Posted tagged ‘BDS’

BDS banned! – Hear them whine

January 11, 2018

BDS banned! – Hear them whine | Anne’s Opinions, 10th January 2018

Back in August I wrote about anti-Israel boycotters being banned, and the irony of their complaints at having a taste of their own medicine.

Last week the Israeli government expanded on their original decision by publishing a list of about 20 anti-Israel organizations whose members will be denied entry to Israel:

“We have switched from defense to offense,” said Public Security and Strategic Affairs Minister Gilad Erdan.

“The boycott organizations need to know that the State of Israel will act to stop them and prevent their representatives from entering the country to harm its citizens.”

The list features BDS groups who, according to the ministry, carry out campaigns of “falsehood and incitement” in an effort to undermine Israel’s legitimacy worldwide.

The blacklisted groups “consistently and continuously act against the State of Israel by pressuring groups, institutions and states to boycott Israel,” the ministry said.

Among the groups on the list are six US based organizations, including Jewish Voice for Peace, and 10 European organizations, including leading BDS groups in Italy, France, Norway and Sweden.

The ban is set to be enforced beginning in March and will be limited to people who hold senior positions or who are very active within the organizations.

“The formulation of this list is another step forward in our battle against the incitement and lies of the BDS organizations. No country would grant entrance to visitors who seek to harm it, especially ones whose goal is to terminate Israel as a Jewish state,” said Erdan.

The ministry added that it will be passing the names of the organizations over to the Interior Ministry and border patrol.

Interior Minister Arye Deri said, “As the minister in charge of the Israel Entry Law, I made it perfectly clear that I would use my authority to prevent individuals and representatives of groups, whose sole purpose is to harm Israel and its security, from entering its borders.”

“These people are trying to take advantage of the law and our hospitality in order to act against and defame Israel,” he added.

Erdan claims a certain degree of success in this new method for deterring BDS:

The ministry pointed out that this approach is successful in curtailing BDS efforts, highlighting the recent announcements by Denmark and Norway, who said they would toughen their stances against the funding of pro-Palestinian organizations.

The ministry also touted their efforts which they claim led 24 US states, as well as the federal government, to pass anti-BDS legislation.

The BDS-ers themselves dispute this of course:

The organizations on the list, however, seem undeterred by the latest tactic. Several organizations on the list issued statements on Sunday, claiming that Israel’s move only serves as proof that the BDS movement is spreading and having an impact.

Rebecca Vilkomerson, executive director of Jewish Voice for Peace, issued a statement and said the ban was “disconcerting but not surprising, given the further erosion of democratic norms and rising anxiety about the power of BDS as a tool to demand freedom.”

The Ireland Palestine Solidarity Campaign issued a statement via its Facebook page and said being on the list was a “badge of honor” and that it was “in good company.”

In fact Prof. Gerald Steinberg, director of NGO Monitor, warned that the ban, while a good idea in theory, might backfire by giving the haters free publicity:

Professor Gerald Steinberg, founder and president of the NGO Monitor watchdog group, told JNS that the government’s move signals that Israel “won’t turn a blind eye to those who work to delegitimize it — but the downside is that it also serves to raise the profiles of these groups.”

The list drew fire from “rights” groups – that is, rights for everyone except Jews. I can’t say I am surprised or even disappointed. They are acting precisely as I expected.

See these tweets for example:

The blogger Edgar Davidson has a nifty graphic illustrating the hypocrisy of the boycotted boycotters:

And here is the full list of the banned organizations – or at least the leaders of the following organizations:

United States:
• AFSC (American Friends Service Committee)
• AMP (American Muslims for Palestine)
• Code Pink
• JVP (Jewish Voice for Peace)
• NSJP (National Students for Justice in Palestine)
• USCPR (US Campaign for Palestinian Rights)

• AFPS (The Association France Palestine Solidarité)
• BDS France
• BDS Italy
• ECCP (The European Coordination of Committees and Associations for Palestine)
• FOA (Friends of al-Aqsa)
• IPSC (Ireland Palestine Solidarity Campaign)
• Norgeׂׂ Palestinakomitee (The Palestine Committee of Norway)
• PGS Palestinagrupperna i Sverige (Palestine Solidarity Association in Sweden)
• PSC (Palestine Solidarity Campaign)
• War on Want
• BDS Kampagne

Latin America
• BDS Chile

South Africa
• BDS South Africa

• BNC (BDS National Committee)

In my humble opinion the ban does not go far enough. There are many more such hateful organizations, plus the ban should include everyone who has been active in these groups, not just the leaders. Why should anyone working to undermine the State of Israel, and especially those trying to harm it, whether physically or politically, be permitted to enter and carry out their despicable work on our own turf? Let them try to do it by remote.

If you would like a further reminder of what BDS is all about see this post of mine about the malicious aims of BDS.

World Council of Churches Endorses Palestinian Protests Over Temple Mount Security Measures

July 24, 2017

World Council of Churches Endorses Palestinian Protests Over Temple Mount Security Measures, ALgemeinerBen Cohen, July 23, 2017

Fr. Robert Smith, Jerusalem representative of the World Council of Churches, addresses a BDS rally in South Africa. Photo: Screenshot.

The WCC is a central promoter of the Christian “Kairos Palestine” document, which characterizes terrorist acts of “armed resistance” as “Palestinian legal resistance,” denies the Jewish historical connection to Israel in theological terms, calls to mobilize churches worldwide in the call for BDS, and compares Israel with the South African apartheid regime.


The World Council of Churches (WCC) has declared its support for the Palestinian campaign against Israeli control of Jerusalem’s holy sites, describing new Israeli security measures at the Temple Mount as a “corrosive act in the midst of an already-fragile peace.”

“Keeping the historical status quo and supporting equal rights for Christians, Muslims and Jews at these holy sites is vitally important to maintaining peace and de-escalating violence,” said Fr. Ioan Sauca, acting general secretary of the WCC.

“Denying access to holy sites for thousands of people who have traveled far to pray is not only a violation of the rights of those individuals, but also a corrosive act in the midst of an already-fragile peace,” Fr. Sauca said.

One prominent Jewish human rights group ridiculed the WCC for protesting against Israel’s installation of metal detectors at the site, when such measures are common at religious sites around the world. In 2015, Saudi Arabia introduced a range of new restrictions, including electronic bracelets, for Muslims performing the Hajj pilgrimage to Mecca after capturing a suicide bomber who planned to attack the Grand Mosque in Islam’s holiest city. Major Christian sites, most obviously at the Vatican in Rome, have also implemented enhanced measures amid a continuing wave of Islamist terror attacks in Europe and the Middle East.

“The installation of metal detectors is taken for granted at the Vatican, at government offices, at every airport around the globe,” said Rabbi Yitzchok Adlerstein – Director of Interfaith Affairs at the Simon Wiesenthal Center (SWC). “They were first made necessary when Palestinians internationalized terrorism decades ago.”

A statement from the SWC argued: “If the WCC’s call to maintain the ‘status quo’, i.e. free access without metal detectors, is heeded, it will be complicit in the shedding of blood in the future. If the WCC is truly interested in protecting the rights of all the prayers, they should denounce extremist protests and threats made against Istanbul’s leading synagogue, which has suffered two previous terrorist attacks.”

The WCC’s attitude to Israel has been consistently hostile for several decades. The organization has a deliberately vague policy towards the BDS campaign targeting Israel, saying it does not support a boycott, but endorsing at the same time “all non-violent efforts to end the occupation (including considering appropriate economic and other measures).”

The WCC is a central promoter of the Christian “Kairos Palestine” document, which characterizes terrorist acts of “armed resistance” as “Palestinian legal resistance,” denies the Jewish historical connection to Israel in theological terms, calls to mobilize churches worldwide in the call for BDS, and compares Israel with the South African apartheid regime.

According to the Israeli research institute NGO Monitor, the WCC directly funds groups in its “Israel/Palestine” network that promote BDS and “lawfare” campaigns to convict Israeli political and military leaders for alleged “war crimes.”

BDS Suffers Another Defeat at University of California-Santa Barbara; Divestment Resolution Gets Zero Votes in Favor

May 12, 2017

BDS Suffers Another Defeat at University of California-Santa Barbara; Divestment Resolution Gets Zero Votes in Favor, AlgemeinerRachel Frommer, May 11, 2017

The University of California-Santa Barbara. Photo: Wikimedia Commons.

Zero votes were cast in favor of a boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) resolution at the University of California-Santa Barbara (UCSB) early Thursday morning following a marathon debate between pro- and anti-Israel activists.

Over 100 students signed up to speak for and against the Students for Justice in Palestine-backed (SJP) resolution at a meeting of the student government (AS) that ran from 6:30 pm local time Wednesday until 4:00 am on Thursday, according to campus paper the Daily Nexus.

Ultimately, 16 student representatives voted against the resolution, which was titled “Divest From Companies that Profit From Human Rights Violations in Palestine/Israel.” There were seven abstentions.

During the open-forum debate, many Jewish students called the resolution antisemitic, with some describing the environment on campus as divided and contentious throughout the BDS campaign, which was launched on Yom HaShoah last month.

Nate Erez — president of UCSB’s chapter of Students Supporting Israel (SSI), a group that played a key role in the anti-BDS effort — said the motion was “no more than a clever disguise to achieve a much more sinister agenda. This is a direct attack on the one Jewish state in the world.”

However, anti-Israel speakers claimed that refusing to boycott companies supposedly profiting from “oppression” of Palestinians would amount to UCSB’s complicity in human rights abuses. Many supporters of the resolution insisted it was a means of remaining neutral in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, an argument made in favor of BDS at other campuses, as well.

After keeping a running commentary of AS proceedings throughout the nearly 9-hour meeting, UCSB Hillel executive director Evan Goodman celebrated the victory on Facebook, “Our students and community are amazing. Time to go home now before the sun comes up. #lailatovbokertov.”

Ilan Sinelnikov — founder of the grassroots SSI movement — also took to social media, writing, “UCSB SSI STRONG. BDS KILLED,” adding that from 2015 until today, a BDS resolution has not passed on any campus with an SSI chapter.

Throughout the night, viewers filled the comments section of a live stream of the AS meeting with messages of support for the Zionist students, including one user who commiserated with those “poor souls [who] have to stay up all night to debate supporting bigotry against Jews and a resolution that won’t do a single ounce of good for Israelis and Palestinians alike.”

This was the fourth defeat of a boycott campaign at UCSB, which remains to date the only UC campus that has never passed a BDS motion in student government.

Last week, a pro-Israel peace mural at UCSB was twice vandalized by an unknown perpetrator with the phrase “Free Palestine.” (UCSB SJP maintained they were not involved in and condemned the incident.) This came after an “apartheid wall” erected by SJP on campus was exposed for featuring falsified quotes from Israeli leaders.

As of publication time, UCSB Divest had not commented on the result of Thursday’s vote.

Outrage After Dartmouth Appoints Israel Boycotter as Head of Faculty

May 8, 2017

Outrage After Dartmouth Appoints Israel Boycotter as Head of Faculty, Washington Free Beacon, May 8, 2017

Dartmouth Hall / Wikimedia Commons

The pro-Israel community at Dartmouth College is reeling following a decision by school leadership to appoint as their new head of faculty a leading supporter of the movement to boycott Israel and Jewish academics.

Dartmouth President Phil Hanlon is facing criticism following his recent decision to appoint Native American studies Professor Bruce Duthu—a leading supporter of the anti-Israel Boycott, Sanctions, and Divestment movement, or BDS—as Dartmouth’s dean of faculty.

Dartmouth, which declined Washington Free Beacon requests to comment on the matter, has come under criticism from the pro-Israel community, including within the school’s own staff, for elevating Duthu to a post of prominence. Duthu’s vocal support for boycotts of Israeli academics and efforts to lead the charge in the BDS movement is dangerous, these individuals argue, and anathema to academic freedom.

The appointment also has renewed fear within the campus pro-Israel community given Dartmouth’s anti-Semitic past, which included the active “Christianization of its students”

While pro-Israel faculty members spent weeks petitioning Dartmouth’s leadership about Duthu’s support for the BDS movement—which included co-authoring a leading BDS document backing the boycott of Israeli academic institutions—President Hanlon moved forward with the decision, prompting some to go public with their concerns.

Dartmouth economics professor Alan Gustman sent a faculty-wide email last week expressing his concern over Duthu’s anti-Israel activism and the college leadership’s apathetic response to these fears.

Dartmouth’s top faculty member should not be an individual who is opposed to working with Israeli academics based on their national origin, Gustman argues.

“In view of Dartmouth’s anti-Semitic history and Professor Duthu’s endorsement of the anti-Semitic BDS document, Dartmouth must not simply appoint Duthu to the position of Dean of the Faculty and ignore the implications of that appointment,” Gustman wrote. “Professor Duthu should either publicly disavow the full ramifications of the BDS positions he has publicly endorsed, or resign his position as Dean and return to his faculty position where expression of these views is sanctioned as academic freedom, but is not representative of Dartmouth College or its faculty.”

Duthu “cannot, without contradiction, 1) assure council signers of the NAISA document and holders of their position of his support for action to boycott Israeli academic institutions, and at the same time 2) administer his job as Dean of the Faculty, while assuring Dartmouth that he will not take such action,” Gustman wrote. “Given its history, Dartmouth cannot turn a blind eye to this contradiction. These issues must be directly and publicly addressed by the Dean, the President, and by the Board. Papering over hypocrisy and prejudice is no way to run an Ivy League College administration.”

When asked to comment on the issue, a Dartmouth spokesman told the Free Beacon, “Thank you for the opportunity, but we are going to decline.”

Dartmouth’s silence on the BDS controversy has raised charges of hypocrisy, given the college’s opposition to President Donald Trump’s immigration policies.

Dartmouth President Hanlon and other top officials issued a public statement condemning Trump’s immigration policies, but continue to remain silent in the face of charges the school is promoting boycotts of Israel.

“Dartmouth’s commitment to the free and open exchange of ideas, global research, and education manifests itself in dozens of partnerships and in international study and exchange programs,” the anti-Trump statement read. “Our engagement with the full human diversity of backgrounds, perspectives, and experiences is critical—to both the strength of the Dartmouth community and the effectiveness of Dartmouth’s learning and leadership. We recognize, value, and celebrate the essential contributions of our international students and scholars.”

The controversy also has begun to resonate in Washington, D.C.

“Dartmouth has long been a hotbed of thinly-veiled anti-Semitic activism, which was excused by the faculty and the institution as criticism of Israel,” said one senior official at a national pro-Israel organization who requested anonymity when discussing strategy. “This disgrace is the logical result. A bureaucrat who is supposed to manage an institution dedicated to the open exchange of ideas but who says that those exchanges shouldn’t include Israeli Jews. Parents will ask themselves if those are the sorts of values they want their kids to learn.”

Josh Block, president and CEO of the Israel Project, told the Free Beacon that Dartmouth must show its commitment to academic freedom.

“This is about dialogue and academic freedom, and simply put, anyone who rules out engaging an entire country, let alone the world’s only Jewish state, is simply unfit to run an institution dedicated to liberal education and higher learning,” Block said.” And that is before we examine the despicable, anti-Semitic double standard being applied, in which the flaws of Israel’s democracy are held up for sanction while the professor and his fellow travelers embrace or ignore numerous regimes committing actual atrocities on historic scale.”

“It’s not just Dartmouth’s reputation that is being damaged, it is the university’s very credibility as an institution capable of discerning right from wrong,” Block added. “Post-modernism married with Moral Relativism is the disease of our time, and a toxic cocktail on display so far here.”

Stephen Smith, an executive director USC Shoah Foundation, which fights anti-Semitism, publicly condemned Dartmouth for elevating Duthu in a recent op-ed.

“Those who call for singling out Israel for the Divestment, Boycott, and Sanction will deny they are anti-Semitic, but the result is clear: when you exclude a colleague by association to their affiliation with an Israeli institution of higher education, you are not targeting the state, you are targeting the individual,” Smith wrote.

Sharia-Advocate Sarsour to Give Graduation Address at CUNY

April 23, 2017

Sharia-Advocate Sarsour to Give Graduation Address at CUNY, Clarion ProjectMeira Svirsky, April 23, 2017

(Caution: “Islamophobic” article. — DM)

Linda Sarsour speaks at a “Women for Syria” rally in NY. (Photo: Drew Angerer/Getty Images)

Pro-sharia activist Linda Sarsour was chosen to give the commencement speech by a division of CUNY, (City University of New York).

CUNY is part of the public university system of New York City, and the largest urban university in the United States.

Sarsour was selected chosen to give the address to CUNY’s Graduate School of Public Health and Health Policy at their June 1 ceremony. Sarsour was recently arrested in New York for blocking traffic along with other protesters outside the Trump International Hotel in New York City. She had been warned several times by police officers before being removed for disorderly conduct.

Sarsour was one of the main organizers of the Women’s March on Washington following U.S. President Donald Trump’s inauguration.

Her “credentials” include:

sharia law is reasonable and once u read into the details itmakes a lot of sense. People just know the basics.”

Sharia law is misunderstood & has been pushed as some evil Muslim agenda.”

“If you are still paying interest than Sharia Law hasn’t taken over America. #justsaying.”

“You’ll know when you’re living under Sharia Law if suddenly all your loans & credit cards become interest free. Sound nice, doesn’t it?”

  • Belittling the lack of women’s rights in Saudi Arabia. Sarsour tweeted:

“10 weeks of PAID maternity leave in Saudi Arabia. Yes PAID. And ur worrying about women driving. Puts us to shame.”

  • Belittling other activists who stand against sharia law. Sarsour tweeted: “Brigette Gabriel=Ayaan Hirsi Ali. She’s asking 4 an a$$ whippin’. I wish I could take their vaginas away – they don’t deserve to be women.”
  • Activist in campaign to discredit Clarion Project’s film Honor Diaries, which showcases the struggle of nine women’s-rights activists, some Muslim some not, as they campaign against honor violence and female genital mutilation.
  • Supporter of the Boycott, Divest and Sanction (BDS) anti-Israel movement

EU Funding to NGOs Active in Anti-Israel BDS Campaigns

January 23, 2017

EU Funding to NGOs Active in Anti-Israel BDS Campaigns

January 23, 2017

Source: EU Funding to NGOs Active in Anti-Israel BDS Campaigns » NGO Monitor

Executive Summary

  • Twenty-nine out of 100 EU grants administered through EU regional funding programs designated for Israel, the West Bank, and Gaza funnel funds to organizations that actively promote BDS (boycott, divestment and sanctions) – totaling €16.7 million out of €67.1 million (roughly 25%).
  • Forty-two out of 180 EU grantees in total support BDS – through participation in activities and events, signing of petitions and initiatives, and/or membership in explicit BDS platforms.
  • A number of organizations were funded through more than one EU grant, sometimes as part of the same program (“Double Dipping”).
  • The EU expressly opposes BDS. When confronted by evidence of funding for NGOs with agendas or values that contradict EU policy, the EU’s recurring response is that it “funds projects submitted by NGOs, in line with [the] EU’s fundamental principles and values, but not NGOs themselves.”
  • A grant titled “Performing Arts: A Pathway Towards Self Expression and Democracy” amply demonstrates this flawed logic. In 2014, during their participation in the EU’s Cultural Programme, all twelve beneficiaries of this grant initiated a group statement calling for a cultural and academic boycott of Israel.
  • Nine BDS-supporting organizations were the recipients of the EU’s Partnership for Peace Program- a program designated for joint projects involving Israeli as well as Palestinian organizations, meant to “build trust and understanding between societies in the region.”


The European Union (EU) is the single largest donor to non-governmental organizations (NGOs) active in the Arab-Israeli conflict, accounting for NIS 28.1 million in 2012-2014 to politicized Israeli NGOs alone.

Indeed, NGO funding is a central component of EU foreign policy, claiming to promote peace, cooperation, and human rights. In contrast to the stated objectives, the EU funds a number of highly biased and politicized NGOs that exploit the rhetoric of human rights to promote anti-Israel BDS (boycotts, divestment, and sanctions) and lawfare campaigns, inflammatory rhetoric, and activities that oppose a two-state framework.

Due to the highly complex and poorly coordinated nature of EU aid and to the lack of a consolidated database differentiating between NGOs and other types of organizations, it is impossible to determine the exact amount or proportions of EU funding to organizations that promote anti-Israel BDS.

However, NGO Monitor reviewed a number of EU regional funding programs designated for Israel, the West Bank, and Gaza, and found that 29 out of 100 EU grants administered through the frameworks reviewed funnel funds to BDS organizations (€16.7 million out of €67.1 million – roughly 25%). 42 out of 180 EU grantees in total support BDS – either through participation in activities and events, signing of petitions and initiatives, and/or membership in explicit BDS platforms. Several organizations were the recipients of more than one grant. See below for an explanation of the methodology, numeral analysis of the findings, and list of relevant grants along with BDS activities of respective beneficiaries.

Grants in € to BDS supporting organizations

(based on reviewed grants with an end date after November 2015 in Israel, West Bank and Gaza)

Number of grants to BDS supporting organizations

(based on reviewed grants with an end date after November 2015 in Israel, West Bank and Gaza)

When confronted by evidence of funding for NGOs with agendas or values that contradict EU policy, the EU’s recurring response is that it “funds projects submitted by NGOs, in line with [the] EU’s fundamental principles and values, but not NGOs themselves.” This distinction is irrelevant, as project funding inevitably is used for overall organization and activity expenses. Because money is fungible, EU funding ostensibly allocated to specific projects also supports the NGO’s infrastructure including funding for staff, equipment, office space, publicity for the organization and its campaigns, and the significant costs of writing more grant applications, as well as allowing officials of these NGOs to travel and promote their agendas around the world. In several cases, EU funding comprises 50%, 60%, or even 75% of an NGO recipient’s entire budget. Moreover, many recipients feature the EU symbol on their publications and websites, bolstering their legitimacy and linking the EU with the broader political activities and campaigns of the NGOs – such as boycotts and the rejection of normalization.

A grant titled “Performing Arts: A Pathway Towards Self Expression and Democracy” (# 16 in the list of grants below) amply demonstrates this flawed logic. In 2014, during their participation in the EU’s Cultural Programme, all twelve beneficiaries of this grant initiated a group statement calling for a cultural and academic boycott of Israel. The group officially registered as the Palestinian Performing Arts Network in the Palestinian Ministry of Interior in February 2015, also during the members’ participation in the EU program. According to their website, which features their BDS statement, the EU and the Swedish consulate in Jerusalem are their sole donors.


The following is a list of 29 EU grants, whose beneficiaries include NGOs that participate in BDS campaigns against Israel. All grants have an end date after November 2015.

The grants were administered through a number of EU country-based programs: European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights (EIDHR), European Partnership for Peace (PfP), Non-State Actors (NSA) program, East Jerusalem Programme, and Cultural Programme; for one additional grant (#7 in the list below), the funding program remains unclear (see Additional Information at the end of this document). The list does not include global thematic funding programs; humanitarian funding; country-specific funding to regions other than Israel, the West Bank and Gaza; or any form of indirect funding (for example, EU funds to a church or humanitarian aid group, that are then transferred to a political NGO). A full accounting of the proportion and extent of EU-funding to BDS-supporting beneficiaries is therefore not available.

Because many of the BDS-supporting organizations listed here are grant co-beneficiaries, and due to the absence of transparency, it is not possible to determine the exact amount of funding received by each organization. A number of organizations were funded through more than one EU grant, sometimes as part of the same program (see Double Dipping below).

Only beneficiaries whose support of BDS could be adequately demonstrated were included. Regardless of whether the NGOs openly declare or deny their support for BDS, all provide material support for BDS initiatives and efforts – either through participation in activities and events, signing of petitions and initiatives, and/or membership in explicit BDS platforms. NGOs whose materials are used to promote BDS but which do not explicitly endorse or participate in these activities are not included.


To view the complete list of grants in table form, click here.

UN Approves Funding for First Anti-Israeli ‘Settlement’ Blacklist

December 30, 2016

UN Approves Funding for First Anti-Israeli ‘Settlement’ Blacklist

By Patrick Goodenough | December 27, 2016

Source: UN Approves Funding for First Anti-Israeli ‘Settlement’ Blacklist

( – On the same day as the U.N. Security Council passed a controversial resolution condemning Israel, the 193-member U.N. General Assembly on Friday approved a budget that includes $138,700 to fund the compilation of a first-ever U.N. blacklist of private companies doing business in territories disputed between Israel and the Palestinians.

Defined in U.N. documents as a “database,” the blacklist will cover companies of any nationality that do business in Israeli “settlements” located in areas claimed by the Palestinians, including Jerusalem’s Jewish Quarter.

The move, which was mandated by the U.N. Human Rights Council (HRC) last March, is expected to benefit the anti-Israel boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) campaign.

The U.S., not a member of the HRC this year, did not have a vote on the matter in March, although the State Department did criticize the decision, with spokesman John Kirby calling it “an unprecedented step” that was “far outside” the scope of the HRC’s authority.

U.S. taxpayers account for 22 percent of the U.N.’s regular operating budget, plus billions of dollars more in voluntary contributions to various parts of the U.N. system each year.

Since Friday’s Security Council resolution – which passed after the Obama administration chose to abstain rather than exercise its veto – several Republican lawmakers have vowed to target U.S. funding for the world body.

The General Assembly approves the budget for the HRC, and was asked this year to green light $26.4 million over and above earlier estimates, to pay for resolutions and decisions taken during the council’s periodic sessions in Geneva.

Included in that request was the sum of $138,700 – $102,400 to pay for the individual tasked to compile the Israeli settlement blacklist over a period of eight months, and $36,300 for “documentation.”

The HRC resolution called for the list to be presented to the council at an upcoming month-long session, which is scheduled to begin in late February next year.

Earlier this month, Palestinian representative Abdullah Abushawesh made clear the BDS goal behind the move.

“We should block the source of financing for settlements on occupied Palestinian territory, in particular by drawing up a list of companies that operate on this territory, whether these companies are Israeli or from other countries,” he told General Assembly member-states considering the budget request.

“As soon as this list is drawn up we encourage all to disseminate it, and to help these transactions with these companies to be stopped,” Abushawesh said through a translator.

“Because I am sure that you would all agree that these settlements are illegitimate,” he added. “As a consequence, any products there are also illegitimate and should not be sold on your markets.”

Hours before the General Assembly adopted the budget resolution without a vote on Friday night, it was approved by the assembly’s “Fifth Committee,” which deals with budgetary affairs.

At that committee session earlier in the day, Israel’s delegation tried to insert an amendment to exclude funding for the blacklist. It was criticized by other delegates for introducing “political elements” – in the words of Slovakia, speaking for the European Union – into what they argued should be a strictly budgetary process.

Israel’s proposal was then put to a vote, and failed dismally, with just six countries (the U.S., Israel, Australia, Canada, Guatemala and Palau) in favor and 151 opposed.

Israel’s delegate afterwards dissociated his country from the specific funding requirement for the blacklist, saying that the funds were being “used to target the State of Israel.”

“It’s time to remove resources for activities that have only one agenda – to politicize the work of the Human Rights Council,” he said.

Last month, the office of the U.N. human rights commissioner Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein formally invited “all interested persons, entities and organizations” to submit information to enable it to compile the HRC-mandated blacklist.

“The identity of sources of information will be kept confidential,” it said in a notice requesting that concise and pertinent submissions be emailed by November 30.

Ahead of Friday’s budget vote in New York that included funding for the blacklist, Anne Bayefsky, president of the U.N.-focused NGO Human Rights Voices, warned that American companies “are in for a shock.”

“American taxpayers can expect to find themselves funding BDS in the very near future, with American businesses caught in the crosshairs,” Bayefsky wrote.