DOCSLIB.ORG

The BDS Movement: Why Israel?

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The BDS Movement: Why Israel? Alex Feuerherdt The BDSMovement: Why Israel? The BDSMovement – Past and Present The BDS movement is currentlythe most active and best known anti-Israel asso- ciation. The abbreviation “BDS” stands for “Boycott, Divestment,and Sanc- tions.” Officially,the movement was founded in July 2005 by more than 170or- ganizations,supposedlyrepresenting the Palestinian civil society.Atleast,this is how the BDSmovement likes to tell the story.¹ Since 2005,BDS has gained many supporters,evenoutside the Palestinian territories, among them celebrities like South African archbishop Desmond Tutu, Britishfilm director KenLoach,Amer- ican philosopher Judith Butler, and ex-Pink Floydsinger Roger Waters.The BDS movement perceivesand describes Israel as an “Apartheid state,” like South Af- rica previously, and calls for acomprehensive economic, political,academic, and artistic boycott,aswell as for awithdrawal of investments, an embargo, and coercive measures.Thus, it targets the Jewish state as awhole. It is headed by Omar Barghouti,who, albeit having studied at TelAvivUniversity, accuses Is- rael of “Apartheid,”² “Nazi practices,”³ and “ethnic cleansing.”⁴ He categorically rejects atwo-state solution and maintains thatany dialogue with Israeliswould be “unethical” and “dangerous.” Another well-known BDS activist is Lebanese-American professor of politics As’ad AbuKhalil, who in 2012 said: The real aim of BDS is to bringdown the stateofIsrael. […]That should be stated as an unambiguous goal. Thereshould not be anyequivocation on the subject.Justiceand free- dom for the Palestiniansare incompatible with the existenceofthe stateofIsrael.⁵ Cf. “Palestinian Civil SocietyCall for BDS,” BDS Movement,issued July 9, 2005,accessed April 1, 2020,https://bdsmovement.net/call. O. Barghouti, “BesiegingIsrael’sSiege,” TheGuardian,August 12, 2010,https://www.the guardian.com/commentisfree/2010/aug/12/besieging-israel-siege-palestinian-boycott. O. Barghouti, “‘The Pianist’ of Palestine,” countercurrents.org, issued November 30,2004,ac- cessed April 1, 2020,https://www.countercurrents.org/pa-barghouti301104.htm. O. Barghouti, “No StateHas the Right to Exist as aRacist State,” interview by S. Cattori, Vol- tairenet.org,December 7, 2007,http://www.voltairenet.org/article153536.html. A. AbuKhalil, “ACritique of Norman Finkelstein on BDS,” Al-Akhbar English,issued Febru- ary 17,2012,accessed October 3, 2018, http://english.al-akhbar.com/blogs/angry-corner/critique- norman-finkelstein-bds [no longer available]. OpenAccess. ©2021Armin Lange, Kerstin Mayerhofer,Dina Porat, LawrenceH.Schiffmann, published by De Gruyter. This work is licensed under the Creative CommonsAttribution-NonCommercial- NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110671964-018 308 Alex Feuerherdt Palestinian-American writer Ahmed Moor,another leading figure of the BDS movement,wrotein2010: BDS does mean the end of the Jewish state. […]Iview the BDS movement as along-term project with radicallytransformative potential. […]Inother words, BDS is not another step on the waytothe final showdown; BDS is The Final Showdown.⁶ Activists and supporters of the BDSmovement regularlygopublic with bold and eye-catchingcampaigns. Every year,for instance, they organizeaso-called “Is- raeli Apartheid Week” in more than fifty cities, especiallyacross the United States,Canada,the UK, and South Africa, featuring numerous rallies and on- campus events. Especiallyoncampuses in the United Statesand the UK, this is not the onlytime of the year thatBDS activists make theirpresencefelt.In 2010 for example, the Universityand CollegeUnion (UCU), which is the largest further and higher education union in the UK, votedto“sever all relations” with Histadrut,which represents the majority of trade unionists in the State of Israel. The cited reason was that Histadrut had “supported the Israeli assault on civilians in Gaza in January 2009,and thereforedid not deservethe name of atrade union organization.”⁷ AlreadyinMay 2007,UCU decided to boycottall academic institutions in Is- rael.⁸ And BDS did not stop at this point: In avery aggressive manner,student BDS activists have called for the termination of all cooperation between their re- spective universities and their Israeli counterparts. They try to prevent Israeli sci- entists from lecturing.Iftheir attempts are not successful, they heckle and mas- sively disturb the lectures.Their goal is to obstruct anydialogue with Israeli scientists. This way, they turn these individuals into mere pieces of acollective to which they assign collective guilt.They don’tjudge these scholars by what they do but from wherethey come. This is evidence of antisemitic and racist thinking. A. Moor, “BDS is aLong Term Project with RadicallyTransformative Potential,” Mondoweiss, issued April 22, 2010,accessed April 1, 2020,https://mondoweiss.net/2010/04/bds-is-a-long- term-project-with-radically-transformative-potential/. “UCU Congress votestosever relations with Israeli Histadrut Boycott process will be initiated for college in West Bank settlement,” Palestinian Campaign for the Academic &Cultural Boycott of Israel (PACBI), issued May31, 2010,accessed April 1, 2020,http://pacbi.org/pacbi140812/?p= 1249. Cf. J. Meikle, “Lecturers Vote for Boycott of Israeli Universities,” TheGuardian,May 31, 2007, https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2007/may/31/highereducation.israel. The BDSMovement: Why Israel? 309 The BDS movement also takes aim at culture. This goes beyond Roger Wa- ters;musicians like ElvisCostello⁹ and Brian Eno cancelled concerts or called on their fellow musicians not to perform in Israel.¹⁰ Some artists even opt against selling anyrecords in Israel. Americanwriter Alice Walker went as far as to re- fuse to let her prize-winning novel TheColor Purple be translated into Hebrew.¹¹ Musicians likeCarlos Santana¹² and Nick Cave¹³ who resist the pressurefor a boycott and decidetoperform in the Jewish state are bullied by the BDSmove- ment; the movement uses online campaigns, furious appeals,and protest rallies against these concerts to put pressureonthem. Everyone who does not explicitly support the goals of the BDSmovement is automaticallyseen as apolitical foe. Here, too, the principle of collective liability is appliedand especiallyapparent in the case of Alice Walker:Whoever speaksHebrew is pronounced guilty. As the BDS movement declaresinits statements,the supposedresultofall these efforts is the following:Israel “ends its occupation and colonization of all Arab lands” and “respects,protects and promotesthe rights of Palestinian refu- gees to return to theirhomes and properties.”¹⁴ What is innocentlycouched in the languageofhuman rights is nothing less than the dismantlement of the Jew- ish state. That the BDS movement fails to saywhich parts of “Arab land” it con- siders to be under colonization—just the West Bank or perhaps the entire land of Israel?—is no lapse but adeliberate decision. While hypotheticallyleaving the door open for atwo-state solution, the messageisdesigned to resonatewith those who want to “liberate all of Palestine,” meaning aNo-State-of-Israel solu- tion. Cf. V. Dodd and R. McCarthy, “Elvis Costello cancels concerts in Israel in protest at treatment of Palestinians,” TheGuardian,May 18, 2010,https://www.theguardian.com/music/2010/may/ 18/elvis-costello-cancels-israel-concerts. Cf. S. Harmon, “Brian Eno and RogerWaters Scorn Nick Cave’s ‘Principled Stand’ to Play in Israel,” TheGuardian,November 22, 2017,https://www.theguardian.com/music/2017/nov/22/ brian-eno-and-roger-waters-scorn-nick-caves-principled-stand-to-play-in-israel. Cf. A. Flood, “AliceWalkerDeclines Request to Publish Israeli Edition of The Color Purple,” TheGuardian,June 20,2012,https://www.theguardian.com/books/2012/jun/20/alice-walker-de clines-israeli-color-purple. Cf. N. Barrows-Friedman, “WhyisCarlos Santana refusing to honor Israel boycott call?” Elec- tronic Intifada,June 29,2016,https://electronicintifada.net/blogs/nora-barrows-friedman/why- carlos-santana-refusing-honor-israel-boycott-call. Cf. R. Reed, “RogerWaters, Brian Eno Criticize Nick Cave for Israel Concerts,” Rolling Stone, November 20,2017, https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-news/roger-waters-brian-eno- criticize-nick-cave-for-israel-concerts-128927/. “Palestinian Civil Society Call for BDS,” BDS Movement. 310 Alex Feuerherdt The “right of return” on which the Palestinian “refugees” insist is not just based on ideological but also on strategic considerations: Since the refugeesta- tus of the Palestinians is inherited by descendants,the number of “refugees” has ballooned from an initial 700,000 to currentlyfivemillion. Most of these people have never livedinIsrael. Their “return” would turn Israel’sJews into aminority at the mercyofthe Arab majority.For these reasons,evenAmerican political scholarNorman Finkelstein—otherwise afervent “anti-Zionist”—has sought to distance himself sharplyfrom the BDS movement.InFebruary 2012,hesaid in an interview: They don’twant Israel. They think they’re beingvery clever.They call it their threetiers: We want the end of the occupation, we want the right of return, and we want equal rights for ArabsinIsrael. And they think they arevery clever,because they know the result of imple- mentingall threeiswhat?What’sthe result?You know and Iknow what’sthe result:there’s no Israel.¹⁵ The BDS campaigns are an integralpart of the battle against the Jewishstate, which is fought on different fronts and with different weapons: by means of ter- rorist attacks, bombs, and rockets
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Chapter 4 the Right-Wing Media Enablers of Anti-Islam Propaganda
    Chapter 4 The right-wing media enablers of anti-Islam propaganda Spreading anti-Muslim hate in America depends on a well-developed right-wing media echo chamber to amplify a few marginal voices. The think tank misinforma- tion experts and grassroots and religious-right organizations profiled in this report boast a symbiotic relationship with a loosely aligned, ideologically-akin group of right-wing blogs, magazines, radio stations, newspapers, and television news shows to spread their anti-Islam messages and myths. The media outlets, in turn, give members of this network the exposure needed to amplify their message, reach larger audiences, drive fundraising numbers, and grow their membership base. Some well-established conservative media outlets are a key part of this echo cham- ber, mixing coverage of alarmist threats posed by the mere existence of Muslims in America with other news stories. Chief among the media partners are the Fox News empire,1 the influential conservative magazine National Review and its website,2 a host of right-wing radio hosts, The Washington Times newspaper and website,3 and the Christian Broadcasting Network and website.4 They tout Frank Gaffney, David Yerushalmi, Daniel Pipes, Robert Spencer, Steven Emerson, and others as experts, and invite supposedly moderate Muslim and Arabs to endorse bigoted views. In so doing, these media organizations amplify harm- ful, anti-Muslim views to wide audiences. (See box on page 86) In this chapter we profile some of the right-wing media enablers, beginning with the websites, then hate radio, then the television outlets. The websites A network of right-wing websites and blogs are frequently the primary movers of anti-Muslim messages and myths.
    [Show full text]
  • J Street Sides with Israel's Enemies & Works to Destroy Support for Israel
    ZIONIST ORGANIZATION OF AMERICA J Street Sides With Israel’s Enemies & Works to Destroy Support for Israel Special Report Including Executive Summary by The Zionist Organization of America by Morton A. Klein, Elizabeth Berney, Esq., and Daniel Mandel, PhD “J Street is one of the most virulent anti-Israel organizations in the history of Zionism and Judaism.” - Prof. Alan Dershowitz, Harvard Law School Copyright 2018, Zionist Organization of America CONTENTS Table of Contents . i Executive Summary . ES-00 - ES-13 Full Report . 1 Introduction . 1 I. J Street’s Anti-Israel, Foreign & Muslim Donors, and Its Lies About Them. 1 (1) For years, J Street Falsely Denied that Anti-Zionist Billionaire George Soros Was A Major J Street Funder . 1 (2) J Street’s Arab, Muslim and Foreign Donors . 4 II. J Street’s Interconnected Web Of Extremist Anti-Israel Organizations . 9 (1) J Street Is Part of a Soros-Funded Web of Anti-Israel Organizations . 9 (2) J Street Is Also Part of an Interconnected Web of Extremist Organizations Working to Delegitimize Israel, Founded by and/or Coordinated by J Street President Ben-Ami’s Consulting Firm . 11 III. J Street Persistently Even Opposes Israel’s Existence, Persistently Defames and Condemns Israel, And Has Even Encouraged Anti-Israel Violence. 12 (1) J Street Persistently Maligns and Blames Israel . 12 (2) J Street Speakers Have Called for the End of the Jewish State; and a J Street Official Letter to Congress Supported Those Calling for an End to Israel’s Existence . 15 (3) J Street’s Co-Founder Condemned Israel’s Creation As “Wrong” – A Repeated J Street Theme .
    [Show full text]
  • Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) Our Mission: to Stop the Defamation of the Jewish People and to Secure Justice and Fair Treatment to All
    NOV 2018 Background Information on Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) Our Mission: To stop the defamation of the Jewish people and to secure justice and fair treatment to all. ABOUT ADL ADL is a leading anti-hate organization that was founded in 1913 in response to an escalating climate of anti-Semitism and bigotry. Today, ADL is still the first call when acts of anti-Semitism occur and continues to fight all forms of hate. A global leader in exposing extremism, delivering anti-bias education and fighting hate online, ADL’s ultimate goal is a world in which no group or individual suffers from bias, discrimination or hate. 2 Background Information on Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) 3 Preface This article provides background on the beliefs, tactics and activities of Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP). At the outset, it is important to note that while we profoundly disagree with what SJP represents, we understand that they have the right to their views and to express them. ADL fully supports and defends free speech principles in America, and we recognize that the First Amendment protects even hateful or offensive speech. We have also long believed that the best answer to hate speech is not censorship, but more speech. It is because of these principles that ADL does not seek to censor or silence SJP, but rather to exercise our own First Amendment rights to report on them, criticize them, and expose their views to greater public scrutiny. 4 Introduction Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) is a network of pro-Palestinian student groups across the US which disseminate anti-Israel propaganda often laced with inflammatory and at times combative rhetoric.
    [Show full text]
  • Norman G. Finkelstein
    Gaza an inquest into its martyrdom Norman G. Finkelstein university of california press University of California Press, one of the most distinguished university presses in the United States, enriches lives around the world by advancing scholarship in the humanities, social sciences, and natural sciences. Its activities are supported by the UC Press Foundation and by philanthropic contributions from individuals and institutions. For more information, visit www.ucpress.edu. University of California Press Oakland, California © 2018 by Norman G. Finkelstein Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Names: Finkelstein, Norman G., author. Title: Gaza : an inquest into its martyrdom / Norman G. Finkelstein. Description: Oakland, California : University of California Press, [2018] | Includes bibliographical references and index. | Identifi ers: lccn 2017015719 (print) | lccn 2017028116 (ebook) | isbn 9780520968387 (ebook) | isbn 9780520295711 (cloth : alk. paper) Subjects: LCSH: Human rights—Gaza Strip. | Palestinian Arabs—Crimes against—Gaza Strip. | Arab-Israeli confl ict—1993– | Gaza Strip— History—21st century. Classifi cation: lcc jc599.g26 (ebook) | lcc jc599.g26 f55 2018 (print) | DDC 953/.1—dc23 LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2017015719 Manufactured in the United States of America 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Gaza praise for gaza “ Th is is the voice I listen for, when I want to learn the deepest reality about Jews, Zionists, Israelis, and Palestinians. Norman Finkelstein is surely one of the forty honest humans the Scripture alludes to who can save ‘Sodom’ (our Earth) by pointing out, again and again, the sometimes soul-shriveling but unavoidable Truth.
    [Show full text]
  • Alan Dershowitz
    Debunking the Newest – and Oldest – Jewish Conspiracy: A Reply to the Mearsheimer-Walt “Working Paper” Alan Dershowitz Harvard Law School April 2006 The author of this paper is solely responsible for the views expressed in it. As an academic institution, Harvard University does not take a position on the scholarship of individual faculty members, and this paper should not be interpreted or portrayed as reflecting the official position of the University or any of its Schools. L:\Research\Sponsored Research\WP RR RAO\WP response paper\Dershowitz.response.paper.doc Words count: 9733 Last printed 4/5/2006 1:13:00 PM Created on 4/5/2006 1:08:00 PM Page 1 of 45 Debunking the Newest – and Oldest – Jewish Conspiracy1: A Reply to the Mearsheimer-Walt “Working Paper” by Alan Dershowitz2 Introduction The publication, on the Harvard Kennedy School web site, of a “working paper,” written by a professor and academic dean at the Kennedy School and a prominent professor at the University of Chicago, has ignited a hailstorm of controversy and raised troubling questions. The paper was written by two self-described foreign-policy “realists,” Professor Stephen Walt and Professor John Mearsheimer.3 It asserts that the Israel “Lobby” – a cabal whose “core” is “American Jews” – has a “stranglehold” on mainstream American media, think tanks, academia, and the government.4 The Lobby is led by the American-Israel Public Affairs Committee (“AIPAC”), which the authors characterize as a “de facto agent of a foreign government” that places the interests of that government ahead of the interests of the United States.5 Jewish political contributors use Jewish “money” to blackmail government officials, while “Jewish philanthropists” influence and “police” academic programs and shape public opinion.6 Jewish “congressional staffers” exploit their roles and betray the trust of their bosses by 1 Article citations reference John J.
    [Show full text]
  • In an Academic Voice: Antisemitism and Academy Bias Kenneth Lasson University of Baltimore School of Law, [email protected]
    University of Baltimore Law ScholarWorks@University of Baltimore School of Law All Faculty Scholarship Faculty Scholarship 2011 In an Academic Voice: Antisemitism and Academy Bias Kenneth Lasson University of Baltimore School of Law, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarworks.law.ubalt.edu/all_fac Part of the Civil Rights and Discrimination Commons, and the First Amendment Commons Recommended Citation Kenneth Lasson, In an Academic Voice: Antisemitism and Academy Bias, 3 J. Study of Antisemitism 349 (2011). This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Faculty Scholarship at ScholarWorks@University of Baltimore School of Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in All Faculty Scholarship by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks@University of Baltimore School of Law. For more information, please contact [email protected]. In an Academic Voice: Antisemitism and Academy Bias Kenneth Lasson* Current events and the recent literature strongly suggest that antisemitism and anti-Zionism are often conflated and can no longer be viewed as distinct phenomena. The following paper provides an overview of con- temporary media and scholarship concerning antisemitic/anti-Zionist events and rhetoric on college campuses. This analysis leads to the con- clusion that those who are naive about campus antisemitism should exer- cise greater vigilance and be more aggressive in confronting the problem. Key Words: Antisemitism, Higher Education, Israel, American Jews In America, Jews feel very comfortable, but there are islands of anti- Semitism: the American college campus. —Natan Sharansky1 While universities like to nurture the perception that they are protec- tors of reasoned discourse, and indeed often perceive themselves as sacro- sanct places of culture in a chaotic world, the modern campus is, of course, not quite so wonderful.
    [Show full text]
  • Microsoft Outlook
    Human Welfare and Community Action Commission Supplemental Communications List (content too voluminous to print but will be available in Records Online) October 21, 2015 1. Cindy Shamban 51. Steven Davidoff Solomon 2. Dina Ezzeddine 52. Liz Jackson 3. Marge Sussman 53. Benjamin Lerman, MD 4. Stephanie Roth 54. Robert Gordon 5. Fred Werner 55. Barry Gustin, MD 6. Katharine Samway 56. Dietlaw 7. G. Meir 57. Laura Walklet 8. Youval Dar 58. Laura Sigura 9. (anonymous-Redwood, CA) 59. Yoel Schwartz 10. Nina Wouk 60. Klaus Rotzscher 11. David Kaye 61. Barbara Schick 12. Gabriela Kipnis 62. Leanne Orowitz 13. Dan Cronin 63. G. Weitzner 14. Linda Rothfield 64. Alan Manin 15. Sheldon Whitten-Vlle, MD 65. Eve Hershcopf (2) 16. Wesley Rosenthal 66. Sheldon Whitten-Vlle, MD 17. Issy and Patricia Kipnis 67. Sandra NK 18. Caterina and Jonathan Polland 68. Abby Maimon, PsyD 19. Selma Soss 69. Paul Shkuratov 20. Maureen Clearfield 70. Yehuda Ferris 21. Gila Perach Hirsh 71. Armando Davila Kirkwood 22. Donna Cooper 72. Dan Fendel 23. Janine M. Mogannam 73. Green Party of Alameda Co. 24. Barbara Schick 74. Wilma RK Rader 25. Ian Zimmerman, Esq 75. Liora Brosbe 26. Barry Kanel 76. Dianna Dar 27. H. Milstein 77. Marvin Lewis (2) 28. Yetta Rossofsky 78. Russell Ward 29. Rose G. Schlecker 79. Rochelle Gause 30. Adam Spam 80. July Galper 31. Esther Brass-Chorin 81. Jill Siegel Dodd 32. Daniel Isaacson 82. Jessica Kosmin 33. Jeff Morgan 83. David Spero RN (2) 34. Lenny Kristal 84. Frederica Barlaz 35. Keren Stronach 85. Alice Diane Kisch 36.
    [Show full text]
  • Review of <Em>Gaza: an Inquest Into Its Martyrdom</Em>
    Chapman University Chapman University Digital Commons Political Science Faculty Articles and Research Political Science Summer 2018 Review of Gaza: An Inquest into Its Martyrdom Nubar Hovsepian Chapman University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.chapman.edu/polisci_articles Part of the Cultural History Commons, Islamic World and Near East History Commons, Near and Middle Eastern Studies Commons, Other History Commons, Other Political Science Commons, Political History Commons, Political Theory Commons, Public History Commons, and the Social History Commons Recommended Citation Hovsepian, Nubar. 2018. Review of Gaza: An Inquest into Its Martyrdom. Journal of Palestine Studies 47(4): 101-103. doi: 10.1525/ jps.2018.47.4.101 This Book Review is brought to you for free and open access by the Political Science at Chapman University Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Political Science Faculty Articles and Research by an authorized administrator of Chapman University Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Review of Gaza: An Inquest into Its Martyrdom Comments Published as Hovsepian, Nubar. 2018. Review of Gaza: An Inquest into Its Martyrdom. Journal of Palestine Studies 47(4): 101-103. doi: 10.1525/jps.2018.47.4.101 © 2018 by Institute for Palestine Studies. Copying and permissions notice: Authorization to copy this content beyond fair use (as specified in Sections 107 and 108 of the U. S. Copyright Law) for internal or personal use, or the internal or personal use of specific clients, is granted by [the Regents of the University of California/on behalf of the Sponsoring Society] for libraries and other users, provided that they are registered with and pay the specified fee via Rightslink® or directly with the Copyright Clearance Center.
    [Show full text]
  • Rhetorics of Belonging
    Rhetorics of Belonging Postcolonialism across the Disciplines 14 Bernard, Rhetorics of Belonging.indd 1 09/09/2013 11:17:03 Postcolonialism across the Disciplines Series Editors Graham Huggan, University of Leeds Andrew Thompson, University of Exeter Postcolonialism across the Disciplines showcases alternative directions for postcolonial studies. It is in part an attempt to counteract the dominance in colonial and postcolonial studies of one particular discipline – English literary/ cultural studies – and to make the case for a combination of disciplinary knowledges as the basis for contemporary postcolonial critique. Edited by leading scholars, the series aims to be a seminal contribution to the field, spanning the traditional range of disciplines represented in postcolonial studies but also those less acknowledged. It will also embrace new critical paradigms and examine the relationship between the transnational/cultural, the global and the postcolonial. Bernard, Rhetorics of Belonging.indd 2 09/09/2013 11:17:03 Rhetorics of Belonging Nation, Narration, and Israel/Palestine Anna Bernard Liverpool University Press Bernard, Rhetorics of Belonging.indd 3 09/09/2013 11:17:03 First published 2013 by Liverpool University Press 4 Cambridge Street Liverpool L69 7ZU Copyright © 2013 Anna Bernard The right of Anna Bernard to be identified as the author of this book has been asserted by her in accordance with the Copyright, Design and Patents Act 1988. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or
    [Show full text]
  • Boycott Divestment Sanctions (Bds) Against Israel an Anti- Semitic, Anti- Peace Poison Pill
    BOYCOTT DIVESTMENT SANCTIONS (BDS) AGAINST ISRAEL AN ANTI- SEMITIC, ANTI- PEACE POISON PILL BY DR. HAROLD BRACKMAN SIMON WIESENTHAL CENTER MARCH 2013 TABLE OF CONTENTS Preface 1 Executive Summary 2 Introduction 4 6 BDS and “the Durban Strategy” for Destroying Israel Not All Boycott Movements Are the Same 7 BDS Movement and Sharansky’s “3Ds” Test for Anti-Semitism 9 BDS’s Multiple Battlefields: From Boardroom to Union Halls To Supermarkets 12 Academic Institutions and the BDS’ Jihad Against Israel 14 BDS’ “Shaming” Cultural War on Israel 16 The Churches and the BDS’ Theology of Hate 17 In their own words: 19 Defenders of BDS 19 Critics of BDS: 20 Conclusion 23 Appendix: BDS Hall of Shame—A Chronology 24 Endnotes 30 copyright 2013 www.wiesenthal.com BOYCOTT DIVESTMENT SANCTIONS (BDS) AGAINST ISRAEL AN ANTI- SEMITIC, ANTI- PEACE POISON PILL 1 preface For decades, diplomats, politicians, and pundits have weighed in as to how best bring peace to the Holy Land. In 2013, U.S. President Barack Obama is paying his first presidential visit to Israel and the Palestinian Territories to try to reboot hopes for peace. There is, however, one campaign—BDS (Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions)—that presents itself as a pro-peace initiative but in reality is a thinly-veiled, anti-Israel and anti-Semitic “poison pill,” whose goal is the demonization, delegitimization, and ultimate demise of the Jewish State. Taking a page from the late twentieth century worldwide campaign against the South African Apartheid regime, BDS casts a global anti-Israel net on campuses, among unions, entertainers and Churches.
    [Show full text]
  • Behind the Boycott
    Promoters of BDS—the movement to boycott, divest from, and bring sanctions against the Jewish state of Israel—are open about their aim of pressuring Israel to relinquish land for a Palestinian state. What they less often share is that a two- state solution—Israel and Palestine living side-by-side in peace—is not their goal. THE ORIGINS OF THE ISRAEL BOYCOTT ven before the State of Israel was officially declared in 1948, with the endorsement of the EUN and backed by the immediate recognition of U.S. President Harry Truman, Arabs in British Mandatory Palestine and throughout the region declared war against the Jews. They sought to kill as many as possible, drive the rest out of the country, and end the Jewish state. That era of belligerency lasted over 30 years before Israel and its chief antagonist, Egypt, signed a peace accord in 1979. When it became clear that war could not defeat Israel, those seeking to bring Israel to its knees shifted tactics, and the Palestinian Intifada was born. It came in two waves of terror, running from 1987 to 1993 and then from 2000 to 2005. These surges were premised on the idea that Jews were foreign colonizers who, like European imperialists in the Third World, could be driven out by making the cost of staying higher than the colonizers could bear. But the Palestinians learned during their terror campaigns that the threat of physical harm would not end the Jewish state, because the Jews knew that they belonged in Israel. Next came the current stage in the long-running campaign against Israel—the movement to boycott, divest from, and bring sanctions against Israel, or “BDS” for short.
    [Show full text]
  • An Analysis of Operation Protective Edge Using the Two-Factor Test
    FIU Law Review Volume 11 Number 1 Article 17 Fall 2015 Defending Israelis or Suppressing Palestinian Self-Determination? An Analysis of Operation Protective Edge Using the Two-Factor Test Wajiha Rais Florida International University College of Law Follow this and additional works at: https://ecollections.law.fiu.edu/lawreview Part of the Other Law Commons Online ISSN: 2643-7759 Recommended Citation Wajiha Rais, Defending Israelis or Suppressing Palestinian Self-Determination? An Analysis of Operation Protective Edge Using the Two-Factor Test, 11 FIU L. Rev. 255 (2015). DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.25148/lawrev.11.1.17 This Comment is brought to you for free and open access by eCollections. It has been accepted for inclusion in FIU Law Review by an authorized editor of eCollections. For more information, please contact [email protected]. 37792-fiu_11-1 Sheet No. 131 Side A 04/28/2016 10:11:02 14 - RAIS_FINAL_4.15.DOCX (DO NOT DELETE) 4/15/16 8:21 PM Defending Israelis or Suppressing Palestinian Self-Determination? An Analysis of Operation Protective Edge Using the Two-Factor Test Wajiha Rais* On July 7, 2014, Israel launched its third military offensive in Gaza in six years, dubbed Operation Protective Edge.1 The Operation lasted for fifty days before Israel and Hamas agreed to an Egyptian brokered cease-fire on August 26, 2014.2 According to the United Nations, 2,131 Palestinians were killed during the offensive, of whom 1,473 were civilians.3 On the Israeli side, seventy-one people died, of whom four were civilians.4 Israel justified the offensive as an act of self-defense against indiscriminate rocket attacks5 and the so-called “terror tunnels.”6 The “terror tunnels” were a network of underground tunnels that went from Gaza to Israeli territory.7 In an interview with Fox News, Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, reiterated that “Israel .
    [Show full text]