bds » ADL Blogs
Posts Tagged ‘bds’
March 10, 2016 2

The Economic Costs Of Boycotting Israel: An Arab Perspective

Anti-Israel activists have often argued that the goal of the Boy­cott, Divest and Sanc­tion (BDS) cam­paign is to encour­age Israelis to think crit­i­cally about the “eco­nomic cost of the Occu­pa­tion,” but a recent arti­cle pub­lished by Al-Hayat, one of the lead­ing daily pan-Arab news­pa­pers, may be chal­leng­ing them to con­sider think­ing about the costs some Arabs endure as a result of calls to resist nor­mal rela­tions with Israel.al hayat

“Resist­ing Nor­mal­iza­tion [with Israel] in Jor­dan adds eco­nomic losses to the defeat” by Jor­dan­ian jour­nal­ist Ibrahim Gharaiba, which appeared on the inter­na­tional edi­tion of Al-Hayat on March 7, offers a real­is­tic pic­ture of the real price Jor­da­ni­ans are pay­ing as a result of calls to boy­cott Israel.

Accord­ing to Gharaiba, the Israel–Jordan peace treaty, known as Wadi Araba, could have trans­formed the sta­tus of war between the two coun­ties into great eco­nomic and devel­op­ment oppor­tu­ni­ties for Jor­dan. “Israel, which its sta­tus has changed into a non-enemy coun­try is located at the same geo­graphic region as Jor­dan, and it has an advanced econ­omy which achieves very high lev­els of human development.”

This Israeli suc­cess story, accord­ing to the arti­cle, is focused around areas with strate­gic impor­tance for Jor­dan, such as water desali­na­tion and agriculture.

“Jor­dan, which suf­fered a mil­i­tary defeated in 1967 and regional crises cre­at­ing a refugee pro­por­tion close to 70 per­cent of the pop­u­la­tion, is also plagued by bizarre polit­i­cal trends work­ing against its best inter­est in a puz­zling way. [This polit­i­cal trend] turned work in Israel, export to and import from it, and train­ing and tech­ni­cal coop­er­a­tion with it into some­thing taboo.”

Israeli goods burned as part of the BDS activities in the Arab world

Israeli goods (and goods per­ceived as Israeli) burned as part of the BDS activ­i­ties in the Arab world

The author also defends his fel­low Jor­dan­ian cit­i­zens who seek work oppor­tu­ni­ties in Israel against attempts to crim­i­nal­ize their actions. “Cit­i­zens who work in Israel are try­ing to pre­serve their [human] dig­nity, espe­cially as the unem­ploy­ment rate [in Jor­dan] is too high.”  Gharaiba also responds against those who label coop­er­a­tion with Israel as “trea­son” by offer­ing a para­dox­i­cal real­is­tic def­i­n­i­tion: “Trea­son is when a gov­ern­ment aban­dons the inter­ests and eco­nomic oppor­tu­ni­ties of its people.”

The arti­cle com­pares the con­se­quences of such polit­i­cal rhetoric about boy­cotting Israel with the sit­u­a­tion in 1967 when Jor­dan joined sev­eral other Arab coun­tries in attack­ing Israel. Many in the Arab world remem­ber the polit­i­cal rhetoric in these years, which rejected any com­pro­mise with Israel. Accord­ing to the author, today’s calls to boy­cott Israel would add an eco­nomic defeat to the mil­i­tary defeat of the Six Day War.

Gharaibah is not the only one in the Arab world who empha­sizes the eco­nomic hard­ships that are shap­ing the future of the Arab world. A num­ber of Arab intel­lec­tu­als have chal­lenged attempts to mask the role of eco­nomic con­di­tions in trig­ger­ing frus­tra­tions of the Arab youth.

While many who sup­port the BDS move­ment may be moti­vated by what they believe to be the human rights agenda of its lead­ers, they often choose to dis­re­gard real­i­ties on the ground when it comes to the real bur­den endured by the aver­age Arab cit­i­zen. This arti­cle is a sober­ing reminder that the BDS movement’s rhetoric is dis­con­nected  from the real­ity of the cit­i­zens of Jor­dan and poten­tially oth­ers in the Arab world, many of whom are in seri­ous need of the eco­nomic ben­e­fits that could come from fur­ther coop­er­a­tion with Israel.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

March 8, 2016 7

Think Twice Before Jumping on the BDS Bandwagon

By Jonathan Green­blatt
CEO of the Anti-Defamation League

This blog orig­i­nally appeared on Medium

Israeli_Apartheid_Week-Northwestern University

Polit­i­cal move­ments often depend on spo­ken or unspo­ken hatreds to per­pet­u­ate themselves.

Often, how­ever, they can use ambi­gu­ity to mask these motives and appeal to a broader audience.

How­ever, some­times, when haters show their true col­ors, onlook­ers and fel­low trav­el­ers can see through ambi­gu­i­ties to the unsa­vory aims of the causes which they’ve lent their support.

The Boy­cott, Divest­ment, Sanc­tions (BDS) move­ment against the State of Israel is undoubt­edly spread­ing on U.S. cam­puses, in main­stream Protes­tant cir­cles and in uni­ver­si­ties and unions in Europe. One ele­ment explain­ing the growth of BDS is frus­tra­tion with the stale­mate that has taken hold between Israelis and Palestinians.

It is under­stand­able that in the face of diplo­matic dead­lock, move­ments that promise easy solu­tions and sim­plis­tic nar­ra­tives gain steam. Indeed, the belief that Israel, as the occu­pier and stronger party, needs to act, com­bined with the appeal of an osten­si­bly non-violent move­ment like BDS – one that worked so well to bring an end to the apartheid regime in South Africa – makes for a com­pelling case for action.

Yet, any seri­ous observer would admit that the apartheid anal­ogy is flawed to its core.  The con­flict between Israel and the Pales­tini­ans is not an issue purely demar­cated along racial lines.  It is a national con­flict between two peo­ples, a con­flict for which each side bears responsibilities.

The real­ity is com­pli­cated by the fact that Israel has on sev­eral occa­sions pre­sented the Pales­tini­ans oppor­tu­ni­ties to end the occu­pa­tion and build an inde­pen­dent Pales­tin­ian state. One can argue with the terms pro­posed by both sides, but the stark truth of sev­eral rounds of failed nego­ti­a­tions reveals mutual cul­pa­bil­ity in the cur­rent sta­tus quo.  And the ongo­ing incite­ment of the Pales­tin­ian lead­er­ship con­tributes as much if not more to the dimin­ish­ing pub­lic will and widen­ing diplo­matic impasse as the actions of the Israeli government.

So, the keys to the two-state solu­tion are kept by both Israel and the Palestinians.

But many who are swept up in its cur­rents do not look closely at the desired end-state of the BDS move­ment. Many envi­sion a sce­nario in which Israel, com­pelled by pres­sure, would be more forth­com­ing to the Pales­tini­ans and ide­ally a two-state solu­tion could result. One might not agree with this logic, but we should note that, at least among many young Jews, it is ani­mated by a desire for jus­tice. I believe it has impelled groups such as J Street and a num­ber of other emerg­ing grass­roots ini­tia­tives in the Jew­ish com­mu­nity. Even if we dis­agree, even we should acknowl­edge the earnest­ness of their motives.

uc davis protesters

Indeed, the BDS move­ment has been able to cap­i­tal­ize on attract­ing to its ranks many who legit­i­mately seek a last­ing peace between the Israel and the Pales­tini­ans. But it’s cru­cial to note – this end state is not what BDS seeks.

Noth­ing illus­trates this bet­ter than the stance of the orig­i­na­tor and main intel­lec­tual dri­ver of the BDS move­ment, Omar Bargh­outi, and his reac­tion to the views expressed by two pro­fes­sors in sup­port of boycott.

These pro­fes­sors, Steven Lev­it­sky and Glen Weyl pub­lished an arti­cle in the Wash­ing­ton Post endors­ing boy­cott as a way to pres­sure Israel in its poli­cies toward the Pales­tini­ans. Self-described “life-long Zion­ists” seek­ing a two-state out­come, their endorse­ment of the boy­cott rep­re­sents well a vari­a­tion of the “pres­sure school” which seeks through pres­sure to change Israel’s behav­ior and approach to negotiations.

Regard­less of the valid­ity of their ideas—and I have deep doubts over the abil­ity to achieve their desired out­come through one-sided penal­ties against Israel—what is telling is Barghouti’s response.

In his arti­cle, “You can’t save Israel from itself by appro­pri­at­ing BDS,” Bargh­outi slams the pro­fes­sors. He calls out this “Zion­ist” endorse­ment of BDS an appro­pri­a­tion, since it is cal­cu­lated, in the final analy­sis, at achiev­ing a res­o­lu­tion of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Yet, BDS ortho­doxy, Bargh­outi openly acknowl­edges, does not seek this goal. Bargh­outi argues that it is not the occu­pa­tion that is the chal­lenge but Israel’s very exis­tence as a Jew­ish State.

Bargh­outi is trans­par­ent in his views and in his aims, and this should be instruc­tive to any poten­tial sup­porter of BDS. He speaks of Israel as “crim­i­nally built.” He refers to Israel itself – not the ter­ri­to­ries occu­pied in 1967 after the Six Day War – as an “apartheid” and “colonial-settler” regime.

And he spells out in no uncer­tain terms that his ide­ol­ogy – the ide­ol­ogy of BDS – is opposed to the for­mula achieved at Oslo and long since adopted by the inter­na­tional community—the res­o­lu­tion of the Israeli-Palestinian con­flict by the cre­ation of a Pales­tin­ian state to live side-by-side with Israel. Bargh­outi, tellingly, writes:

“End­ing the 1967 occu­pa­tion, even if it included East Jerusalem, at best addresses most of the rights of only 38% of the Pales­tin­ian peo­ple – those liv­ing in the OPT (occu­pied Pales­tin­ian Ter­ri­tory).  What of the UN-stipulated rights of the remain­ing 62% of the Pales­tin­ian peo­ple (12% are cit­i­zens of cur­rent Israel and 50% are in exile who are enti­tled to their right of return) and what of the right of return of more than 40% of the Pales­tini­ans in the West Bank and Gaza who were eth­ni­cally cleansed dur­ing the Nakba and denied their right to go home?”

It is fair to expect Israel to live up to a pol­icy that can accom­mo­date the even­tual emer­gence of a Pales­tin­ian state—and to expect equally that the Pales­tini­ans will act in accor­dance with a two-state vision.

But Bargh­outi spells out here that what he imag­ines as ‘jus­tice’ is not merely the achieve­ment of self-determination for the Pales­tin­ian peo­ple through the cre­ation of an inde­pen­dent state. No, he longs for the right of any Pales­tin­ian liv­ing under the Pales­tin­ian Author­ity to “return” to areas that now com­prise Israel.

In other words, BDS seeks to erad­i­cate the Jew­ish state by bring­ing about an end to the self-determination for the Jew­ish peo­ple through the return of all five mil­lion Pales­tin­ian refugees.

University_of_Michigan-BDS Protest

Of course, the refugee issue has since their incep­tion been a core com­po­nent of bilat­eral nego­ti­a­tions between Israelis and Pales­tini­ans. And, any con­ceiv­able agree­ment between the par­ties requires that the plight of Pales­tini­ans refugees and their descen­dants must be addressed. Numer­ous inter­na­tional efforts have acknowl­edged that their needs will be pre­dom­i­nantly accom­mo­dated within a future state of Palestine.

Among those who sup­port BDS, there are undoubt­edly some who seek Israel’s demise. But for the mul­ti­tude of those who jump on the BDS band­wagon because they see it as a non-violent way to fast-track an end to the occu­pa­tion, they need to know they are being taken for a very dan­ger­ous ride. They sup­port the pol­i­tics of Israel’s destruc­tion, a move­ment of anti-normalization which Israel which is anath­ema to nego­ti­a­tion, com­pro­mise, and con­flict resolution.

That’s some­thing that the vast major­ity of BDS sup­port­ers would reject if only they clearly under­stood it.

So, even as we rec­og­nize the mis­guided aims of BDS and step up our efforts to defeat its ide­ol­ogy, it is a deeper under­stand­ing – not sim­plis­tic slo­gans – that are needed to nav­i­gate the aspects of this com­plex challenge.

That is why ADL has joined with the Reut Insti­tute in a new effort aimed at exam­in­ing the entire array of fac­tors dri­ving the growth of BDS cam­paigns, an ini­tia­tive that will help parse those who are gen­uinely com­mit­ted to peace – even if their views are dif­fer­ent from our own as to how to get there – from those who mean to inflict grave harm.

Tags: , , , , , , ,

November 24, 2015 2

Campus Groups Exploit Domestic Social Issues to Attack Israel

Anti-Israel groups on uni­ver­sity and col­lege cam­puses con­tinue to link the Israeli-Palestinian con­flict to issues of police bru­tal­ity and dis­crim­i­na­tion in the U.S., in an attempt to gain broader sup­port for Boy­cott, Divest­ment, and Sanc­tions (BDS) cam­paigns and other anti-Israel ini­tia­tives from minor­ity stu­dent groups. By employ­ing this tac­tic, groups such as Stu­dents for Jus­tice in Pales­tine (SJP) link domes­tic issues to the Israeli-Palestinian con­flict, thereby couch­ing hos­til­ity towards Israel in social jus­tice terms and mak­ing Israel look like an aggressor.students-for-justice-in-palestine-suhad-khatib

Below are a few exam­ples of these events and actions from the 2015–2016 aca­d­e­mic year:

  • Linda Sar­sour, the National Advo­cacy Direc­tor for the National Net­work for Arab Amer­i­can Com­mu­ni­ties, spoke at Rut­gers Uni­ver­sity on Mon­day, Novem­ber 23, 2015 for an event titled “Sol­i­dar­ity: Uni­fy­ing Com­mu­ni­ties of Color to Break Cycles of Oppres­sion.” Accord­ing to the orga­niz­ers of the event, it was held to focus on a num­ber of issues, includ­ing “mass incar­cer­a­tion, mass crim­i­nal­iza­tion, struc­tural vio­lence, apartheid, racism, state-sanctioned vio­lence, police bru­tal­ity, tear gassed for fight­ing for free­dom and equal­ity– a real­ity for Pales­tini­ans liv­ing under occu­pa­tion, and for Blacks fight­ing an unjust sys­tem here in the United States.”
  • Suhad Khatib, a mem­ber of the St. Louis Pales­tine Sol­i­dar­ity Com­mit­tee (PSC), spoke via Skype at San Diego State Uni­ver­sity on Thurs­day, Novem­ber 19 for an event titled “Resist­ing Oppres­sion from Miz­zou to Gaza.” In her pre­sen­ta­tion, she stated that African-Americans, Pales­tini­ans, Mex­i­cans, and oppressed peo­ple are con­nected, claim­ing that “Fer­gu­son taught me more about my con­nec­tion with Pales­tine than any­thing else because you under­stand racism and sys­tem­atic racism. We as Pales­tini­ans are brain­washed to think we are white when we are peo­ple of color and are oppressed.”
  • The Mar­quette Uni­ver­sity SJP chap­ter spon­sored a panel dis­cus­sion titled “Out­lets 4 Activism,” which fea­tured Ali Abunimah, founder and exec­u­tive direc­tor of the anti-Israel Elec­tronic Intifada blog, as a pan­elist. Other pan­elists at the event included Nate Hamil­ton, an activist from the #Black­Lives­Mat­ter move­ment and brother of Don­tre Hamil­ton; and Oscar Her­nan­dez, an immi­grant rights activist who works as an Orga­nizer for We Own the DREAM. The event was co-sponsored by Black Stu­dent Coun­cil (BSC), Youth Empow­ered in the Strug­gle (Y.E.S), the National Asso­ci­a­tion for the Advance­ment of Col­ored Peo­ple (NAACP), and Jew­ish Voice for Peace (JVP).
  • Many SJP chap­ters and other anti-Israel groups across the coun­try co-sponsored ral­lies and demon­stra­tions held in sol­i­dar­ity with African-American stu­dents at the Uni­ver­sity of Mis­souri. At one of the demon­stra­tions, which took place at Loy­ola Uni­ver­sity on Wednes­day, Novem­ber 11, Nadine Dar­wish, a mem­ber of Loy­ola SJP and Loy­ola Divest, stated “Now is the time to hold admin­is­tra­tors accountable…No longer can we remain com­pla­cent as stu­dents and stu­dent activists. We have to put an end to the poli­cies and prac­tices that con­tribute to the sys­temic trauma­ti­za­tion of stu­dents of color on cam­pus, par­tic­u­larly Black stu­dents and my peers in SJP.”

These events are a con­tin­u­a­tion of what occurred dur­ing the pre­vi­ous aca­d­e­mic year, when anti-Israel groups worked to link the Israeli-Palestinian con­flict to Fer­gu­son, Mis­souri and when SJP and its part­ners began to pub­licly back dif­fer­ent move­ments and offer sup­port to var­i­ous groups, while broad­en­ing sup­port for BDS and other anti-Israel initiatives.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,