The BDS movement, begun in 2005, calls for individuals and institutions to:
· boycott Israeli products, as well as companies and cultural institutions that are closely associated with Israel;
· sell stocks and other investments in Israeli-associated companies; and
· sanction such companies and cultural institutions, mostly by limiting their access to markets, capital, and international organizations.
The goal is to use these completely non-violent means to achieve:
· an end of Israel’s occupation of the West Bank;
· full equality for Palestinian citizens of Israel; and
· the right of all Palestinians who used to live in what is now Israel, and their descendants, to return to what is now Israel.
Although the means are non-violent, the results of achieving these three goals would be the elimination of Israel as a Jewish state because Palestinian citizens would form a majority of the electorate. Why would anyone who favors Israel as a Jewish state support such a movement? Does it have a compelling justification or any redeeming features?
Yes, it has both. As for justification, Israel’s allowing and facilitating the establishment of “settlers” on West Bank land conquered in 1967 violates international law. Calling the land in question “disputed territory” no more affects its legal status than the US calling its internationally illegal torture “enhanced interrogation” legalized that torture.
By excluding Palestinians from many areas in the West Bank while allowing settlers to establish communities there, Israel has divided up the area controlled by the Palestinian Authority into such small parcels as to make a sovereign state on the West Bank unviable, and therefore a two-state solution impossible. Since Israel has no intention of affording Palestinian residents voting rights and Israeli citizenship, the current plan seems to be to hold West Bank Palestinians as a perpetually colonized people whose movements and employment prospects are severely restricted by a government they’re not allowed to influence through peaceful political means. The US Founding Fathers called for revolution in such circumstances. Colonial empires nevertheless flourished in much of the 19th century, only to be dismantled in the 20th.
How does Israel justify defying international law and imposing morally objectionable colonialism? Israelis often contend that BDS is a form of antisemitism, and I’d be shocked if there weren’t anti-Semites among its supporters. But it’s no defense when you’re doing something wrong that some critics are motivated to object for the wrong reasons.
In addition, Israelis often complain that BDS subjects Israel to higher standards than other countries that are guilty of worse human rights abuses. But the double-standard argument is factually incorrect. There are currently sanctions against many countries, including Iran, Iraq, Liberia, North Korea, Sudan, Syria, Zimbabwe, Venezuela, and the Ivory Coast. Individuals in other countries, including Russia, have sanctions against them, as well. Rather than being uniquely subject to sanctions for its internationally illegal behavior, Israel continues to enjoy favorable treatment by the lack of sanctions.
Still, why should I support a movement designed to eliminate Israel as a Jewish state? First, people don’t have to agree with the most militant members of a coalition – whether BDS, Black Lives Matter (BLM), or protests against the Vietnam War – to support the coalition. I protested the War in Vietnam without agreeing that America needed some ill-defined revolution. I support BLM without believing that police forces should be de-funded. And I support BDS without believing that Israel should be eliminated as a Jewish state.
Second, political movements often serve purposes different from those envisioned by their founders or most ardent supporters. If BDS is successful, it won’t drive Israelis into the sea, because it’s peaceful. It will embarrass, inconvenience, and shame Israeli society for the way it treats Palestinians. A probable result is this: as Israelis increasingly focus political attention on this issue, they will recognize that fundamental change on the West Bank is necessary, and that Gaza can’t be sequestered forever.
There are only three realistic possibilities in the foreseeable future:
· A viable Palestinian State alongside Israel;
· A single state in the area now controlled or blockaded by Israel, which for demographic reasons ends the Jewish state even without any return of Palestinian refugees; and
· Attempted perpetuation of 19th-century style colonialism.
The last option is completely unrealistic. Ask France, Britain, Russia, Turkey, Spain, and others. Consider also that two centuries ago it was unthinkable that the US would afford the right to vote to Native Americans, blacks, and people of Asian descent. But they all have the vote now. If Israel is to have a bi-centennial as a Jewish state, it needs a Palestinian state, because the only alternative is a single state where all Palestinians have a right to vote. BDS is currently the most popular and realistic peaceful means of altering Israeli public opinion in the direction of accepting policies that are in the best long-term interests of Israel.
Comments