BDS and Israel

By John Ballard

The Israeli-Palestinian standoff continues, but standoff is not the same as standing still.

"Standoff" suggests a measure of tension not found in "standing still."

Consider these links.

Posted at Anthony Loewenstein's Blog, copied from Facebook...

US Jews breaking the Israeli law of return

We are Jews from the United States, who, like Jewish people throughout the world, have an automatic right to Israeli citizenship under Israel�s �law of return.�

Today there are more than seven million Palestinian refugees around the world. Israel denies their right to return to their homes and land�a right recognized and undisputed by UN Resolution 194, the Geneva Convention, and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Meanwhile, we are invited to live on that same land simply because we are Jewish.

We renounce this �right� to �return� offered to us by Israeli law. It is not right that we may �return� to a state that is not ours while Palestinians are excluded and continuously dispossessed.

In 1947-49, Zionist militias destroyed more than 500 Palestinian villages and made more than 800,000 Palestinian people refugees in order to create a Jewish state on land where the majority was not Jewish. It is Palestinians who have the right to return to their own land.

Now in Gaza, where more than three quarters of the people are refugees, the State of Israel not only denies the population its right of return, but also incarcerates the entire Gaza Strip under illegal and inhumane siege conditions.

We reject the notion that Israel is a �safe haven� from anti-Semitism for Jews. No one is truly safe when the price of that �security� is oppression, inequality, and occupation of another people.

Today there is a growing transnational movement for boycott, divestment, and sanctions (BDS) against Israel, called for by Palestinian civil society and supported by activists, artists, and academics around the world, including an increasing number of conscientious Israelis. As part of this campaign, we pledge to boycott the �law of return.� As an act of political and ideological divestment, we repudiate the claims the State of Israel makes on us as potential citizens.

We protest Israel�s colonial policies and discriminatory laws toward the Palestinian people, as well as the U.S. government�s political and financial support of these policies.

We hereby renounce Israel�s �law of return� and refuse to lend the state our support, resources, or passports.

That Facebook page is the social media's presence of the Global BDS Movement which, as the statement says, stands for Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions.

Since the Unified Palestinian call for BDS, launched in July 2005, BDS initiatives have been multiplying all over the world. Building and strengthening a global BDS movement has become a core aim for many involved in today�s solidarity work for Palestine. As well as the growth of diverse actions on the ground, an increasing number of websites are taking up the issue. This site aims to give an overview of the Palestinian calls for BDS, the myriad local initiatives and resources online, related background information and analysis to inform and guide visitors and activists.

M.J. Rosenburg asked the question last week "Should Palestinians Give Up On Negotiations?" Check out the rest of what he wrote, but this is how he ended...

What would happen is that the Palestinians would go to the United Nations, to the European Union, and even to the United States to seek those consequences. And these would most likely come in the demand for sanctions. There is already a burgeoning BDS (Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions) movement that is seeking to bring down the occupation the way a similar movement brought down apartheid.

Is this what Israelis want? Do they really want those concerned about the occupation to be forced to turn to an option this extreme?

I know that the last thing I want is a successful international movement that would boycott and sanction Israel as if it was apartheid South Africa. But it's probably inevitable unless Israelis come to their senses and begin the process of ending the occupation while the decision is still theirs to make.

As for the United States, President Obama needs to stop worrying about the survival of Israel's right-wing coalition. He should instead focus on the survival of Israel itself, not to mention the well-being of Palestinians whose suffering is mightily abetted by US policies (and arms). And that means pressure, pressure, pressure. For Israel's own sake.

I used to believe that there was no alternative to negotiations. I was wrong. There is. And, at this rate, its day will arrive soon.

There you have it. The future of Israel as a country is more important than the future of right-wing politics in Israel.

(Something about that observation rings true for domestic politics as well, but this post is about Israel.)
Moving along...

A column in the Jerusalem Post by Alon Ben-Meir focused on improved Israel-Syria relations includes this interesting paragraph. (H/T Philip Weiss)

INTERNATIONAL OPPOSITION to Israel�s continued occupation is growing because occupation of Arab land and the settlements are seen as the single source of continued regional strife and instability. Linking the occupation to national security concerns is viewed as nothing more than a pretext to maintaining the occupation and as a recipe not only for self-isolation but a precursor for renewed violence.

It is time for Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu to put an end to Lieberman�s reckless statements about Syria and lack of any diplomatic savoir-faire. If Israel is truly focused on national security then it must relinquish the Golan Heights.

Tony Karon boldly put a piece in Time Magazine under the headline "Israel Gets More Comfortable with Status Quo" but when I check the tab on the screen it says "Would Sanctions Imposed on Israel Help Palestinians?" Not too subtle, I'd say.

"If, and as long as between the Jordan (River) and the [Mediterranean] Sea there is only one political entity, named Israel, it will end up being either non-Jewish or nondemocratic," warned Israel's Defense Minister Ehud Barak last week. "If the Palestinians vote in elections it is a binational state, and if they don't vote it is an apartheid state."

[...]

Whatever the long-term dangers, Israelis right now don't see any negative consequences for maintaining the status quo. The Palestinians are under siege in Gaza and walled off in the West Bank. Terror attacks are rare today and most Israelis are scarcely aware that the Palestinians exist. Israel's booming economy, increasingly integrated with those of Europe and the U.S., is knocking on the door of membership to the OECD; its lifestyle is increasingly American; its culture entirely integrated with the globalized West.

The peace process of the 1990s collapsed in a spiral of bloodshed, and most Israelis have simply moved on. Opinion polls indicate that they would prefer a peace deal with the Palestinians, but also that most don't believe such a deal is possible. Yitzhak Rabin in the old days promised to "pursue peace as if there was no terror and fight terror as if there is no peace," but now that terror has been largely subdued, Israelis feel no urgency about peace.


[...]

Barak sounded his warning in the same week that South Africa marked the 20th anniversary of the decision by the then President F.W. De Klerk to free Nelson Mandela and begin negotiating an end to apartheid. It was certainly a courageous decision by De Klerk, but it's important to remember that it was not some epiphany about the immorality of apartheid that changed his mind. By 1989, with the Cold War essentially over, Pretoria had gotten the message that it could no longer count on U.S. support to head off sanctions and other international pressure in the name of anticommunist solidarity. Financial sanctions were beginning to bite and the price of maintaining the status quo was beginning to appear prohibitive. De Klerk, to his credit, realized that his people had more to gain from negotiating from a position of relative strength. And the political unrest in the black townships, combined with the expanding sanctions and growing isolation, helped him make the case to his own electorate.

Parallels between the plights of Palestinians and other weak minorities are inescapable, and the image can only become more vivid as long as Israel continues occupation remains custodian.

Philip Weiss points to a Ha'aretz link describing a planned historic "heritage trail."

Haaretz has learnt that Benjamin Netanyahu's government is considering a five-year plan costing NIS 500 million to renovate and preserve national heritage and infrastructure sites, in an attempt to strengthen ties between global Jewry and Israel's historical and Zionist legacy.

...Referring to the proposal for two heritage trails running the length and breath of Israel, Netanyahu told the conference that Israel's existence relied first and foremost on the emotional connection and knowledge bestowed upon children by their parents and, as a state, by the educational system.

The premier added that on February 25 he intended to present the cabinet with a working program which would include the inauguration of two trails to be added the existing Israel Trail: an historical trail that would connect various archeological sites, and an "Israeli Experience" trail linking dozens of Israel's landmarks, museums and memorials.

This all sounds fairly benign. Obviously tourists are the target group and tourism is important for Israel for public relations and political reasons as well as a revenue stream. But too much exposure to how Palestinians live and are treated can result in both a political and public relations failure.

The Israel Trail was first marked in 1995, and it was carefully constructed to sidestep areas of territorial dispute, such as the Golan Heights, West Bank settlements, and even Jerusalem. From one end of the country to the other, it passes ancient ruins and biblical sites, beaches, expansive forests, a desert, and cities. The Society for the Protection of Nature in Israel says that thousands walk the Israel Trail, or sections of it, every month. Nimrod Barkan, 22, says that while he was completing his mandatory tour in the Israeli military, he would dream of hiking there. "The thought that I would do this trail, that there was an alternative to the constant pressure, kept me going."

[...]

The politics are at their most subtle in the way some hikers strive to keep those politics at bay. The trail has become a place for Israelis to meet, far removed from the internal dichotomies of their country's existence. "Suddenly the code of behavior is not the usual Israeli code of aggression, of suspicion," Grossman says of Israelis he's met on the trail, including right-wing settlers. "If I had met these people in any other context, we would have immediately begun quarreling, but meeting in nature allows you some generosity again."

Part of the charm of the trail is the evening stopovers, sleeping under the stars. You can also stay as a guest of "trail angels," whose homes dot the country in both Jewish and Arab villages. I stayed at the home of a family in the Bedouin village of Durijat, and as I sat down to eat dinner with them, I asked about the source of their hospitality. "It's simple," said Yitzhak Abu Hemad, passing around a plate of dates. "My door is always open to hikers, no matter who they are and what they believe in. They love the land, and that is enough for me." The trail may not offer a solution for regional peace, but for many Israelis, it does bring a little peace of mind.
LINK (July '09)

Weiss refers to the tourism angle in a year-old post with the delightful title "They will beat their outposts into condoshares�."  The proposed trail (map at the link) seems to have been proposed in total disregard of Palestinian land claims.

I'm reminded of a story I heard last week about a Palestinian investor who is following through on plans to build a modern city, Rawabi, in the West Bank with a view of attracting the Palestinian diaspora and others, with or without permission or encouragement from Israel.

It is a project two years in the making, carefully marketed at young Palestinian professionals looking for affordable, modern homes, as well as much sought-after technology jobs in a town that would be only six miles north of the economic hub of Ramallah. "Providing jobs for Palestine's educated but underemployed workforce," says one advertising slogan. Financed with money from the Qatari government, it is eventually intended to house 40,000 people and to create 5,000 permanent jobs.

Bashar Masri, a Palestinian businessman who is leading the project, said the first phase of the city's masterplan was complete and ready for construction, which may begin within months. Apartments will sell for about �45,000-�48,000 for an average-sized 140sq metres and, although homes will only go on sale once built, thousands of people have already registered an interest. Individual home ownership among Palestinians is still unusual and expensive.

Despite the obvious risks, Masri hopes it will encourage others to invest in the West Bank and will prepare for an eventual end to the Israeli occupation. "I would like to think of this project as part of building a Palestinian state," he said."

?000?

When I read this material and compare it with the war-mongering language associated with Israel in the US I get a serious case of cognitive dissonance. Because of the recent tragedy we know more about Haitians than we do about Palestinians. A Gaza pogrom came and went with little notice. If you ask someone on the street what was the Goldstone Report you will get a blank stare. Few know Hamas from Abbas, much less Hamas and Fatah.

Such ignorance is unfortunate but understandable Whatever the reasons, Americans (like many Israelis) are so wrapped up in domestic issues that few pay attention to foreign affairs generally, much less what they regard as a centuries-old conflict in the Middle East that has been in progress for generations and can be expected to continue long after we are gone.

If the BDS Movement continues to gain momentum, it is hard to know who will be more surprised, Israelis in denial or Americans who never imagined anything would ever change.
But to recycle an old phrase from the past, consciousness-raising is taking place. And you don't need to be an expert on climate change to know which way the wind is a-blowing.