has announced that it is severing its links with Partner, its Israeli affiliate. The move came on Thursday, a day after Orange's CEO said that he would like to do so but for the heavy penalties that would be involved. Orange denies that the move is politically motivated.

A statement from the company said that it doesn’t want to maintain its brand presence “in countries in which it is not, or is no longer, an operator.”

It clarified that it “does not engage in any kind of political debate under any circumstance.”

The announcement came a day after Orange CEO Stephane Richard said his company intended to withdraw the company brand from Israel as soon as possible, but that the move would take time.

He said that he would like to end cooperation with Partner “tomorrow,” but that to do so would incur a “huge risk” of penalties.

“Our intention is to withdraw from Israel. It will take time” but “for sure we will do it,” he said. “I am ready to do this tomorrow morning… but without exposing Orange to huge risks.”

“I know that it is a sensitive issue here in Egypt, but not only in Egypt … We want to be one of the trustful partners of all Arab countries.”

Orange does not operate in Israel but licenses its name to Partner Communications. On Wednesday, outgoing Partner head Haim Romano said the firms had recently renewed its agreement for another 10 years.

Here in Israel, no one is buying the claim that this is not political.

“I am very, very angry. I think that what he said is the result of very significant pressure from pro-Palestinian [groups],” incoming Partner CEO Isaac Benbenisti told Army Radio following Richard’s comments.

Also on Thursday, Culture Minister Miri Regev called on the French president to fire the chief executive of telecom giant Orange SA.

“The French government must show zero tolerance for anti-Semitism,” Regev said in a text message. She also urged Jewish customers of Orange in France and around the world to drop their service and switch carriers.

On Wednesday, Deputy Foreign Minister Tzipi Hotovely wrote to Richard asking for clarification.

“I must admit to have been taken aback by these reports which do not become a responsible global company such as Orange,” she said in the English-language letter, a copy of which was seen by AFP.

“I am confident that these reports do not reflect the intent of your company. I therefore urge you to clarify the matter as soon as possible.”

...

French human rights organizations have been pushing their government, which has a quarter stake in Orange, and the company itself, to end the relationship over Partner Communications Ltd.’s activity in Israeli settlements, which are considered illegal by the international community.

The carrier, one of three major providers in the Israeli cell market, is available in Israeli settlements in the West Bank.

At the end of May, five non-governmental organizations and two unions in France asked Orange to state publicly its willingness to sever its ties with Partner and denounce “attacks on human rights” they said the Israeli company had carried out.

In Egypt, local Orange franchisee Mobinil has also come under pressure from BDS activists protesting Orange’s business with Israel.

This apparently means that Partner will be operating on its own without the Orange label - as do all our other cell phone companies. My guess is that other than not seeing the Orange logo every time you turn on your (new) phone, the only effect on customers will be that you may no longer be able to buy Orange's international packages when you travel abroad. Yes, that could hurt them.

But most Jewish Israelis would oppose committing suicide (by fleeing Judea and Samaria) over this.

Labels: BDS, cell phone, Orange