According to a recent White House press statement, President Obama was prepared to sign the Trade Facilitation and Trade Enforcement Act of 2015 despite its inclusion of a provision that makes it’s anti-BDS sanctions equally applicable to “Israel” and “Israeli-controlled territories.”
We say “despite” because White House press secretary Josh Earnest said the bill’s conflating of “Israel” and “Israeli-controlled territories “contravenes longstanding U.S. policy toward Israel and the occupied territories, including with regard to Israeli settlement activity.”
But he said the president would sign the legislation anyway inasmuch as the overall legislation was the product of bipartisan compromise and “As with any bipartisan compromise legislation, there are provisions in this bill that we do not support.”
The new law will require the U.S. government to take specific action in response to BDS activity. Given Mr. Earnest’s statement, the question is whether the Obama administration will take those actions if the BDS activity is directed at “Israeli-controlled territories.”
In all fairness, it should be noted that the administration has in the past opposed BDS efforts. But will that laudable history trump its concern about the implications of enforcing the part of a law that equates “Israel” and “Israeli-controlled territories” even for this limited purpose? The president’s past intensity about “settlements” would seem to suggest it well might not.
Of course, since the legislation was the product of compromise, one would like to think that both sides will honor the entirety of the agreement.
