March 14, 2003
Anti-War Boycotts Proliferate Worldwide
IDEA press release

As it has become clear that the Bush administration intends to prosecute a war against Iraq regardless of international opinion, calls for boycotts of US goods and services have escalated and proliferated all around the globe.

14 March 2003
For Immediate Release
Contact:
International group for Direct Economic Action against war (IDEA)
via
Patrick Baggot (USA) 1-757-722-0188 pbaggott@cox.net
Marinella Correggia (Italy) mari.cor@libero.it
Pattrice Jones (USA) 1-410-651-4934 pattrice@bravebirds.org

Contact information for other organizations mentioned in this release may be found following the text of this release. In addition, IDEA can supply journalists with contact information for citizens who are participating in boycott efforts.

Anti-War Boycotts Proliferate Worldwide

"I've started a personal boycott on products with a 'Made in USA' label." Thus begins an email missive from United States Air Force retiree and Korean War veteran Sanford M. Russell, who opines that such a boycott, if undertaken by all who oppose the USA's campaign against Iraq, might result in "decisive pressure that could prevent the coming massacre."

Halfway around the world, the Balochistan Post prints an open letter from a US citizen, in which the unnamed citizen asserts that "If the people of the world are serious about their opposition to a US attack on Iraq, they must stop giving their money to the US military-industrial complex."

These US citizens are only two of an increasing number of people who support or already implementing economic direct action against the war. As it has become clear that the Bush administration intends to prosecute a war against Iraq regardless of international opinion, calls for boycotts of US goods and services have escalated and proliferated all around the globe.

From the County Donegal man who suggests to the local newspaper that his fellow citizens should "show them an old Irish tactic: the boycott" to the Californians who marched through a shopping mall chanting "we won't go shopping while bombs are dropping,'' more and more individuals and organizations are contemplating a shift from merely expressive forms of dissent, such as marches and rallies, to more direct acts of opposition, such as tax resistance and boycotts.

The growing international boycott movement is a grassroots phenomenon, with boycott websites and calls to action springing up independently in diverse locations. Boycott strategies are also diverse, ranging from refusal to purchase any US or UK goods to ostracism of only those corporations known to support or likely to profit from the war.

For example:

- The organization For Mother Earth (which has offices in Belarus, Belgium, Bulgaria, Finland, France, Germany, Romania, Slovakia, and Sri Lanka) is calling for an international boycott of both specific brands (such as General Electric) and specific industries (such as US airlines and US automobile manufacturers) while also offering those who pledge to participate the option of saying "I will boycott all US products"

- In New Zealand, the Spend for Peace campaign is calling for consumers to boycott specific US brands (such as Dow and Dupont) and to notify the companies that they are doing so

- In the USA, Be the Cause has also targeted specific brands (such as Kraft and Philip Morris) for a consumer boycott

- Also in the USA, the influential Adbusters magazine and website have launched a "Boycott Brand America" campaign, which asks participants to pledge to boycott American corporate brands "from the moment the war begins and to the best of my ability until the empire learns to listen"

- In Jordan, a committee representing 14 opposition parties and 14 trade unions has called for citizens to boycott US goods and to purchase French and German goods instead

- In Australia, Peace Action promotes boycotting "as a positive and powerful alternative to 'fighting for peace'" and provides lists of companies linked to "warmongering"

- In the UK, the Stop the War Coalition has expressed support for the ongoing Greenpeace boycott of Exxon-Esso-Mobil

- The European Social Forum, which encompasses a multiplicity of organizations from many countries, has called for a boycott of all US oil companies

- In both Spain and Iceland, peace and justice activists have called for boycotts of all US products

- In Belgium, Citoyens-Consommateurs Scandalises par la Politique Internationale des Etats-Unis have called for a boycott of American oil companies

- The Iraq Action Committee of South Africa has reaffirmed its call for a wholesale boycott of all US goods

- The US-based cyber campaign known as We Won't Shop Until Attack Talk Stops asks Americans to reduce their consumer spending, asking participants to pledge to reduce their own spending by a set amount

- The International group for Direct Economic Action against war promotes a flexible boycott strategy, serving as a clearinghouse for various boycott proposals and encouraging consumers to choose the boycott implementation that makes the most sense to them.

Almost all of the organizations that promote the idea of boycotting specific companies target symbols of US hegemony such as McDonalds and CocaCola. Most also specify General Electric, as a major military contractor that also produces consumer goods.

A number of nontraditional boycotts also have been proposed. For example:

- In Jordan, the Committee for Defending the Nation and Countering Normalization (which includes 14 professional associations and 13 opposition parties) has called for a kind of reverse boycott, urging Jordanians to refuse to provide goods or services to US troops stationed in that country

- In the USA, consumers concerned about high gas prices have joined the ongoing boycott of Exxon-Mobil in hopes that this will inspire price reductions

- In Denmark, actresses participating in the reading of the play Lysistrata have raised the cry "no peace, no sex" and are encouraging women to withhold sex from any man who favors war

The momentum of the anti-war boycott movement gained a big boost on 10 March, when the "human shields" in Iraq released a statement calling for a boycott of all US goods if the US stages a preemptive attack on Iraq. Because the people who are voluntarily risking their lives in hopes of preventing war are very much respected by the mainstream peace movements, it is likely that this call to boycott will be heeded more widely than those that have come from other individuals and organizations.

The rationale for the boycott as an anti-war tactic has both ethical and practical components. At the ethical level, boycotters believe in consistency between speech and action. As IDEA member Richard Rosenthal says, "If you say you are for peace, you shouldn't buy war." At the practical level, boycotters are intent on reducing the funds available to what President (and WWII military commander) Dwight David Eisenhower called "the military-industrial complex."

Many political analysts believe that the tactic of the boycott, if embraced by the peace movement as a whole, is the only form of non-violent direct action that could potentially stop or mitigate US attacks on Iraq. If the tens of millions of people who protested against war in February were to 'vote with their wallets' by boycotting, the impact on US corporations (and US tax revenues) would be significant. In addition to this direct economic impact, a successful boycott effort will influence political leaders by influencing their corporate sponsors. The corporations express their dissatisfaction to leaders like Bush and Blair, leading them to change course.

Corporations such as Coca-Cola, Nike, McDonalds, and Exxon-Esso-Mobil are already the targets of boycotts expressing consumer dissatisfaction with corporate globalization, sweatshop labor, factory farming, and pollution of the environment. Many of these companies have seen profits dip as a result of such boycotts. In the Middle East, where the boycott movement is strongest, some American companies have seen sales plummet as much as 65 percent.

Those calling for boycotts point out that the millions who have marched against war worldwide are potentially an even more powerful bloc of consumers. According to IDEA member Pattrice Jones, "As trade globalization turns more and more of the world into a market, we have less and less power as citizens but more and more power as consumers. While we would like to regain true political sovereignty, in the interim we can deploy our consumer power to good effect."

Online sources of further information

International group for Direct Economic Action against war (IDEA)
http://www.boycottwar.net

Adbusters
http://www.adbusters.org

Be the Cause
http://www.bethecause.org

Citoyens-Consommateurs Scandalises par la Politique Internationale des Etats-Unis
http://users.skynet.be/plusdepetroleus/tracts.htm

For Mother Earth
http://www.motherearth.org/USboycott/

Peace Action
http://peace-action.inbyron.com

Spend for Peace
http://www.spendforpeace.co.nz

We Won't Shop Until Attack Talk Stops
http://www.stopshopping.org/index.htm

Sources used in preparation of this press release

BALOCHISTAN POST [Pakistan] (10 Mar 2003) Open Letter from a US Citizen to the People of the World

Crescent International [Canada] (01 Feb 2003) American companies feeling the impact of Muslim boycotts

Monday Morning [Lebanon] (10 Mar 2003) NEW CALLS FOR BOYCOTT OF US GOODS OVER IRAQ CRISIS

Mercury News [USA] (09 Mar 03) Peace march stopped at Santana Row's door

The Scotsman [Scotland] (26 Feb 2003) Global brands face consumer boycott in protest at Bush plans.

The Star [South Africa] (11 Mar 2003) Mandela says he's too old to make trip to Baghdad

Reuters (10 Mar 2003) Human shields urge global action against Iraq war

Sanford M. Russell [Mexico] (12 Mar 2003) No Made in USA [posting to online discussion list]

UPI International Desk (05 Mar 2003) Jordan uneasy over U.S. boycott appeal

Permission to print this release as a news item, with or without IDEA byline, is granted.

FAIR USE NOTICE: This page contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. GlobalIssues.Net distributes this material without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. We believe this constitutes a fair use of any such copyrighted material as provided for in 17 U.S.C § 107.