The Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement is often presented as a civil society effort to promote justice, but its roots and objectives reveal a far more complex and troubling story. This article uncovers the origins, motives, and consequences of the movement, grounded in historical and legal facts.
Origins: Not What You Thought
BDS supporters claim the movement began in 2005 with a call from Palestinian civil society organizations for a boycott of Israel, in response to Israel’s refusal to accept an International Court of Justice (ICJ) advisory opinion condemning the security barrier. However, the truth is that the boycott campaign predates Israel’s establishment. In 1945, the newly formed Arab League Council declared an economic boycott on “Jewish products and manufactured goods” to isolate the Zionist entity and undermine its economic and military strength. The conflation of “Jewish” and “Zionist” in this declaration reveals its inherently anti-Jewish character.
Is BDS Anti-Semitic?
While the focus shifted to Israel after 1948, the Arab League’s targeting of Jews signaled an anti-Semitic foundation. This became evident during the 2001 NGO forum in Durban, held alongside the UN World Conference Against Racism, where blatant anti-Semitic rhetoric was voiced. The forum’s final declaration labeled Israel a “racist, apartheid state” guilty of “war crimes, genocide, and ethnic cleansing,” advocating for its complete isolation through sanctions and embargoes. The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Mary Robinson, condemned the forum for its anti-Semitic nature.
The BDS movement draws a false comparison between Israel and South Africa’s apartheid regime to justify sanctions and boycotts. As’ad AbuKhalil, a professor at California State University, revealed the true aim: “The real aim of BDS is to bring down the state of Israel… Justice and freedom for Palestinians are incompatible with the existence of the state of Israel.” Omar Barghouti, founder of PACBI, added that the two-state solution is dead, advocating for a “just” one-state solution—Palestine in place of Israel.
Germany, aware of the history of anti-Jewish boycotts under the Nazis, declared BDS inherently anti-Semitic in 2019. The German Parliament noted that the movement’s methods, such as “Don’t Buy” stickers, echo the Nazi slogan “Don’t buy from Jews.” A statement signed by 136 international Jewish organizations condemned BDS, noting that while criticism of Israel is legitimate, it becomes anti-Semitism when it denies Israel’s right to exist or defend its citizens.
Churches and the Boycott
BDS has influenced some U.S. churches. In 2004, the Presbyterian Church (USA) approved divestment from companies linked to Palestinian suffering but reversed this in 2006, favoring investments in peace-promoting companies. In 2014, it divested from Caterpillar, HP, and Motorola due to their involvement in “demolition and surveillance” in the West Bank. In 2015, the United Church of Christ voted to boycott settlement products, and in 2017, the Mennonite Church decided to sell holdings in companies profiting from the “occupation.” However, many churches, including the Episcopal Church, rejected divestment, and most evangelical Christians actively support Israel.
Palestinians Oppose BDS
Contrary to BDS claims, not all Palestinians support the movement. Mahmoud Abbas, President of the Palestinian Authority, stated in 2013: “We do not ask anyone to boycott Israel itself… We have relations with Israel, mutual recognition.” A 2008 agreement between Israel’s Histadrut and the Palestinian General Federation of Trade Unions emphasized cooperation and dialogue to promote peace and coexistence. Palestinian universities, artists, and doctors have collaborated with Israeli counterparts despite tensions.
A stark example of BDS’s harm is SodaStream, which employed nearly 600 Palestinians in its Mishor Adumim factory. BDS pressure contributed to the factory’s closure, and only 74 Palestinian workers were rehired at a new facility in the Negev. Ali Jafar, a Palestinian shift manager, said: “All the people who wanted to close the factory were mistaken… They didn’t consider the families.” Palestinian human rights activist Bassem Eid noted that displaced workers faced severe financial hardship, earning far less in the Palestinian Authority.
Cultural and Academic Boycotts
BDS has pressured artists like Roger Waters and Coldplay to cancel performances in Israel, but many, including Paul McCartney and Madonna, defied the boycott. Academically, the UK’s Association of University Teachers (AUT) voted in 2005 to boycott Haifa and Bar-Ilan universities but reversed this due to backlash over academic freedom. In 2013, the American Studies Association (ASA) boycotted Israeli institutions, sparking widespread opposition, with over 250 universities rejecting the idea. Al-Quds University President Sari Nusseibeh opposed the boycott, stating: “The academic community in Israel promotes pro-peace views… If you want to punish a sector, this is the last one to target.”
Minimal Impact, Legal Resistance
Despite BDS efforts, Israel’s economy thrives. Exports to the U.S. grew from $5 million in 1948 to $19 billion in 2023, and trade with the EU rose from $21 billion in 2003 to over $50 billion in 2022. China, India, and Japan have become major trade partners, and Jordan and Egypt signed gas deals with Israel. In France, boycotts of Israel are illegal, with courts convicting BDS activists of inciting hatred. In the U.S., a 2016 law opposes EU BDS efforts, and states like South Carolina and Illinois have passed anti-BDS legislation. In 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld Arkansas’s anti-BDS law, ruling that boycotts are discriminatory conduct, not protected speech.
Conclusion: Propaganda Masquerading as Justice
The BDS movement uses human rights rhetoric to delegitimize Israel, ignoring Palestinian responsibility and harming peace prospects. It hurts the Palestinians it claims to represent, as seen in the SodaStream case, and promotes a one-state solution that denies Israel’s right to exist. Despite its efforts, BDS has failed to significantly impact Israel’s economy or international relations, facing growing legal and public opposition.
Comments
Post a Comment