16 April 2005

Press accounts in support of 'poor' Caterpillar, ranked #57 in the
Fortune 1,000 corporate index with 2004 revenues of some $30
billion, and Israeli policies in general are limited to the
second-tier intellectual press, mainly the Los Angeles Times and
Boston Globe.

The trouble centers around Rachel Corrie, a college student crushed
to death by a Caterpillar-made, IDF-operated bulldozer in March of
2003 in the Rafah refugee camp, where she had traveled to protest
razings. With Corrie's death ruled an accident by Israeli officials
and the three soldiers involved absolved by an Israeli military
prosecutor, her family has sued Caterpillar, characterized by the
Los Angeles Times as a "legal attack" against the company in an
otherwise fairly straightforward March 20 account spelling out the
allegations. The Corrie's attorney, Jennie Green, is quoted as
saying "Caterpillar purposefully turns a blind eye as to how their
products are used" while a three-sentence Caterpillar statement
follows, noting the company "shares the world's concern over unrest
in the Middle East" without a hint as to their culpability in such
concerns, but unfortunately has "neither the legal right nor the
means to police individual use of the equipment" they sell.[1]

Perhaps forgotten is a Human Rights Watch report published last
November that refutes Caterpillar's "head-in-the-sand" statement,
which "ignores international standards on corporate social
responsibility and the requirements of Caterpillar's own code of
conduct."[2] HRW cites a new United Nations "document", called the
U.N. Norms on the Responsibilities of Transnational Corporations and
Other Business Enterprises with Regard to Human Rights, which says
that corporations like Caterpillar "engage in or benefit from" human
rights violations and calling on corporations to "seek to ensure
that the goods and services they provide will not be used to abuse
human rights."

The HRW report notes that Caterpillar makes the IDF bulldozer of
choice, the D9 model, "to military specifications" and sells them
"as weapons under the U.S. Foreign Military Sales Program, a
government-to-government program for selling U.S.-made defense
equipment." The report also cites other uses of D9 such as using "a
blade on the bulldozer's back known as 'the ripper'" to destroy
"more than 50 percent of Rafah's roads" and damage "more than 40
miles of water and sewage pipes." Human Rights Watch also reports
the death of 3 Palestinians under the blade of the bulldozer during
the last two years "because they could not flee their homes in
time." The Independent of London notes in an article published today
that "Water wells, schools and hundreds of thousands of trees have
been razed by the Israeli army" using Caterpillar equipment such as
the D9, a note absent from U.S. press accounts.[3] These revelations
seem fairly pertinent here, universally ignored as far as I'm aware.

Also ignored are the contents of a State Department report, repeated
in a letter to the Corrie family by then-Secretary of State Colin
Powell's Chief of Staff, which noted the lack of a "thorough,
credible and transparent" investigation by Israeli authorities.[4]
The only mention I've found of the statement among U.S. press is in
an apologist editorial appearing in the March 18th edition of the
Seattle Post-Intelligencer, in which Robert Jamieson Jr. contends
that Caterpillar is "free to do business with whomever it chooses"
yet bothering to learn how its products are used and prevent it
might be "admirable" from a "moral perspective" because it's "smart
public relations."[5] In defending Caterpillar, Jamieson Jr. says
"the real terrorist in Rachel's death" was the IDF soldier at the
bulldozer controls, a shockingly unusual admission rarely found in
the U.S. press but understandable since it was written in defense of
the almighty corporation, which is to be absolved of any
responsibilities and concerns according to American cultural
beliefs.

Not content to simply report Caterpillar's profiteering at
Palestinian expense, doctrine requires support for the occupation
itself, dutifully provided by Los Angeles Times editors in article
published yesterday.[6] Teresa Watanabe reports on a Caterpillar
stockholder resolution protesting sales to Israel and lead by "four
Roman Catholic orders of nuns" and the California group Jewish
Voices for Peace. Lest you think Jewish and Roman Catholic support
for Palestinian liberation is widespread, Watanabe quickly cites
"several" Jewish organizations that are leading a "counter-campaign"
against the resolution, saying it is "part of a broader movement
that unfairly singles out" the occupier Israel "without holding
Palestinians accountable for terrorism and other actions that have
stymied the peace process."

Statements like this have become the standard method of dealing with
criticism for Israeli policies, serving to draw attention away from
specific allegations with warnings of racist conspiracies against
Jews. But in case you didn't get the picture, Los Angeles Times
editors spell it out several paragraphs later, artfully turning a
lawsuit against Caterpillar into "divestment from Israel" at large,
"rekindling a siege mentality and fears of anti-Semitism" during
this "time of some progress in peacemaking", followed by a statement
noting "blatant bias against Israel" from a American Jewish Congress
official.

Boston Globe editors join the chorus in a March 24 report, taking
special care to include multiple statements from Israeli officials,
who provide the standard line about destroying Palestinian homes as
a way to "combat terrorism", used to "target terror" and "not
innocent civilians", reported without noting such an easily
refutable facade or any evidence, let alone quotes from any number
of available groups who might refute the standard official line.[7]
The Globe cites a Consulate General spokeswoman's comment that in
the face of a halt to razings, continuing to protest "proves that
these activists are merely opposing Israel's policies out of habit
and vendetta", presumably an implication of racism against Jews,
joining the common refrain in such matters and offered without
comment here. Paragraphs later we learn that although razings have
officially stopped, "Israel deems that other conditions, including
illegal building, nonownership of land, and criminal reasons, could
warrant the demolition of a house." The implications being what they
are, we're left with a distinct impression that Israel does what it
likes in the Occupied Territories, and anyone who dares to protest
such activities are naturally anti-Semites, and should be dismissed
with repugnance.

The disregard for Palestinian life is palpable as Los Angeles Times
and Globe editors lend support, apologist if not fully complicit, to
the brutal and illegal Israeli domination of Palestine, using
bitterly ironic phrases like "siege mentality" to describe not
Israeli occupation policies but the supposed harsh treatment of Jews
in this matter. And where, one wonders, are the concerns of
"anti-Arabism" in press accounts? I doubt such a phrase even exists
among the U.S. press, who prefer to grimly note the "rekindled"
hatred of Jews while ignoring daily accounts, widely reported in
Israeli press and other sources, of Palestinian death and
destruction at the hands of Israeli occupiers. It's interesting to
note that media attempts to support Caterpillar complicity has been
successful so far--company shareholders overwhelmingly voted down a
proposal on 13 April (97 percent opposed) to simply review the
company's sales of bulldozers to Israel, another notable win for the
corporate/state community.[8]

Dane Baker is a former editor turned media analyst, focusing on U.S.
press treatment of American foreign policy issues. His work can be
found on Bewildered Herd at bewilderedherd.org, where this article
was originally published.


Footnotes 1 Henry Weinstein and Laura King, "Activist's Parents Sue
Caterpillar, Inc.", Los Angeles Times, March 20, 2005.

2 Human Rights Watch, "Israel: Caterpillar Should Suspend Bulldozer
Sales", November 22, 2004
(hrw.org/english/docs/2004/11/22/isrlpa9711.htm).

3 Maxine Frith, "Parents of Peace Activist Killed by Israeli
Bulldozer Target Caterpillar", Independent (London), April 14, 2005.

4 U.S. Department of State report, "Israel and the occupied
territories: Country Reports on Human Rights Practices 2004",
released February 28, 2005
(www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/hrrpt/2004/41723.htm).

5 Robert Jamieson Jr., "Bulldozers Don't Kill People. People Do.",
Seattle Post Intellgencer, March 18, 2005.

6 Teresa Watanabe, "Jews Target Caterpillar Shareholder Effort", Los
Angeles Times, April 13, 2005.

7 Franco Ordonez, "Protesters Target Caterpillar Dealer", Boston
Globe, March 24, 2005.

8 Associated Press, "Caterpillar Won't Probe Bulldozers' Use", April
13, 2005.