Outsourcing violations: The Israeli case

Using the Israeli case as a point of reference, this paper suggests that the term outsourcing, borrowed from economic discourse, can serve as a powerful explanatory device that facilitates the conceptualization of existing processes pertaining to human rights violations. It allows us to draw a connection among several phenomena that are usually conceived to be independent and unconnected, while disclosing and capturing some of the predominant features characterizing the global violation of human rights. Demonstrating that outsourcing violations is an increasingly prevalent strategy used to mask power and thus abdicate social and moral responsibility, the author argues that its benefits are legal, political and economic. From a legal perspective, the employment of subcontractors is effective since it obfuscates the connection between Israel and the contravening act, making it extremely difficult to hold Israel legally accountable for violations it sanctions. From a political perspective, outsourcing is beneficial because even if the abuses are exposed, they are frequently presented to the public as having been perpetrated by someone else. Finally, the use of subcontractors is economically advantageous because it enables the violator to avoid legal prosecution and political embarrassment, both of which can have an unfavourable effect on capital.