The international aid organization Oxfam chastised Hollywood actress Scarlett Johansson in a statement this week over her new contract with a controversial Israeli company, leaving the starlette in the crosshairs of a worldwide ethical debate.
The firm, SodaStream — a business that offers at-home, soda-making products, is based in the occupied West Bank territory and has publicly made Johansson its global brand representative. Its website prominently features several images and a glossy video of Johansson enjoying the company’s products.
Although Oxfam, based in the U.K., praised her previous work, they said it conflicted with its stance on the Israeli settlements in Gaza and the West Bank, making it difficult to further the relationship with Johansson. However, it reportedly did not ask her to sever her deal with Sodastream either.
In a statement earlier this week, the aid group said it “respects the independence of our ambassadors. However, Oxfam believes that businesses that operate in settlements further the ongoing poverty and denial of rights of the Palestinian communities that we work to support. Oxfam is opposed to all trade from Israeli settlements, which are illegal under international law.”
The statement goes on to say the organization had made its concerns known to Johansson but were still “engaged in a dialogue on these important issues,” leaving open the door that there still may be an outlet here.
An article by the Palestinian-run website ElectronicIntifada.net, a website founded by the Palestinian-American activist Ali Abunimah, on Thursday said, “Clearly it would be preferable if Johansson would learn the lesson and walk away from SodaStream. Either way, it is now apparent that no matter how much money you get, doing business with firms that exploit Palestinian workersand profit from Israeli crimes carries, at least, a mounting reputational cost.”
By Friday, there was no official word as to whether Johansson would back out of the SodaStream deal.
In the Jewish Daily Forward, Elisheva Goldberg wrote that the factory’s location is in an area “which will likely be incorporated into Israel in any future deal,” but she added, “it does exploit the commercial benefits of its location, essentially profiting from occupation.”
As noted by The New York Times blog The Lede, the Israeli news outlet Haaretz said that the settlement’s industrial zone, in which SodaStream is located, sits “on the seam line between Israel and the Palestinian territories, putting it in Area C, which is under Israeli military and civil control. This means that the Palestinians need permits to work there. As far as the employers are concerned, though, they’re outside the law.”
A spokesman for the Palestinian labor organization said in the same Haaretz article that, “This is a no-man’s land. Industry, Trade and Labor Ministry inspectors don’t enter Area C since it’s not under Israeli sovereignty, but they’re the only ones who can enforce labor laws.”
Confusing?
Let’s put it this way: if Johansson doesn’t distance herself from SodaStream, she risks being rebranded — and it’s a tightrope she probably didn’t bank on when she signed the big contract with the sleek soda company, which she has described as a healthy and environmentally-friendly product.