Corvallis City Councilors have set a Monday, October 20 public hearing on Councilor Briae Lewis’ resolution against Israel. At the direction of the Council, City lawyers and staff have revised the original draft, which was first introduced in July.
Lewis has been seeking to bar the City from investing in Israeli companies, and companies that do business with Israel. She seeks for the City to align with the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement, or BDS. You’ll see why this is controversial in a minute.
The new draft’s language gives the City far broader power over public investments than the original. It also offers no explicit means for public input over future investment decisions, or even how taxpayers can know what future decisions are being made. It really is carte blanche for the Council to do whatever it wants from now on.
Titled A Resolution Prohibiting Investment in Genocide, Apartheid, Illegal Occupation, Mass Deportation and Mass Incarceration, it sounds like all laudable goals. Getting into the details, however, not so much. The rewritten resolution defines none of its title terms. It still allows the Palestinian led BDS movement to define those terms through what can fairly be seen as their partner, the American Friends Service Committee, or AFSC. Both groups are all about targeting Israel and are viewed worldwide as antisemitic.
Wait, antisemitic. Yes. These groups don’t just criticize the world’s only Jewish state. That wouldn’t be antisemitic in any way. Israel can be criticized like any other nation-state, and that’s not antisemitism.
But these groups crossover into something else. They don’t believe there should even be a Jewish state. This is called delegitimization, and it is viewed as implicitly antisemitic by most any internationally accepted definition. Likewise, the BDS movement and AFSC seek the destruction of Israel, and they rationalize that view with demonizing propaganda and impossible double standards that are never applied to any other country than Israel. All of this is deeply antisemitic.
But aside from any of that, the very language and lack of public oversight in this newly rewritten draft of Lewis’ resolution practically guarantees it will not do as advertised over the course of years.
Murkey language and processes
The rewrite doesn’t really commit the City to anything other than whatever it wants to do at any given time. Today, the Council may want to single out Isreal. Tomorrow or ten years from now that may morph into something completely different. And the public, that’s you, may never know.
There is zero callout in this resolution for any ongoing public input, review or oversight. And considering that none of the resolution’s title terms, which we remind you are genocide, apartheid, illegal occupation, mass incarceration and mass deportation are even minimally defined by the resolution itself; the lack of an ongoing public review structure is especially worrying.
After all, the resolution doesn’t say the City will use AFSC divestment lists, only that they may. Not that we support using their lists, quite the opposite. But even if we did, nobody knows who will be controlling what goes on those lists in five or ten years. And now add there’s not even a guarantee the City will use any list at all. They can just do whatever they want.
As stands, there’s no telling how future Councils will interpret the resolution. Its own terms are undefined. There are no determinative tests for the acceptability of an investment. At one point, the language even starts morphing in on itself to include public health and safety investments; and who knows what that could wind up meaning.
This is ambiguity at a farcical level. But it shouldn’t be. We’re talking money, public funds, taxpayer dollars.
But beyond those dollars, if you support the aims of this resolution, its imprecise language and lack of public oversight are troubling. It means you cannot rely on it delivering as promised over a course of years. In fact, given human nature, it almost certainly won’t.
Antisemitic demonization and double standards; the propagandist’s toolkit
War is, by definition, horrific. And the war with Hamas was not a war of choice for Israel. They had been living with ‘minor’ Hamas missile and terrorist attacks for years when the group invaded on October 7, 2023. Hamas tortured, mutilated, raped and murdered 1,200 Israelis that day.
If the same percentage of the U.S. population had been attacked and killed that day, over 43,000 Americans would have died. Israel is a small country. Also, there were kidnappings. 251 Israeli civilians were kidnapped, many of them enduring the same fates as those that preceded them in death.
The atrocities included the burning of families, mass shootings of people cornered in public bomb shelters. Babies and elderly Holocaust survivors were kidnapped. Mothers and daughters raped. Hamas started the war that day. Hamas that was founded on a charter calling for the killing of Jews. Hamas that receives aid and dollars from Qatar and Turkey.
But Lewis’ resolution against Israel recognizes none of this. It cites no Qatari or Turkish anything for divestment. Councilor Briae Lewis singles out Israel only, and somehow it escapes the moral zeitgeist to call that what it is, a double standard, and a clear instance of antisemitism.
But that lack of moral zeitgeist is no accident.
Like we said, Hamas started this. Hamas that built 450 miles of military tunnels in the 250 square mile area that is Gaza. Hamas that built military installations into private homes, apartment buildings, hospitals and schools. Hamas that is accused of using its own civilians as human shields.
But they are not shields. They are Palestinian lives precious as our own. But for the Hamas propagandist they aren’t any of this. They are an opportunity. A cudgel. Put them in front of the command centers and caches of missiles and other arms that are the usual legitimate targets of war. Make sure the pictures get out. Stoke the outrage machine.
And what can Israel do. Leave a terrorist infrastructure intact knowing their enemy has crossed over the human boundaries of child torture and murder and rape. Knowing Hamas unchecked will do it all again. So, Israel takes the Hamas propagandist’s bait, because what is the choice.
But nobody thinks it through to the idea that Israel did not put those innocents in harm’s way. Hamas did. Nobody thinks about how unusual and wrong that is.
And the propagandist knows we can’t think it through. Our increasingly visual media laps up and regurgitates the horrors. Our psyche responds viscerally. We are genetically hardwired for that. The propagandist knows this. The propagandist then points our outrage addicted western mind to the nearest thing it can blame, Israel.
Israel that has more power. Israel that is wealthier. Israel portrayed as thinking it’s better than us. And we buy those portrayals. How can we not. We in our society relate. A society that can make us all feel some of this in our own selves; power we don’t have, resources that aren’t equally shared, and the envy and pain that comes with it. Today’s western society is especially good at priming these pumps for the propagandist.
And as transparently manipulative as this is, the propagandist has won for the moment. But history is replete with examples of these moments. Today, we look at FDR’s Japanese internment camps as shameful. We see McCarthyism for what it was. The propagandist’s wins are generally short term.
So today the world demonizes Israel defending itself, calling them genocidal. Today the world wanly ignores a human history replete with the fog of war. That there is no purity of arms beyond aspiration. But it will be years of international court proceedings and the perspective that comes with time that will ultimately decide. It will not be scholars or politicians, or the moment.
Likewise, the fences and checkpoints used the world over for security are characterized as apartheid when Israelis deploy them. It’s notable that terrorist attacks decreased by over 90% in Israel when these protocols were put into place. But the double standard remains for now. We doubt it will look the same in twenty years.
Councilor Lewis is a powerful elected official, and she has the responsibility to see through this. To understand what antisemitism is, and to keep it out of public policy. Here, she has demonstrably done the opposite.
Of course, we can already hear the screams that we just don’t get it. That this really is about genocide and apartheid and occupation.
But then, if that’s true, where is Lewis’ look toward China and their ongoing genocide and apartheid of the Uyghurs. What about China’s occupation of Tibet. What about Congo, Myanmar and Sudan, and those ongoing genocides? Nope, not a peep from the Councilor.
And why. Because language moves, and the terms genocide, apartheid and occupation don’t mean what they once did. Their meanings in international law are entirely ignored in the zeitgeist. They are little more than new stand-in tropes for old allegations of Jewish supremacy. Ripe for the propagandist’s redefining them. Lewis already knows this, or should.
And then there are the claims that this resolution is equally about mass incarceration and protecting immigrants. But of 96 companies listed for divestment in the Council packet, 78 are all about Israel, and only 18 center on anything else.
Antisemitic delegitimization
This next part will get confusing for just a minute, but we promise it’ll get clear quickly.
So, Lewis’s resolution tries to avoid saying it’s a BDS resolution, though it clearly is exactly that. The language from first draft to the current draft is a dead-ringer for the rhetoric used on the BDS movement’s website. But she uses an AFSC website, investigate.info, for a list of companies to divest from.
In general, folks who follow this sort of thing already know what BDS is. They’re still catching onto the whole AFSC thing. As to the AFSC divestment list, they openly disclose they’re just publishing the one from the BDS movement. So at least they’re honest. Why the resolution before Council looks to hide that reality; you can draw your own conclusions.
Anyhow, both the AFSC and BDS view Israel as a colonizing state that shouldn’t exist. Neither organization believes there should be normalization or even direct negotiations between the Palestinians and Israelis. This is an obvious recipe for continued war, so it’s hard to see peace as being a goal for these organizations or Lewis.
Omar Barghouti, a co-founder, and leader of the BDS movement once said, “We oppose a Jewish state in any part of Palestine… [only] a sellout Palestinian would accept a Jewish state in Palestine.” In a separate New York Times interview, when asked if the Jews can have a state of their own, Barghouti said, “Not in Palestine.” Barghouti has on countless occasions said that the whole of the modern state of Israel is on Palestinian land.
In 2013, The New York Daily News ran an op-ed from Barghouti. They also wrote their own response to his commentary, saying, “Barghouti aims in the short-term to undermine Israel’s moral legitimacy on the way to the long-term prize of securing rights for Palestinians that would effectively dismantle the Jewish state.”
They went on to say, “His dancing around this central point lets Barghouti verge on anti-Semitism while claiming respectability,” and they also said, “Skilled as a propagandist, he piles falsehood upon falsehood to present Israel as relentlessly oppressing the Palestinians in violation of human decency, and to hold Israel exclusively responsible for the ills afflicting them.” We would say the Daily understated, Barghouti’s dance doesn’t verge, it’s a full-on cha-cha.
For Barghouti, there is no two-state solution, only the elimination of Israel. As its first goal, the BDS website says, “An end to Israel’s occupation of all Arab lands and dismantling the illegal apartheid Wall.” And like we’ve shown you, Barghouti believes it is all Palestinian, or Arab land.
By the time you read the BDS movement’s other two goals, you know you’re in for some double-speak. “Full equality for Palestinian citizens of present-day Israel; and the right of return for Palestinian refugees,” which roughly translated means, whatever Jews are remaining, they’ll be outnumbered.
The New York Times reports that, “B.D.S. National Committee’s members, for example, include the Council of National and Islamic Forces in Palestine. The council includes several groups designated by the United States as terrorist organizations, including Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine.”
So, can we really leave aside the BDS movement’s wish to, in fact, eliminate Israel wholly. No. This is straight-up antisemitism and a prescription for continued violence. This is good for nobody.
Beyond this analysis, our newspaper is already on record as strongly opposing this resolution, or anything like it. We continue to encourage the Council to wholly reject it.
Some alternatives
On another level, we wonder if principals of proactive moral imagination could be applied to City investments, rather than always seeking punitiveness. Why not a public process to determine what we all want to support, rather than what we’re against. Could we be investing in companies that represents our fair burgh’s shared values. Maybe even prioritizing companies doing things right here in Oregon. Is there some reason we wouldn’t do that if we could.
History shows boycotts and divestments and sanctions don’t ever stop wars. It can be said they helped to end South African apartheid, but the facts on the ground in that country were far different than in the Middle East today. The use of the word apartheid actually meant apartheid in that instance. It doesn’t in the Israeli context. For crying out loud, look at Ukraine today and tell us that boycotting, divesting and sanctioning has worked.
Also, let’s say you don’t view Lewis’ resolution as antisemitic. You could still acknowledge that many Jewish people do. And you could decide that just because of that, you would rather the City not do this. Even if you don’t understand why many Jews may feel this way, you could decide the why isn’t so important as acknowledging it. All of us are someone else’s otherness that they cannot understand. But we can still honor each other. Please consider emailing the City Council and asking them to reject this resolution.
Finally, many Jewish and Muslim community members have expressed real distress at how they’ve been treated in Corvallis lately. Many over these last months have testified to Council that feel unsafe in our shared community. Unfortunately, the Corvallis area has a very real history of systemic antisemitism, and we assume Islamophobia, as well. Hate groups are still present. Some on our staff have related that diaspora Muslims and Jews share many experiences in common and tend to get along. But if you’re not in one of these communities, try to understand that these folks may be going through a lot right now.
In our shared community at a time of authoritarian autocracy taking hold nationally, we may need to lean on one another locally in ways that we haven’t in the past. We believe Lewis’ resolution is a tacit impediment to that kind of unity and care.
Here’s the text of the current draft resolution
A RESOLUTION PROHIBITING INVESTMENT IN GENOCIDE, APARTHEID, ILLEGAL OCCUPATION, MASS DEPORATION, AND MASS INCARCERATION
Minutes of the _______________________________, Corvallis City Council meeting, continued. A resolution submitted by Councilor ____________________.
WHEREAS, the City of Corvallis (City) has adopted Resolution 2022-49, thus committing to support “the redirection of institutions and resources of our nations from their present dedication to war, toward the fostering of peace, justice, and a healthy, sustainable environment for our earth and its inhabitants;” and
WHEREAS, in Resolution 2022-49 reflects the City’s commitments to avoid investment in military contractors, munitions and nuclear weapons manufacturers; and
WHEREAS, the City does not want to support companies that benefit from and contribute to genocide, apartheid, illegal occupation, mass incarceration, or mass deportation; and
WHEREAS, the American Friends Service Committee (AFSC) maintains a database of such companies, which can be accessed at https://investigate.info; and
WHEREAS the City of Corvallis FY 2025-2029 Strategic Plan prioritizes actions which “strengthen public trust by providing a respectful and transparent process” and “support the social and emotional well-being of residents”; and
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CORVALLIS RESOLVES to continue to set a progressive standard for responsible ethical investing by avoiding investment, to the best of its ability, of its non-pool public funds in companies which the City determines are directly, consistently, and knowingly involved in such human rights violations as genocide, apartheid, and illegal occupation, as well as other violations of international human rights law, including war crimes, ethnic cleansing, mass incarceration, and mass deportations; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City of Corvallis may use resources such as the AFSC database, and/or the best tools and techniques available, to manage its investments in accordance with this resolution; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City will work with its financial advisors to manage its investments in order to achieve the goals established by this resolution, in addition to the guidelines in Attachment H, Section 4 of Financial Policy # F1.01, describing the integration of Environmental, Social, and Governance risk factors into the investment decision-making framework; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that none of the provisions of this Resolution shall be for the benefit of or enforceable by any party other than the City. No third party shall obtain any right under any provision of this Resolution or shall by reason of any of its provisions make any claim relating to any investment, funds, debt, liability, obligation or otherwise against the City; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City of Corvallis aspires to make investments that prioritize the health, safety, and well-being of the citizens of Corvallis, the citizens of our shared world, and future generations as well.
By Steven J. Schultz, Mike Suarez and Hallie Greenberg
Do you have a story for The Advocate? Email editor@corvallisadvocate.com