As I have written before, I don’t much like the BDS movement for many of the same reasons Prime Minister Netanyahu doesn’t. It demonizes Israel, many of its leading proponents are anti-Semites, and its rage against Israel is entirely selective. I also believe (from reading its material) that the movement exists to eliminate the State of Israel by replacing it by “One State” in which Jews will be a minority. As one who supports the continued existence of a secure Jewish state, I have no choice but to oppose the BDS movement.
So I wasn’t offended by anything Netanyahu said about it in his AIPAC speech.
What did offend me was Netanyahu’s (and AIPAC’s) use of BDS as a diversion from the main issue: the occupation. It is the occupation, not BDS, that threatens to end Israel’s existence as a democratic Jewish state. It is the occupation, not BDS, that has turned Israel into a pariah in most of Europe. It is the occupation, not BDS, that prevents Israel from achieving peace with the Palestinians and the entire Arab League (as offered in the Arab League initiative). It is the occupation, not BDS, that has jeopardized Israel’s standing with liberal and progressive Americans, including the Democratic party at large, not BDS.
In fact, if BDS disappeared tomorrow, all of Israel’s problems would remain. All it would lose is a convenient scapegoat.
In short, Netanyahu is using BDS as just one more excuse to avoid making tough decisions about the occupation. And he is giving a hostile movement infinitely more credibility than it deserves. The prime minister of Israel should not be giving speeches about a fringe movement that, so far, has accomplished almost nothing–including on US campuses. It’s as if Lyndon Johnson gave a speech denouncing the Trotskyists for its opposition to the Vietnam war.
All Netanyahu did was use BDS as another excuse to avoid the issue of the ugly, immoral, illegal occupation itself. So typical. Anything to avoid talking about peace.
All the more reason for BDSers to just go away. They are doing what people across the pro-I spectrum cannot do for themselves — get them to stand united.
Rosenberg’s fear of the horrible “one state” option is an undemocratic view since it means the political power that is now weilded in a brutal and racist way against the majority is ok, as long as the artificial majority of Jews is maintained. You apparently agree to this. So the lives of Palestinians count less than Jews, because Jews Must have their own state on someone else’s land. News flash: BDSer’s are not going away, but rather are growing quickly because they demand justice. A “Jewish state” on Palestinian land is never going to be “Jewish” in the sense of any humanitarian values, any more than White Apartheid S. Africa could be humanitarian. Israelis will sooner or later learn what we all learn in 1st grade: Sharing.
My comments on MJ Rosenberg’s previous posting against BDS pertains here once again.
Palestinian civil society is calling for BDS just like black South Africans called for BDS because Israel’s trampling on Palestinian rights and Israel’s decisive moves towards creating a “greater Israel” is unlikely to stop without a concerted campaign of international pressure. Taking away BDS strips the Palestinians of a viable, effective, and non-violent means to confront what Israel is doing. Listening to J-Street and MJ Rosenberg, it appears that Palestinians are supposed to be quiescent, passive, and non-violent spectators, waiting for liberal Jews to bring Israel to its senses while Israel continues to create facts on the ground.
Rather than simply ignoring Palestinian demands to address the historic wrongs committed against them, understanding how to creatively address them is what is required, for example how Israeli Jews are going to acknowledge and address the Nakba and the refugee crisis.
The reasons for general BDS against Israel are very sound. BDS is a tactic to put pressure on a country or institution to change its behavior, it doesn’t need to be a value judgement on the existence of that country or institution or the people.
– Palestinian civil society is calling for a boycott, no similar civil society movement is demanding a boycott of the U.S.
– Other methods of pressure on Israel are unavailable, primarily because of US providing diplomatic and economic cover for Israel and because of the widespread institutional support for Israel in the United States
– Focusing on the settlements makes a lot of sense, but unfortunately, I doubt very much that a boycott of settlements only will be SUFFICIENT to make change in Israel. The reason to embark on BDS is not to be simply symbolic but to create actual change, therefore the pressure applied will need to be sufficient
– Israel’s government and many of Israel’s institutions, corporate, military, academic, are completely complicit with the the settlement enterprise and benefit from, for example, the plunder of West Bank resources like water
– All of Israeli society is complicit, for one thing even folks in Tel Aviv take part in the military occupation of Palestinian land and defend the settlers while in the military.
– Israel society already feels the effects of BDS, meaning the likelihood of effecting some kind of change through the use of BDS is very great
– BDS can have a huge impact politically, socially, psychologically before it begins to have an actual impact economically. Meaning people will feel the pain before they are actually hurt!
The whole situation in the Mideast is just the world’s whitest, most gentile, richest, most testosterone-drenched 1% laughing their heads off at having gotten another bunch of us peasants to fight among ourselves. When World War II was over, an Arab leader very sensibly pointed out that it was German gentiles who had harmed Jews, so it was Germany that ought to provide the territory for a defensible Jewish homeland. However, the white gentiles weren’t going to take any real estate away from one of their own, so–under the pretext of some ancient superstition–they pushed displaced Jews off onto poor people of color who hadn’t done anyone any harm. Granted there are a good many Jews who subscribe to that superstition, the point is that ALL Semitic peoples have a common enemy: the economic rulers of the white, gentile countries. The most devastating conflict is not really between Israelis and Palestinians, but between Semites and white-as-the-driven-snow plutocrats.