A brief chronology, By Rachel Giora
18 January 2010
The emergence of the Israeli boycott,
divestment, and sanction (BDS) movement has been influenced by a number
of factors. In essence, however, the movement in Israel has been basically
reactive - a response to (a) international calls following traumas,
and to (b) ideas, primarily those introducing the South African model
into the international and Israeli discourse; and perhaps most significantly,
it has evolved in response to (c) calls by Palestinians to the international
community to boycott Israel, divest and disinvest from it, and sanction
it. Although the history of the BDS movement in Israel is reviewed here
chronologically, the assumption is that all these factors have worked
interactively and in tandem to influence the development of the BDS
movement worldwide as well as in Israel.
The major role of the Israeli BDS movement
has been to support international BDS calls against Israel and legitimize
them both as clearly not anti-Semitic, as not working against Israelis
but against Israeli governmental policies, and as supporting a legitimate
nonviolent means by which Palestinian civil society can reclaim and
re-own its people's rights and freedoms. Alongside solidarity with
the Palestinians, the driving force behind the Israeli BDS movement
has been the realization that the criminal occupation and repression
of the Palestinian people, as practiced by Israeli governments, will
not be redressed without significant international pressure.
1. The awakening
Al-Aqsa Intifada
The first BDS call in Israel was initiated
by Gush Shalom. Launched in September 1997, it asked Israelis as well
as the U.S., the European countries, and others having trade treaties
with Israel to boycott products of the Jewish settlements in the occupied
Palestinian territory. The call proffered a provisional list in Hebrew,
Arabic, and English of products produced in the settlements.1
However, the first Israeli initiatives
supporting international calls for comprehensive boycott against Israel
emerged only following the outbreak of the second intifada known as
the Al-Aqsa Intifada, in September 2000. They were mostly responses,
by a few individuals, to international calls for BDS against Israel.
At the time, support for such calls did not come from Israeli organizations.
On the whole, the Israeli left shunned such initiatives. The first boycott
support action by Israelis that I recall, which again attracted few
other Israelis, was the one initiated by the late Tel Aviv University
linguist, Professor Tanya Reinhart, and myself, in April 2001, demanding
that the city of Ann Arbor divest itself of Israeli investments.2
In April 2001, 35 Israelis
published a call for boycotting Israel. The authors of this appeal are
Israeli citizens and Jews of other nationalities whose families have
been victims of racism and genocide in past generations, and who feel
they cannot remain silent:
“We call on the world community
to organize and boycott Israeli industrial and agricultural exports
and goods, as well as leisure tourism, in the hope that it will have
the same positive result that the boycott of South Africa had on Apartheid.
“This boycott should remain in
force as long as Israel controls any part of the territories it occupied
in 1967. Those who squash the legitimate aspirations of the Palestinians
must be made to feel the consequences of their own bitter medicine.
“We urge every recipient of this
appeal, irrespective of origin and nationality, to:
“1. Start practicing the boycott
on a personal level immediately, and make sure that the steps taken
are known in the community (for example: tell your shopkeeper why you
will not buy Israeli products; avoid leisure travel to Israel).
“2. Add your name to the appeal, circulate it to your friends, and
do whatever you can to have it endorsed by groups concerned about human
rights.
“3. Organize activities to put pressure on your government to cut
economic and commercial ties with Israel and to rescind preferential
economic treaties with Israel”.
1. Meir Amor, Toronto, Canada
2. Yael Arbel, Tel-Aviv, Israel
3. Dita Bitterman, Tel-Aviv, Israel
4. Hagit Borer, Los Angeles, USA
5. Ouzi Dekel, Paris, France
6. Esty Dinur, Arena, USA
7. Aviva Ein-Gil, Tel-Aviv, Israel
8. Ehud Ein-Gil, Tel-Aviv, Israel
9. Arie Finkelstein, Paris, France
10. Rachel Giora, Tel-Aviv, Israel
11. Zamir Havkin, Givataim, Israel
12. Zvi Havkin, Tel-Aviv, Israel
13. Haggai Katriel, Haifa, Israel
14. Irit Katriel, Haifa, Israel
15. Justin Kodner, Princeton Junction, USA
16. Helga Kotthoff, Fulda, Germany
17. Miri Krasin, Tel-Aviv, Israel
18. Debby Lerman, Tel-Aviv, Israel
19. Mely Lerman, Tel-Aviv, Israel
20. Moshe Machover, London, UK
21. Yael Oren Kahn, Warwickshire, UK
22. Akiva Orr, Kfar Shmaryahu, Israel
23. Rachel Ostrowitz, Tel-Aviv, Israel
24. Eran Razgour, Tel-Aviv, Israel
25. Eyal Rozenberg, Haifa, Israel
26. Hilla Rudich, Givataim, Israel
27. Herzl Schubert, Tel-Aviv, Israel
28. Ilan Shalif, Tel-Aviv, Israel
29. Oz Shelach, New York, USA
30. Ur Shlonsky, Geneva, Switzerland
31. Toma Sik, Budapest, Hungary
32. Ehud Sivosh, London, UK
33. Gideon Spiro, Jerusalem, Israel
34. Guy West, Herzliyya, Israel
35. Adeeb Yaffawy, Yaffa, Israel
The 35 original signatories were supported
by 994 signatures worldwide.3
Then, in May 2001, as a keynote speaker
before a nationwide meeting of Jewish anti-occupation activists in Chicago,
Rela Mazali, an Israeli feminist and writer, one of the outstanding
founders of New Profile4, called for suspension of US military
aid to Israel.5
Jenin Jenin6
The year 2002, however, may be singled
out as a turning point triggered by the Israeli army's large-scale
assault on cities, towns, villages, and refugee camps in the West Bank
in late March (titled Operation Defensive Shield but often referred
to as the Jenin Massacre). This ferocious attack unleashed a wave of
protest in the Arab world, Europe, the United States, and beyond. At
this stage, it looked like the citizens of the world, including those
sheltered in their ivory towers, could no longer be indifferent to the
plight of the Palestinians. “Academics, artists, and intellectuals
launched a number of initiatives, among them a movement to isolate Israel
in the international arena through moratoria, boycotts, and a divestment
campaign”.7 The ferocious assault combined with the construction
of the Apartheid Wall in July, which turned the West Bank into bantustans,
affected some change among Israelis. On the whole, a growing number
of activists protested the occupation, and some also voiced support
of such boycott and divestment campaigns.
In March 2002, supporting the Suspend
Aid Campaign of the Jewish Voice for Peace, the Israeli feminist author,
Rela Mazali, wrote: “Arms are the motor of militarization. Please
reciprocate the young people inside Israel saying “NO” to the deployment
of their bodies and souls, in the service of the occupation. Please
join them by saying “NO” to arming it with your dollars”.
8 Her call to suspend military aid to Israel earned the full support
of the members of the feminist organization New Profile.
In April 2002, a call for a Moratorium
on EU and European Science Foundation support for Israel was launched.
The call was initiated by Professor Steven Rose (Physics, Open University)
and Professor Hilary Rose (Bradford University)
and was published in the Guardian on 6 April 2002.9
More than 120 academics signed this call, among them about 10 Israeli
academics: 10 11
Professor Amit, Daniel, Hebrew University
Bar, Iris, Haifa University
Professor Farjoun, Emmanuel, The Hebrew
University of Jerusalem12
Professor Giora, Rachel, Tel-Aviv University
Professor Jablonka, Eva, Tel-Aviv University
Dr Katriel, Haggai, Haifa University
Professor Lavie, Smadar, Tel-Aviv
Dr Pappe, Ilan, Haifa University
Professor Razi, Zvi, Tel-Aviv University
Professor Reinhart, Tanya, Tel-Aviv University
Dr Shlonsky, Tuvia, Hebrew University, Jerusalem13
The letter had an immediate effect.
It was soon followed by a unanimous decision made by the board of directors
of the organization for professors and teachers in higher education
in England to call for a more sweeping boycott. “The decision calls
on all the British institutions of higher education to weigh - with
the goal of severing - any future academic connection with Israel. It
insists that such relations should be resumed only after a full withdrawal
of all the Israeli forces, the beginning of negotiations to implement
UN resolutions, and the promise of full access for all Palestinians
to institutions of higher learning”.14
In April 2002, an Art boycott petition
was launched too, appealing “to all artists of good conscience around
the world to cancel all exhibitions and other cultural events that are
scheduled to occur in Israel, to mobilize immediately and not allow
the continuation of the Israeli offensive to breed complacency”. It
was endorsed by many signatories (more than 180) from Australia, Austria,
Belgium, Canada, Egypt, France, Germany, India, Ireland, Italy, The
Netherlands, Norway, Palestine, Sweden, Switzerland, UK and US, and
Israel.15
At the same time, several hundred students
and about 100 staff at Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) and
Harvard University signed a divestment petition which was also supported
by professors at several Israeli universities.16
In April 2002, a US-initiated boycott
letter called for Boycotting Israeli Academics and Research.17
In June, Professor Mona Baker of the University of Manchester Institute
of Science and Technology (Umist) dismissed two Israeli linguists from
the editorial board of the translation journal she edited. Such acts
did not go unnoticed and stirred a heated debate among Israelis, giving
the boycott movement a lot of visibility here.
In May 2002, Professor Tanya Reinhart
published an article inYediot Aharonot, the then most popular
Israeli daily, in which she endorsed a boycott of Israeli academic institutions
for being complicit in the Palestinians' oppression by turning a blind
eye to their plight, not least the plight of Palestinian academic
colleagues: “Never in its history did the senate of any Israeli university
pass a resolution protesting the frequent closure of Palestinian universities,
let alone voice protest over the devastation sowed there during the
last uprising”. The type of academic boycott she endorsed drew on
a model used effectively in South Africa. “The economic pressure on
South Africa”, she said, “was combined with another aspect of pressure
-- cultural boycott and social isolation: South Africa was kicked out
of international sports; professional and academic organizations did
not cooperate with South-African organizations; there was a ban on conferences
and cultural events. All these helped. South Africa was forced to change”.18
A comparison of the occupation with
South African Apartheid was also brought up by Nobel Peace Prize laureate
Desmond Tutu in October 2002. “If apartheid ended”, he said, “so
can this occupation, but the moral force and international pressure
will have to be just as determined. The current divestment effort is
the first, though certainly not the only, necessary move in that direction”.19
The analogy to the South African case, made explicit by various thinkers,20
will affect the minds of many Israeli leftists. Not only will the numbers
of Israeli boycott supporters increase, but more importantly, the Israelis'
attempts to resist the occupation will be geared towards collaborating
with the Palestinian resistance movement, thus modeling their action
after the joint struggle for liberation of South Africans.
Earlier that autumn, when interviewed
in September 2002 for Labournet, Dr. Ilan Pappe, a renowned historian
and boycott supporter at Haifa University, had expressed his views on
his support for boycott, including academic and cultural boycott: “a
cultural and academic boycott can drive the message to good Israelis
that there is a price to be paid for being indifferent. Not only for
doing the things themselves, but even for being silent in Israel itself”.
21
Before the year was out, in December
2002, the administrative council of Marie Curie University - Paris VI
- “demanded that the European Union (EU) not renew its 1995 Association
Agreement with Israel, giving that country commercial concessions, but
also providing funds for infrastructure and research. The university's
motion called on Israeli academics to adopt positions on the measures
being taken against Palestinian universities, whose work has been rendered
impossible, and called on the university's president to foster contacts
with academics from both sides, in order to promote a peaceful solution”.22
In January 2003, this decision was endorsed
by Palestinian academics who issued a letter of support to French colleagues.
In the same spirit, in February 2003, Professor Tanya Reinhart also
expressed support for this resolution.23
Inspired by the South African resistance
movement, Anarchists Against the Wall (AATW) – an Israeli direct action
group - was founded in 2003 to oppose the Apartheid Wall Israel
had started building on Palestinian land in the Occupied West Bank.
The group is essentially Palestinian led. It works in cooperation with
Palestinians in a joint popular struggle against the occupation.24
Many of its members will later make up the nucleus of BOYCOTT! Supporting
the Palestinian BDS Call from Within25 - an Israeli
group of Palestinians, Jews, Israeli citizens and residents resisting
Israeli Apartheid by supporting BDS initiatives against Israel.
In May 2003, Dr.
Ilan Pappe called for divestment, boycott, anti-Apartheid campaigns
against Israel. Expressing his views on the analogy to the South African
case, he declared: “it is difficult to compare Israel's apartheid
system with the one that existed in South Africa”… “Conditions
the Palestinians live under are much worse than South Africa's”.26
2. The impact of the Palestinian Civil
Society calls for BDS against Israel on the BDS movement
The Palestinian calls for BDS against
Israel affected the BDS movement worldwide. These calls were a significant
milestone, inducing a much more sweeping support for BDS against Israel
than observed earlier. The most influential Palestinian calls for BDS
against Israel emerged in August 2002 when a group of Palestinian organizations
in the Occupied Palestinian Territory called for a comprehensive economic,
cultural, and academic boycott of Israel: “For the sake of freedom
and justice in Palestine and the world, we call upon the solidarity
movement, NGOs, academic and cultural institutions, business companies,
political parties and unions, as well as concerned individuals to strengthen
and broaden the global Israel Boycott Campaign”.27 Then,
in October 2003, Palestinian academics and intellectuals in the occupied
territories and in the Diaspora called for a boycott of Israeli academic
institutions. These calls were later followed by a group of Palestinian
academics and intellectuals who launched the Palestinian Campaign for
the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel (PACBI) in Ramallah in April
2004, highlighting the institutional nature of the boycott.28
These calls mobilized many academics
worldwide, including in Israel. In March 2004,
an Open Letter addressed to the Israeli academic leadership was released
to the press. Nearly 300 academics from around the world, including
Israel, called for “leaders of Israeli universities to lay their political
cards on the table and reveal whether they support the government's
policies on the border conflict”.29
In January, 2005, the Israeli Committee
Against House Demolitions (ICAHD) issued a statement supporting sanctions
against Israel.
“Since sanctions are a powerful,
non-violent, popular means of resisting the Occupation, a campaign of
sanctions seems to us the next logical step in international efforts
to end the Occupation. While it will develop over time, ICAHD supports
the following elements at this time:
- “Sales or transfer of arms
to Israel conditional upon their use in ways that do not perpetuate
the Occupation or violate human rights and international humanitarian
law, violations that would end if governments enforced existing laws
and regulations regarding the use of weapons in contravention of human
rights;
- “Trade sanctions on Israel
due to its violation of the “Association Agreements” it has signed
with the European Union that prohibit the sale of settlement products
under the “Made in Israel” label, as well as for violations of their
human rights provisions;
- “Divestment from companies
that profit from involvement in the Occupation. In this vein ICAHD supports
initiatives like that of the Presbyterian Church of the US which targets
companies contributing materially to the Occupation and certainly the
campaign against Caterpillar whose bulldozers demolish thousands of
Palestinian homes;
- “Boycott of settlement
products and of companies that provide housing to the settlements or
which play a major role in perpetuating the Occupation; and
- “Holding individuals, be
they policy-makers, military personnel carrying out orders or others,
personally accountable for human rights violations, including trial
before international courts and bans on travel to other countries.
“ICAHD calls on the international
community – governments, trade unions, university communities, faith-based
organizations as well as the broad civil society – to do all that
is possible to hold Israel accountable for its Occupation policies and
actions, thereby hastening the end of this tragedy. While we also call
on the Palestinian Authority to adhere to human rights conventions,
our support for selective sanctions against Israel's Occupation policies
focuses properly on Israel which alone has the power to end the Occupation
and is alone the violator of international law regarding the responsibilities
of an Occupying Power”.30
In April 2005, Dr. Ilan Pappe appealed
to the British Association of University Teachers (AUT), expressing
support of a prospective resolution to boycott the Israeli universities,
Haifa and Bar-Ilan. Publishing his appeal in the Guardian he explained
that “outside pressure is effective in a country where people want
to be regarded as part of the civilized world, but their government,
with their explicit and implicit help, pursues policies which violate
every known human and civil right. Neither the UN, nor the US and European
governments, and societies, have sent a message to Israel that these
policies are unacceptable and have to be stopped. It is up to the civil
societies, through organizations like yours, to send messages to Israeli
academics, businessmen, artists, hi-tech industrialists and every other
section in that society, that there is a price tag attached to such
policies”.31 To Haaretz, Dr. Pappe said that he hoped that
his support of the boycott had contributed to the boycott decision imposed
on Haifa and Bar-Ilan universities by the British Association of University
Teachers.32
In May 2005, Professor Tanya Reinhart published an article explaining
why Israeli academia deserved to be boycotted.33
In July 2005, the Palestinian United
Civil Society (involving about two hundred organizations) call for BDS
was launched, stating:
“We, representatives of Palestinian
civil society, call upon international civil society organizations and
people of conscience all over the world to impose broad boycotts and
implement divestment initiatives against Israel similar to those applied
to South Africa in the apartheid era. We appeal to you to pressure your
respective states to impose embargoes and sanctions against Israel.
We also invite conscientious Israelis to support this Call, for the
sake of justice and genuine peace.
“These non-violent punitive measures
should be maintained until Israel meets its obligation to recognize
the Palestinian people‘s inalienable right to self-determination and
fully complies with the precepts of international law by:
“1. Ending its occupation and colonization of all Arab lands and dismantling
the Wall;
“2. Recognizing the fundamental rights of the Arab-Palestinian citizens
of Israel to full equality; and
“3. Respecting, protecting and promoting the rights of Palestinian
refugees to return to their homes and properties as stipulated in UN
resolution 194”. 34
This call for BDS against Israel was
endorsed by 171 organizations and individuals.35
Among the welcoming followers were the
British Committee for the Universities of Palestine (BRICUP), which
was formed in 2005 in the UK in response to the Palestinian Call for
an Academic Boycott,36 and Professor Mona Baker, translation
and intercultural studies specialist and ardent British activist and
writer, supporting the BDS movement against Israel.37 These
initiatives have been endorsed by a growing number of Israeli academics
and activists.
In August 2005, in their 13th International
Conference in Jerusalem under the title “Women Resist Occupation and
War”, Women in Black expressed support for the Palestinian call on
the international community to impose ‘non-violent and effective measures
such as divestment and sanctions on Israel, for as long as Israel continues
to violate international law, and continues the occupation and the oppression
of the Palestinian people'.38 In that conference, at the
workshop on Sanctions, Boycott and Divestment, Dr. Dalit Baum “was
emphasizing the importance of knowledge-building as a condition for
such a campaign. Of compiling a list of institutions and companies to
be divested from or boycotted”. Rela Mazali too raised her voice in
support of endorsing BDS against Israel, asking the international community:
“Please, boycott me. Boycott my country. Sanction it till it stops
committing these crimes. And sanction as well those outside it who are
profiting”.39
In March 2006, Shir Hever from The Alternative
Information Center (AIC) published an in-depth analysis of the dependence
of Israel on the global economy and its vulnerability to the effect
of BDS campaigns against it. The conclusion of his analysis is straightforward:
“International reluctance to buy Israeli arms or to sell arms to Israel
will encourage Israel to find non-violent ways of dealing with the Palestinians”.40
In May 2006, following the Palestinian
call, I expressed support for comprehensive boycott of Israel including
academic boycott (published by Yediot Acharonot).41
In May 2006, the feminist organization,
New Profile, sent a letter of support to the Presbyterian Church USA
(PCUSA), initiated by New Profile activist Dr. Dorothy Naor, for contemplating
adopting a policy of selective divestment as a means of bringing peace
to Palestinians and Israelis. “We fervently support such an endeavor,
and hope that PCUSA will indeed adopt divestment as a non-violent means
of ending Israel's Occupation of Palestinians and their lands”.42
In the same month, New
Profile also expressed support for selective divestment. Given that
economic pressure is a non-violent means of ending this catastrophic
Occupation, they argued, “New Profile welcomes and supports selective
divestment aimed at divesting from companies that contribute to the
continuation of the Occupation by supplying arms, other equipment, or
staff”.43
In June 2006, about 100 Israeli individuals,
organizations, and movements expressed their support of the Ontario
wing of Canadian Union of Public Employees (CUPE)44 who,
in May, had voted unanimously to pass a resolution in support of the
“international campaign
of boycott, divestment and sanctions
against Israel until that state recognizes the Palestinian
right to self-determination”. Endorsing the July 2005 Palestinian
call, the CUPE Ontario resolution demands the dismantling of the
Apartheid wall as well as the right of return for all Palestinian refugees.45
In June 2006, Reuven Abergel, founder
of Israel's Black Panthers, expressed support for the academic boycott
of Israel.46 At the same time, Gideon Levy, Haaretz journalist,
published an op-ed supporting boycott resolutions.47
Also in June 2006, a group of more than
50 Israeli citizens supporting BDS against the occupation was formed
issuing a statement to this effect later on in June 2007.48
In May 2007, Professor Kenneth Mann
of Tel Aviv University, the chairperson of the advisory council of Gisha,
the Legal Center for Freedom of Movement, called upon Israeli university
presidents to protest the government's restrictions imposed on Palestinian
university students in 2000. Only four university presidents signed
the appeal to Defense Minister Amir Perez to lift the ban: Ben-Gurion
University of the Negev President Professor Rivka Carmi, Technion Institute
of Technology President Professor Yitzhak Apeloig, Hebrew University
President Professor Menachem Megidor, Haifa University President Professor
Aharon Ben Zeev.49
In June and July 2008, open letters
were issued by Palestinian and Israeli BDS groups to Snoop Doggy Dog,
Branford Marsalis, and Mercedes Sosa, all of whom were scheduled to
perform to Israeli audiences. During that month, over 100 European Organizations,
including the Israeli Committee against House Demolitions, joined
the Palestinian BDS National Campaign (BNC)50 in calling
for suspension of the EU-Israel Association Agreement.51
In September 2008, Dr. Kobi Snitz and
Roee Harush published a report about
a working group's discussions on how to build the BDS campaign by
Israeli citizens.52 They were documenting the way the Israeli
BDS group, called BOYCOTT! Supporting the Palestinian BDS Call from Within,
was formed during that year.
In October 2008, Shir
Hever from the Alternative Information Center called for “economic
resistance to the occupation through divestment”.53
3. Gaza's Guernica54
Following the Gaza offensive by the
Israeli army in December 2008, titled Operation Cast Lead, over 540
Israelis (backed by more than 5000 internationals) issued a call initiated
by the philosopher, Dr. Anat Matar, the publisher Yael Lerer, and other
members of BOYCOTT! Supporting the Palestinian BDS Call from Within, for
“support of the Palestinian human rights community call for international
action”:
“We are calling on the world to
stop Israeli violence and not allow the continuation of the brutal occupation.
We call on the world to condemn and not become an accomplice in Israel's
crimes…
“In light of the above, we call on the world to implement the call
by Palestinian human rights organizations which urges:
• “The UN Security Council to call an emergency session and adopt
concrete measures, including the imposition of sanctions, in order to
ensure Israel's fulfillment of its obligations under international humanitarian
law.
• “The High Contracting Parties to the Geneva Conventions to fulfil
their obligation under common Article 1 to ensure respect for the provisions
of the Conventions, taking appropriate measures to compel Israel to
abide by its obligations under international humanitarian law, in particular
placing pivotal importance on the respect and protection of civilians
from the effects of the hostilities.
• “The High Contracting Parties to fulfil their legal obligation
under Article 146 of the Fourth Geneva Convention to prosecute those
responsible for grave breaches of the Convention.
• “EU institutions and member states to make effective use of the
European Union Guidelines on promoting compliance with international
humanitarian law (2005/C 327/04) to ensure Israel complies with international
humanitarian law under paragraph 16 (b), (c) and (d) of these guidelines,
including the adoption of immediate restrictive measures and sanctions,
as well as cessation of all upgrade dialogue with Israel“.55
In January 2009, members of BOYCOTT!
Supporting the Palestinian BDS Call from Within, including Prof. Yoram
Carmeli, Dr. Anat Matar, Jonathan Pollak, Dr. Kobi Snitz, myself,
and another 17 members published a call in The Guardian appealing
to EU leaders to “use sanctions against Israel's brutal policies and
join the active protests of Bolivia and Venezuela”. We also appealed
to the citizens of Europe: “please attend to the Palestinian Human
Rights Organisation's call, supported by more than 540 Israeli citizens
(www.freegaza.org/en/home/658-a-call-from-within-signed-by-israeli-citizens): boycott Israeli goods and Israeli institutions;
follow resolutions such as those made by the cities of Athens, Birmingham
and Cambridge (US). This is the only road left. Help us all, please!”56
In April 2009, BOYCOTT! called on musician
Leonard Cohen to cancel his planned concert in Israel: “We see our
society becoming more and more calloused and racist and given your longstanding,
vocal commitment to justice, we cannot envision you cooperating with
continued Israeli defiance of justice and morality; we cannot envision
you playing a part in the Israeli charade of self-righteousness. We
appeal to you to add your voice to those brave people the world over
who boycott Israel. We urge you to cancel your planned performance in
Israel”.57
In May 2009, I sent a letter of support
to BRICUP's pre University and College Union (UCU) Congress 2009 meeting,
which said, in part:
“in
spite of the growing plight of their Palestinians colleagues,
universities'
senates and heads have never spoken up against the Israeli
occupation
of the Palestinian territory or against the oppression of the
Palestinians;
nor have they protested the destructive damage inflicted on
Palestinian academic institutions
by the Israeli military; nor have they shown any concern for or solidarity
with their Palestinian colleagues. And when given the chance to protest
“the policy of the Israeli government which is causing restrictions
of freedom of movement, study and instruction, and […] call upon the
government to allow students and lecturers free access to all the campuses
in the Territories, and to allow lecturers and students who hold foreign
passports to teach and study without being threatened with withdrawal
of residence visas”, only very few (407 out of over 5000) faculty
have chosen to sign this petition.58 Is
“academic
freedom” only the prerogative of the powerful?
These
are only shreds of evidence testifying to the complicity of Israeli
Also in May 2009, BOYCOTT! appealed
to the European Union via its embassies in Israel to suspend existing
trade agreements with Israel and to “implement the human rights clause
that is part of your trade agreement with Israel and suspend the existing
trade agreements with Israel until it upholds international and humanitarian
law”.60
In the same month, BOYCOTT! sent a message
to Madonna asking her to cancel her planned performance in Israel: "A
performance here would imply that Israel is behaving in an acceptable
manner, and would be interpreted by Israelis as moral support for the
illegal and inhumane policies, described by many as war crimes and crimes
against humanity".61
Also, during May 2009 BOYCOTT! joined
the Coalition of Women for Peace in calling on Norway to divest from
the Israeli occupation. Twenty Israeli organizations urged the Norwegian
pension fund to “remove from the fund's investment portfolio all
corporations that support and maintain the Israeli occupation of the
Palestinian territory”.62
In the same month, BOYCOTT! sent a message
to the Barcelona Department for International Cooperation wondering
if Barcelona is still cooperating with Tel Aviv, even after the Gaza
massacres. The letter reminded Barcelona that “keeping up the business
as usual charade will only encourage Israel to proceed with its illegal,
atrocious, and unjust practices that have been going on for the past
42 years without much interference from the international community”.63
In July, 2009 BOYCOTT! sent a message
to UNICEF on the issue of their partnering with Motorola, letting them
know that we consider it “is immoral for UNICEF to partner with a
company which undermines UNICEF's efforts by its actions. We ask that
UNICEF end its partnership with Motorola until Motorola stops selling
equipment used by the Israeli army to violate the rights of Palestinian
children along with those of many others”.64
In the same month, BOYCOTT! joined PACBI's
call on Amnesty to follow their appeal to boycott
all Israeli academic and cultural institutions and withdraw their support
from Cohen's concert in Israel.65
In July 2009, Women's International
League for Peace and Freedom (WILPF) Israel decided on joining the
Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions Campaign against Israel:
“Taking into account that up till now our calls for significant
international pressure on Israeli policy have not been answered, and
in spite of having utilized all the means we have had available to us,
these actions have not brought about change in Israeli policies, we,
therefore join the call for BDS on Israel.66
In August 2009, Dr. Neve Gordon, a longtime
peace activist and head of the political science department at Ben-Gurion
University, published an op-ed in the Lost Angeles Times, endorsing
the Palestinian call for BDS against Israel.67
In September 2009, BOYCOTT! also joined the Toronto declaration68 supporting the call to protest
the Toronto International Film Festival's City-to-City Spotlight on
Tel Aviv. Filmmaker, writer, and visual artist, Udi Aloni and the artist David Reeb69
were also among the supporters of the declaration.70
In October 2009, Michel (Mikado) Warschawski a prominent member of The Alternative Information
Center, published a reply to Uri Avnery titled “YES to BDS!” in
which he states:
“For us Zionism is not a national
liberation movement but a colonial movement,
and the State of Israel is and has always been a settler's colonial
state. Peace, or, better, justice, cannot be achieved without a
total decolonization (one can say de-Zionisation) of the Israeli State;
it is a precondition for the fulfillment of the legitimate rights of
the Palestinians – whether refugees, living under military occupation
or second-class citizens of Israel… any attempt for reconciliation
before the fulfillment of rights strengthens the continuation of
the colonial domination relationship. Without a price to be paid, why
should the Israelis stop colonization, why should they risk a deep internal
crisis?
“This is where the BDS campaign
is so relevant: it offers an international framework to act
in order to help the Palestinian people achieving its legitimate rights,
both on the institutional level (states and international institutions)
and the civil society's one… The BDS campaign was initiated by a broad
coalition of Palestinian political and social movements. No Israeli
who claims to support the national rights of the Palestinian people
can, decently, turn his or her back to that campaign”.71
In the same month, Uri Yacobi Keller
from The Alternative Information Center published a document justifying
the academic boycott of Israeli universities titled “The Economy of
the Occupation: Academic Boycott of Israel”. He further argues that
“An academic boycott of Israel represents a threat that could damage
one of the most important cultural connections between Israel and the
western world”.72
In November 2009, The Coalition of Women
for Peace73 passed a motion to join the BDS movement in Israel.
It's the first such endorsement by a major Israeli organization, representing
thousands of activists. This initiative has been preceded by a three
year long project it had run (initiated in November 2006), titled Who
Profits: Exposing the Israeli Occupation Industry, coordinated by Dr.
Dalit Baum, Merav Amir and other members of the Coalition. Who Profits
aims to expose Israeli and international corporations which are involved in
the construction of Israeli colonies and infrastructure in the occupied
territories, in the settlements' economy, in building walls and checkpoints,
and in the supply of specific equipment used in the control and repression
of the civilian population under occupation. The question Who Profits
investigates is not the traditional complaint about the costs incurred
by the occupation but the extent to which those involved in it benefit:
Who profits from Control of Population, Economic Exploitation, and The
Settlement Industry.74 The Who Profits data base has become
a mainstay of the international BDS movement, providing much of the
research and information that is vital for worldwide economic activism
against companies and corporations benefitting directly from Israel's
occupation.
In the same month, BOYCOTT! sent an
Open Letter to the Board of Governors of Trondheim University, asking
them to follow the Palestinian call to boycott the Israeli academy.
“Indeed, it has to be recognized by academics the world over that
Israeli universities are part and parcel of the structures of domination
and oppression of the Palestinian people. They have played a direct
and indirect role in promoting, justifying, developing or supporting
the state‘s racist
policies and persistent violations of human rights and international
law”.75
BOYCOTT! also joined Adalah-NY's
call on others to tell the New York Mets that they should refrain from
supporting Hebron's settlers.76
In December 2009, members of BOYCOTT!,
“including Emmanuel Farjoun, Hebrew University; Rachel Giora, Tel
Aviv University; Anat Matar, Tel Aviv University; Kobi Snitz, Technion;
and Ilan Pappe now at Exeter” supported the US campaign for academic
boycott against Israel who issued a statement calling for a boycott
of Israeli academic and cultural institutions.77
In January 2010, ICAHD issued a renewed
statement titled “in support of a campaign of BDS based upon the fundamental
principles of the Palestinian civil society call:
- “Ending Israel's occupation
and colonization of all Arab lands and dismantling the Wall;
- “Recognizing the fundamental
rights of the Arab-Palestinian citizens of Israel to full equality;
and
- “Respecting, protecting
and promoting the rights of Palestinian refugees to return to their
homes and properties as stipulated in UN resolution 194”.
It then goes on to give details about
ICHAD's support of BDS not mentioned in the original statement, such
as:
- “Boycott of Israeli academic
institutions, which have not fulfilled their responsibility of upholding
the academic freedoms of their Palestinian counterparts. Our call for
an academic boycott of Israeli universities is targeted at the institutions,
opposing, for example, the holding of international academic conferences
in Israel or funding joint research ventures. It does not call
for boycotting individual scholars or researchers in any way”.78
In the same month, filmmaker
and artist Udi Aloni published an article in Ynet, explaining why BDS
is the right tool to level against the occupation:
“[W]e must try to create the preconditions
for non-violent resistance to emerge, in order to render violent resistance
unnecessary.
“The most provably-effective form
of pressure known to us so far is BDS. Thus, BDS action does not amount
to negative, counter-productive action, as many propagandists try to
portray it. On the contrary, BDS action is a life-saving antidote to
violence. It is an action of solidarity, partnership and joint progress.
BDS action serves to preempt, in a non-violent manner, justified violent
resistance aimed at attaining the same goals of justice, peace and equality.79”
4. Impact: Israel is losing its legitimacy
The BDS movement against Israel is growing
worldwide. The Israeli public and policy-makers, including military
officers, cannot ignore it any longer.80 Israelis are witnessing
the loss of Israel's legitimacy and beginning to grasp the cost of
continued Israeli disregard of international law.
In September 2009, in his article, “The
third threat”, Gabriel Siboni registers the impact of the BDS movement
against Israel:
“In recent years, however, an
additional threat has been developing. Its main thrust: attempts by
pro-Arab organizations to destroy Israel's legitimacy
as a political entity. There are many examples of this such as accusations
of an apartheid policy, Holocaust denial and the claim that the state's
establishment was an illegal act, as well as accusations that Israel
has committed war crimes. These lead to boycotts of Israeli companies
and products, academic and cultural boycotts and ultimately calls to
destroy the Zionist entity” (emphasis added, R.G.).81
In October 2009, Aluf Benn, Haaretz
correspondent testifies:
“Only one thing does bother the
Israelis, according to the polls: fear of a diplomatic
embargo and an international boycott. The Goldstone Report and the International
Court of Justice in The Hague are arousing concern and interest, far
more than Obama's peace speeches. However, as long as relations with
the rest of the world are satisfactory, Israelis see no reason to emerge
from indifference and listen to the president of the United States”
(emphasis added, R.G.).82
During the same month, in his article
“Israel needs legitimacy to wage war and peace”,
Haaretz mainstream journalist, Ari Shavit, counts the threats to Israel's
loss of legitimacy, including the BDS movement against Israel:
“But things are not all right
- they really are not. Why? Because underneath those still waters on
which Israel's ship is sailing lurks an iceberg. The Goldstone report
marked the iceberg's first appearance. Turkey turning its back on Israel
was the second. Attempts by European courts to try Israel Defense Forces
officers were the third; the boycott of Israeli products and companies
in various places round the world was the fourth”.83
In November 2009, mainstream journalist,
Sever Plocker, admits that
“Israel's image has hit a nadir;
it is isolated, unwanted, and perceived as bad. The world is telling
us that should we continue along the same contemptible path, we will
lose our legitimacy” (emphasis added, R.G.).84
In the same month, in his article titled “How we became a night unto
the nations”, Haaretz mainstream columnist Yoel Marcus laments Israel's
loss of legitimacy:
“Israel is … described as a
strong country, aggressive and domineering, as Charles de Gaulle once
said. President Shimon Peres was recently greeted by angry demonstrations
in Argentina and Brazil. Many countries boycott Israeli products, and
Israeli lecturers on college campuses throughout the West endure catcalls.
During Ehud Olmert's recent lecture tour of the United States, he was
greeted almost everywhere he went with cries such as 'child killers!'
“Ever since
Operation Cast Lead in Gaza, officers in the Israel Defense Forces have
been at risk every time they land in an international airport. … it
would be preferable for our government to discuss how we got to where
we are - no longer a light unto the nations - and what needs to be done
to stop the freefall in our international image before it's too
late” (emphasis added, R.G.).85
Still, in the same month, Yoav Karny
writes in Globes:
“Israel will not continue to exist
if the educated middle class of the West turns against it. The experience
of South Africa has taught all the boycotters in the world that there
isn't a more effective tool to weaken a society's stamina than
the withdrawal of foreign investments” (emphasis added, R.G.).86
In January 2010, Gidi Grinstein, the
founder and president of the Reut Institute, a policy group designed
to provide real-time long-term strategic decision-making support to
the Government of Israel, 87 acknowledges the de-legitimization
threat:
“And so, our politicians and military
personnel are threatened with lawsuits and arrest when they travel abroad,
campaigns to boycott our products gain traction, and our very existence
is challenged in academic institutions and intellectual circles. The
country is increasingly isolated”. 88
The BDS movement against Israel,
supported by a growing number of Israelis, is biting. It threatens to
undermine Israel's position in the civilized world. It holds up a
mirror to the ugly face of Israel as Oppressor. Sooner or later, mainstream
Israelis will have to acknowledge the face in the mirror as their own.
The sooner they do, the sooner they will press for a drastic course
correction in partnership with Palestinians that will bring justice
for all and will set the country on the path to regaining its legitimacy.
I am really grateful to anyone who
sent me comments and helped in shaping up this document. I am most indebted
to Reuven Abergel, Mona Baker, Dalit Baum, Jeff Halper, Shir Hever,
Ingrid Jaradat Gassner, Debby Lerman, Rela Mazali, Dorothy Naor, Ofer
Neiman, Ilan Pappe, Deb Reich, Aliyah Strauss, Gila Svirsky, Mikado
Warschawski, and Beate Zilversmidt.
|