The Olympia Food Co‐op Boycott: Nonviolent Struggle versus Conflict Resolution Process

• Published date: 01 October 2014
• Author: Jennifer P. Berg,Maia Carter Hallward
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1002/crq.21100
• Date: 01 October 2014

C R Q, vol. 32, no. 1, Fall 2014 33

© 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. and the Association for Confl ict Resolution

Published online in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com) • DOI: 10.1002/crq.21100

The Olympia Food Co-op Boycott: Nonviolent

Struggle versus Con ict Resolution Process

Maia Carter Hallward

Jennifer P. Berg

 is article examines the contention caused by a decision in 2010 of

the board of the Olympia Food Co-op to boycott all Israeli products

from the co-op.  e hometown of Rachel Corrie, a twenty-three-year-

old Evergreen University student who was killed in 2003 by an Israeli

bulldozer while defending a Palestinian home in the Gaza Strip,

Olympia has a unique culture of social activism. However, as the case

illustrates, community members diff ered in their conceptualization of

what it means to be “progressive” on the subject of Israel and Palestine.

Drawing on interviews and document analysis, the article argues that

the polarization surrounding the co-op’s boycott refl ects broader tensions

within the fi eld of confl ict studies, including those between advocates

of nonviolent resistance and dialogue, proponents of process versus those

of outcome, and those arguing for neutrality versus solidarity with the

oppressed.  e article also explores the role of competing and overlapping

identity categories in how activists framed their position on the issues

under contention.

Board members from the Olympia Food Co-op (OFC) in W ashington

State agreed on July 15, 2010, to boycott Israeli-made products in

their two grocery stores. With that action, it became the fi rst US grocery

store to remove Israeli goods from its shelves (OFC 2010b). Although

 e data collected for this article are part of a broader project described in Transnational

Activism and the Israeli-Palestinian Confl ict, by M. C. Hallward (Palgrave Macmillan,

2013). A more extended discussion of the Olympia Food Co-op boycott can be found in that

book.

34 HALLWARD, BERG

C R Q • DOI: 10.1002/crq

the co-op is a small store in a small city and only nine products were

deshelved, the boycott hit the international airwaves, spurred conversa-

tions in the Israeli Knesset, and even led to a lawsuit against the board

members (Abunimah 2011b; Silverstein 2012).  e worldwide response

this case received, which far exceeded the scale of the Olympia Food

Co-op’s action, raised this particular boycott, divestment, and sanctions

(BDS) campaign from the local to the global level, where the evaluation

of the various defi nitions of success and peace are surprisingly varied. More

specifi cally, this article illustrates how diff erent orientations to how one

can best work for peace at home and abroad refl ect wider disparities in

the general paradigms of peace and confl ict resolution used by those for

and against the boycott (although there was diversity of opinion on each

side of the issue).

 e Olympia controversy is particularly interesting given that this

small BDS “success” was seen by both local and international opponents

simultaneously as a threat with larger intentions and a failure at having

any eff ect on the larger Israeli-Palestinian confl ict. Rival interpretations of

the case’s success or failure refl ect diff erent paradigms toward peace and

confl ict resolution that determine how actors envision peace and how to

reach it, emphasizing the importance of the process by which the results

are achieved and how the method aff ects the outcome. Boycott support-

ers point to the rights-based approach of the 2005 Palestinian civil soci-

ety call for BDS aimed at ending the Israeli occupation and highlight the

time-tested credentials of boycott as a nonviolent tactic used in movements

for justice and equality. Opponents highlight the confrontational confl ict-

causing nature of the boycott eff ort and challenge the co-op board’s deci-

sion-making process.  ese two positions refl ect broader debates in the fi eld

regarding the relationship between peace and justice, most commonly seen

in the wake of violent confl ict when considering appropriate measures for

transitional justice (Albin 2009). Contending approaches to the boycott

eff ort also implicated actors’ identities—as progressives, as Jews, and as

co-op members—thereby personalizing the confl ict.  is boycott illustrates

that tensions between these theoretical paradigms of confl ict resolution are

not simply abstract or academic debates; in fact, they have practical real-

world ramifi cations, even in small, progressive communities far from situa-

tions of violent confl ict, and they raise questions regarding how concerned

third parties can best engage in eff orts for international peace in their home

communities where parties have diff erential access to power and overlap-

ping identities.