Reykjavik Declares Boycott of All Israeli Products

by Mitchell Plitnick

The Icelandic capital city of Reykjavik has declared a boycott of all Israeli goods. The measure is clearly symbolic, as the city itself can’t do enough trade with Israel, or any other country, for such an action to have any impact. The responses to the action, however, are worth examining.

A retiring official, Björk Vilhelmsdóttir, of the Social Democratic Alliance, a center-left party, brought the motion for the boycott. The motion compels the city to boycott all Israeli products “as long as the occupation of Palestinian territories continues.” The memo that explains the reasoning behind what it terms a “symbolic” decision states that the city condemns “the Israeli policy of apartheid” in the Occupied Territories. 

Einar Gautur Steingrímsson, a Supreme Court barrister in Reykjavik claims that the law is discriminatory and no different from “refusing to do business with red haired people.” This is a variation on the well-worn theme that any boycott or divestment from Israel in response to its occupation is, by definition, antisemitic.

This thought was echoed by Israel’s Foreign Ministry Spokesman, Emanuel Nachson, who said “A volcano of hate is currently exploding in Reykjavik’s city council building. There is no reason or justification for this move, besides hate itself, which is being heard in the form of calls for a boycott against Israel, the Jewish state.”

I do not support boycotts of Israel as a whole, though I am a strong supporter of economic actions that specifically target the settlements and the occupation. However, the debate over these actions always seems to start at a boiling point. Examining the statements of both Steingrimsson and Nachson illustrates this point.

It is not inherently discriminatory to boycott a country over its policies, and such a boycott is certainly not comparable to discrimination based on inherent characteristics. Accusations like that ignore the reality of the conflict: that Israel has been occupying the West Bank, Gaza and East Jerusalem for 48 years. During that time, basic civil and human rights have been denied to Palestinians living under occupation.

Economic actions like boycott or divestment are one of the very few tools ordinary people have to take action against corporations or the policies of foreign governments. And, while Reykjavik is making the comparison in its statement, a country does not have to be exactly like Apartheid South Africa for such actions to be justified. The real question is whether the action is going to be effective.

Of course, many countries are deserving of boycotts, and more. Defenders of Israeli policies are quick to point out the atrocities committed by ISIS, or Bashar al-Asad. They point to the oppressive regimes in Saudi Arabia, or Iran, or Russia, or a host of other countries. In some of those cases, a mass call for boycott might have some effect, though in most it is unlikely. One reason it is effective with Israel, despite the lack of significant economic impact to date, is that world opinion matters to Israel.

The fact that there may be other, worse situations than in the Occupied Territories doesn’t change the reality in the West Bank and Gaza. This is an occupation that has gone on for almost half a century, all of it with tacit Western support. That is why people are trying to take whatever action they can, as it has become clear that absent some change in the status quo, the occupation is not going to end.

Nachson makes it even more explicit: he outright says the only motivation for this action is hatred of Jews. This, too, ignores the reality of Israel’s ongoing occupation. It also ignores the fact that moves to boycott settlements or even Israel itself gained little traction for years, until the Netanyahu government made it so abundantly clear that it was not interested in ending the occupation. That is what gives motions like the one in Reykjavik their energy, not antipathy to Jews or even to the Jewish state.

Hysterical cries that attempt to cast honest attempts to take action against the occupation as acts of antisemitism serve only to polarize an already badly polarized debate.

I believe the blanket boycott of all things Israeli is a misguided and poor strategy. There are obviously great needs for change on both sides. The Palestinian leadership has failed in many ways, and Israel has legitimate concerns regarding attacks against its citizens.

But when you hold millions of people without their rights for nearly five decades, protests, boycotts and international isolation are inevitable. A military occupation is, by definition, a permanent state of violence for the occupied. Daily human rights violations are inevitable, as are periodic flare-ups of devastating violence that kill thousands and destroy homes and infrastructure, whose effects last far beyond the actual violence. Those combine with Israel’s shift to the right and more explicit intransigence to energize and spur the expansion of movements and initiatives for all sorts of economic actions, whether aimed at the occupation or at Israel itself.

Fighting boycotts in response to such conditions by calling the boycotters bigots is a failed and dishonest strategy. The potentially successful one is to end the occupation. When an Israeli Prime Minister says there will be no Palestinian state on his watch that will bring boycott in response. An honest effort to roll back the settlements, to move toward an independent Palestinian state, brings global support. The choice for Israel should be clear. It should be even clearer for other countries, especially the United States and European Union.

Reprinted with permission from Photo of Björk Vilhelmsdóttir

Mitchell Plitnick

Mitchell Plitnick is a political analyst and writer. His previous positions include vice president at the Foundation for Middle East Peace, director of the US Office of B’Tselem: The Israeli Information Center for Human Rights in the Occupied Territories, and co-director of Jewish Voice for Peace. His writing has appeared in Ha’aretz, the New Republic, the Jordan Times, Middle East Report, the San Francisco Chronicle, +972 Magazine, Outlook, and other outlets. He was a columnist for Tikkun Magazine, Zeek Magazine and Souciant. He has spoken all over the country on Middle East politics, and has regularly offered commentary in a wide range of radio and television outlets including PBS News Hour, the O’Reilly Factor, i24 (Israel), Pacifica Radio, CNBC Asia and many other outlets, as well as at his own blog, Rethinking Foreign Policy, at You can find him on Twitter @MJPlitnick.



  1. If Israel, or individual Israelis, are so concerned about “ISIS, or Bashar al-Asad,” or “Saudi Arabia, or Iran, or Russia, or a host of other countries,” then let them boycott those. My interest involves Palestine and the Palestinians, but I know that boycotting only what’s produced in the occupied territories isn’t enough because it will take the whole population of Israel to put pressure on their leaders. I boycott all products made in Israel – which isn’t easy, as it takes a good amount of research.

  2. Symbolic boycott of israeli products by city of Reykjavik is not economically significant ,but, obviously politically significant enough to provoke Israeli reaction in the forms of the old “anti-Semitic ” accusation and warnings bordering threats to Island.
    As Mr.Plitnick puts it “…when you hold millions of people without their rights for nearly five decades,protests,boycotts and international isolation are inevitable…..daily human rights violations are inevitable as well as periodic flair ups of devastating violence that kills thousands and destroys homes and infrastructure,whose effects last far beyond the actual violence “.
    How long does the miserable condition of the Palestinians have to go on to provoke international reaction in the forms of boycotts, pressure and even,if necessary,coercion, to make Israel submit to a just,logical and amiable solution ? As it is the problem is far more away from an honourable solution than ever before.
    The Israeli Prime Minister openly denies the Palestinians any right to exist in the occupied territories. Israel is at the moment perusing the policy of leave or stay and die a gradual, painful and miserable death towards the Palestinians. Should the international community show any reaction or displeasure towards such policy ? In what form to avoid being accused of anti-Semitism ??

  3. I must praise and salute the brave civilised action of Bìörk Vilhesdòttir of the Social Democratic Alliance of Island for proposing the motion for boycott of Israel. The action is politically very significant . Political parties, Parliaments and NGOs in other countries should follow suit if they care about the plight of innocent Palestinian children,women and ordinary people. Israel, left on its own, will never give the Palestinians any right of existence in the occupied territories (probably never intended either). She has to be pressured and even coerced,if necessary. No one is above international laws ,convention and accept human values even if they are Jews and their elders were survivors of Holocaust . The international community should convey a strong message to Israel that she is not allowed to do what she pleases with the Palestinians and unless she submits to an honourable solution, by international standards ,she will have to face reactions from international organisations and world communities.

  4. From an Israeli
    Boycotting Israel people-we the Israelis-based on our Jewish tradition of
    helping people, including our enemies, are telling you that you may use
    products based on Israeli know how.

    Don’t Boycott those-your life span and life quality will be in danger.

    In case that you are not aware what you are going to boycott-the followings
    are only a minor list

    *Antibiotics targeting cellular regulation based Yonath-Nobel prize
    *Personal targeted drug based on Hershko&Ciehanover-Nobel prize
    *Thin needles for eye surgery based on Shechman Nobel prize
    *Stint preventing hard attacks
    **Swallowed camera pill that photographs esophagus
    *The first ever HIV treatment experiment that kills infected cells, a potential
    stepping stone to a cure for AIDS

    You may still use the internet and media-but remember that you are based on Israeli
    knowhow and the major components are manufactured in Israel.

    ** INTEL laptops PCU’s (the computer brain) are developed and manufactured by Israel
    **Communicate using Multimedia over internet. VocalTec invented and patented
    the first Voice over IP audio transceiver

    When you buy food, be aware that many companies worldwide are using the Israeli
    smart drip and micro-irrigation systems providing precise crop irrigation.
    It is used by in 112 countries.

    Boycotter- bon appetite– –

  5. Nachson makes it even more explicit: he outright says the only motivation for this action is hatred of Jews.”……it has nothing to do with hatred of the Jews, it has to do with the genocide committed by Israel. We are not only talking about the bullying, the illegal settlements, the spontaneous invasions and mass killings after the Palestinians through some home made flying firecrackers – we are talking about the blockade as well – a broken Country is not even allowed food and construction material.

    It is not against the Jews, it is to against the Zioists

Comments are closed.