French Mobile Giant to end ties with Israel over settlements

[Falcon29]

Orange announces it will sever link with Israeli subsidiary | The Times of Israel

French mobile communications giant Orange officially announced Thursday that it would sever its ties with its Israeli subsidiary Partner, a day after the company’s CEO provoked a firestorm by saying he would like to pull out of the country but feared penalties.

The company denied that the move was politically motivated, despite claims in Israel that the company’s CEO was looking to join a boycott of Israel.

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.”

.....................

BDS activists should compensate and do service with Orange. Good move by mobile giant. Good activism by BDS. Keep it up.

.........................................

Meanwhile Israeli minister raging:

“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.

............
Israeli minister says Orange CEO should be fired - Israel News, Ynetnews

Israeli Culture Minister Miri Regev has called on the French president to fire the chief executive of French telecom giant Orange.

Regev issued her appeal on Thursday, a day after Orange's CEO announced in Cairo that he would like to sever his company's ties to Israel as soon as possible. He cited the country's sensitivity to Arab countries.

...........

Foken skank bitch, he will not be fired. Israel needs to join the world and end its colonization. This boycott won't end until you colonizers submit.

This is a big blow in the face to the Israeli Likud government.

 

[Archdemon]

oh no! lol
the only thing used is their name, nothing more. They will pay huge fine.

 

[U8200]

According to their statement, they're cutting in all areas where they don't actually operate but just sell their 'name rights'

i.e Orange doesn't actually operate in Israel. It's an Israeli company that uses the Orange branding.

That's all.

 

[libertad]

According to their statement, they're cutting in all areas where they don't actually operate but just sell their 'name rights'

i.e Orange doesn't actually operate in Israel. It's an Israeli company that uses the Orange branding.

That's all.

They have a licensee in Israel (Partner) that they are going to sever ties with.

Serious butthurt flowing from Netanyahu and co. The psychological impact of the move itself is alot more damaging to Israel than the dollars and cents. It creates alot of negative press and delegitimizes them. Positive move, great news!!!

 

[ResurgentIran]

According to their statement, they're cutting in all areas where they don't actually operate but just sell their 'name rights'

i.e Orange doesn't actually operate in Israel. It's an Israeli company that uses the Orange branding.

That's all.

That may be so, but the calls for boycotting Israel will only grow stronger. It will reach a juncture where much of the world will put sanctions against Israel just like they did against the apartheid Afrikaaner regime in South Africa.

It would be a mistake on your part to trivialize these things. In USA there is real debate going on in campuses about Israel/Palestine. Debate is no longer being stymied and hindered by radical AIPAC lobbyists.

Its quite funny that lawmakers in congress want to criminalize boycott of Israel.
That should tell you that BDS is real and means business. Have a happy apartheid.

 

[GBU-28]

They have a licensee in Israel (Partner) that they are going to sever ties with.

They don't operate in Israel, It's only their 'brand name'.

Serious butthurt flowing from Netanyahu and co. The psychological impact of the move itself is alot more damaging to Israel than the dollars and cents. It creates alot of negative press and delegitimizes them. Positive move, great news!!!

The CEO has come out to say he is opposed to boycotts and loves Israel.

Nice try though.

I especially found that post funny from the barking Irani above, residing in the perennially sanctioned nation

Jews have been victims of boycotts for most of their existence in one form or another from their religious enemies. They still manage to innovate and contribute to science, tech and medicine - they don't rely on papier mache boats and plastic armaments to pretend they're still relevant in the world

 

[Jungibaaz]

Good step, we too here in our unions are pushing for boycotts and sorting this thing out with diplomacy.

Nothing burns them more when they can't use the usual cards they have to shoot down critics. Though there is always the anti-semite card nice and handy, to be used in any and every situation.

 

[GBU-28]

Good step, we too here in our unions are pushing for boycotts and sorting this thing out with diplomacy.

Nothing burns them more when they can't use the usual cards they have to shoot down critics. Though there is always the anti-semite card nice and handy, to be used in any and every situation.

I think the UK is more worried about the amount of paedophilia coming from your community.

 

[Jungibaaz]

I think the UK is more worried about the amount of paedophilia coming from your community.

You're a fool if you think you can troll me, lots of guts and no brains are too different things, sunshine. And if you want to go there, I can talk about your community too, it would be easy and with added effect.

 

[Moon]

I think the UK is more worried about the amount of paedophilia coming from your community.

Please stop embarrassing yourself and your community, especially on international forums:
Advertisement
I hope you correct your information in the near future, if you ever have to address such an issue.

 

[Solomon2]

The Volokh Conspiracy
Business with occupied territories, Orange telecom, and the French approach to international law

By Eugene Kontorovich June 4 at 5:00 PM
This week the Columbia Journal of Transnational Law published my new research paper, “Economic Dealings With Occupied Territories.”

The gist (from the abstract):

This Article conducts a comprehensive survey of the relevant current state practice and judicial precedent regarding occupied territories, aside from the well-examined case of Israel. Much of this practice has never been considered by scholars, let alone examined holistically. Clear patterns emerge when state practice is examined globally, and the principles they suggest are in turn reaffirmed by recent path-breaking decisions of European national courts.

State practice and decisions of important national courts support a fully permissive approach to economic dealings by third-party states or nationals in territories under prolonged occupation or illegal annexation. There is no obligation on third-party states to block such activity, or to insist on particular language on product labels, or to ensure that their foreign aid funds do not cross into occupied territory.​

The paper is published at an opportune time. 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.

Perhaps the most instructive aspect of this was the reaction of Amb. Araud, when I pointed out to him that his legal claim is baseless, and squarely contradicted by France’s own courts in recent decisions involving Israel, which held the Geneva Conventions flatly inapplicable to private companies. It is also contradicted by the opinions the U.N. Security Council Legal Advisor, the EU Parliament’s legal advisor, and the U.K. Supreme Court, and more. (All these are described at length in my new paper.)

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.

What the French apparently want is, to paraphrase Stalin, international law for one country. Ok. But don’t call it international. And don’t call it law.

Orange’s legal advice has been bad not just on the international legal front. The CEO apparently is unaware that his statement could make it impossible for at least one major state’s pension funds to have holdings in his firm. Illinois’ pensions have recently had about $1.3 million in Orange shares (it sold them in June for unrelated reasons), and as more states pass anti-BDS laws, Orange will have to seek more of its capital in the places it has built up “trust.”



Eugene Kontorovich is a professor at Northwestern University School of Law, and an expert on constitutional and international law. He also writes and lectures frequently about the Arab-Israel conflict.