Bluewashing in Representation
Image Source: Mabucom.ch
What is Bluewashing?
The main definition of bluewashing deals with the UN Global Compact (UNGC): the UNGC specifies 10 principles companies need to follow in order to be more eco-friendly and ethical in their business practices. So, bluewashing is when a company joins the UNGC but doesn’t actually follow up on its principles, basically deflecting from their bad business practices. This also applies to governments: they use humanitarian operations or actions to cover up their bad practices.
Another more recent definition of bluewashing appeared in the Netflix documentary Seaspiracy: companies make “you think their products are good for the oceans—or at least, don’t harm them—when actually they do.”
In the main definition, the blue in bluewashing refers to the UN logo, and in the Seaspiracy definition, the blue refers to the ocean.
Israel’s Bluewashing Practices
People in Palestine and Lebanon seem intolerant of Israel when they refuse its aid or repudiate its self-praise of its benevolence, but there are bluewashing stories behind such rejections of Israel’s aid or praise. As an Occupying Power, Israel is obligated to provide adequate access to healthcare to the inhabitants of its occupied territories (Palestinians), but evidence has shown Israel has not been fulfilling its obligations. As for Lebanon, Israel has caused destruction in these countries and then later offered aid, which some describe as “rubbing salt in their wounds.”
Israel’s healthcare system and medical innovation have been highly ranked and praised for years, but the well-documented, yet behind-the-scenes, reality on the ground shows that Israel is not as benevolent as it seems. The quality and accessibility of Israel’s healthcare system rank highly in international standings, its medical innovation is praised, and there are articles about expats being treated in Israel. Meanwhile, Palestinians do not enjoy the same access and quality because of Israel’s pervasive policies that restrict the movement of people and resources.
Expats can receive treatment in Israel, but many Palestinians who are in urgent need of medical care are denied permits to enter Israel to receive such care. Many Palestinians die because they cannot receive these permits and therefore don’t receive the care they need: most recently a 19-month-old girl who had a septal defect. And Palestinians often need to travel to Israel for medical care because Israel restricts the entry of medical equipment into the West Bank and Gaza, and because Israel’s bombings (of Gaza) destroy healthcare facilities and kill healthcare providers.
During the pandemic, Israel was praised for its high vaccination rate, but it was not sharing these vaccines with Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza. After rights activists criticized Israel’s discriminatory vaccine practices, the Israeli government and the Palestinian Authority made a deal to swap Israel’s surplus vaccines with the PA’s shipment of Pfizer vaccines, about 1 million to 1.4 million doses. However, despite Israel’s ‘display of benevolence,’ the vaccines were proven to have an expiration date that was sooner than Israeli officials had reported.
When Beirut’s port suffered an explosion, Israeli officials offered their condolences and aid to Lebanon, and the Lebanese flag was flown with the Israeli flag and projected onto government buildings. However, many Lebanese people felt these gestures were not sincere because of Israel’s practices during the 2006 war and the threats from Israeli officials since then. For example, before launching missiles at Lebanon, which caused massive destruction (destroying civilian infrastructure) and many civilian deaths, Israeli children were allowed to write messages on them (and such actions were then justified). And Israeli officials have since threatened to repeat some of the horrific practices it carried out during the 2006 war.
Bluewashing in Iraq
The US invaded Iraq under false pretenses in 2003 and then struggled to extricate itself from the situation of the Bush administration’s own making. In a speech, Bush laid out a ‘five-step plan’ to “resolve the Iraq crisis,” which seems like a benevolent offer, but to Iraqis, most of whom considered the US an occupier at the time, it seemed like bluewashing. Phyllis Bennis at the Transnational Institute lays how this plan is bluewashing step-by-step.
The US will hand over some sort of authority to the Iraqi interim government: Will the interim Iraqi government truly have power as long as US and coalition troops are still stationed in Iraq?
The US military will help establish security: Many would assert that the US is the one that caused much of the instability.
The US will rebuild Iraqi infrastructure: US military offensives and the anti-occupation attacks are what damage the infrastructure, and rather than using local Iraqi or regional Arab contractors to rebuild it, the US chose private contractors that would be more expensive and work slower.
The US is “seeking more international support’ and proposed a new Security Council resolution: the US has the power on the Security Council to sway the vote in its favor, and this resolution would be a UN endorsement of a “continuing US occupation.”
National elections will be held and authority will be given to the interim government: “According to US officials, it will not have the power to overturn any of the economic privatization or security laws imposed by US proconsul Paul Bremer in the last year, and will not have the power to draft or enforce any significant new legislation.” So, the interim government wouldn’t really be in control…
Bluewashing Water
Coca-Cola, Pepsi, and Nestlè have long, well-documented history of water abuse (don’t really know what else to call it, any suggestions?), as they tout their commitment to ensuring people’s right to water. Coca-Cola owns Dasani, Vitamin Water, Smart Water, etc.; Pepsi owns Aquafina; and Nestlè owns Pure Life, Deer Park, Poland Spring, etc. Bottled water as a product is problematic with regards to sustainability, but these companies’ claims of “positive water balance” and “water neutrality” are examples of bluewashing.
Water neutrality cannot really be achieved—it refers to offsetting: “high water use in one place can be offset by purchasing water use credits for lower use or water replenishment in another place.” However, this is not really effective because water is tied to its location (i.e., typography and climate). So, Coca-Cola’s claims of water neutrality are met with accusations of bluewashing due to its overuse of water in some countries.
Pepsi claims it achieves “positive water balance,” which means they’re not pumping out more water than what is going into the water cycle. However, the India Resource Center has evidence to suggest this is not the case:
When calculating their total water use for the year, Pepsi only considered the water used in its beverage and food factories, not its total water impact or footprint.
Pepsi doesn’t count everything when calculating its water “debits” and “credits.” For example, Pepsi doesn’t consider the amount of water used in agriculture in its debits but will consider saving water through agriculture intervention in its credits.
Pepsi “saves” water in places other than where they were using water, which misses the point because “water issues are local issues.”
One in four Pepsi plants operates in water-stressed areas in India, and in some areas, its peak production is in summer when local inhabitants need water the most.
There is much more research that supports the Indian Resource Center’s assertions that Pepsi is bluewashing in India.
Nestlè got into trouble with the Canadian government in 2017 when they tried to certify sites as sustainable. Many protested this because Nestlè had continued to draw water with expired permits and they fear the groundwater resources it is using will be insufficient for future needs. In the Netflix documentary Rotten, the documentarians examined how Nestlè prevented the local inhabitants in Nigeria from accessing their own water supply, and only after deaths and protests did Nestlè properly provide access to water for them.