By Donna Nevel
Many American Jewish organizations claim to be staunch supporters of civil and human rights as well as academic freedom. But when it comes to Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) against Israel, they make an exception. In their relentless opposition to BDS, they leave even core principles behind.
The Palestinian-led call for BDS, which began in 2005 in response to ongoing Israeli government violations of basic principles of international law and human rights of the Palestinian people, is a call of conscience. It has strengthened markedly over the last few years among artists, students, unions, church groups, dockworkers, and others. Media coverage of endorsers of the boycott has gone mainstream and viral. Recent examples include Stephen Hawkingâ€™s refusal to go to Jerusalem for the Presidential Conference, the successful campaign surrounding Scarlett Johanssonâ€™s support for Soda Stream and its settlement operation, and the American Studies Association (ASA) resolution that endorsed boycott of Israeli academic institutions.
Alongside BDSâ€™s increasing strength have come increasingly virulent attacks on, and campaigns against it. These attacks tend to employ similar language and tactics â€“ as if the groups are all cribbing from the same talking points â€“ including tarring BDS supporters as â€œanti-Semiticâ€ and â€œdelegitimizers.â€
These attacks simply donâ€™t address or grapple with the core aspirations or realities of BDS. As described by Hanan Ashrawi, executive committee member of the PLO, in a recent letter in the New York Times, BDS â€œdoes not target Jews, individually or collectively, and rejects all forms of bigotry and discrimination, including anti-Semitism.â€ She goes on to explain that â€œB.D.S. is, in fact, a legal, moral and inclusive movement struggling against the discriminatory policies of a country that defines itself in religiously exclusive terms, and that seeks to deny Palestinians the most basic rights simply because we are not Jewish.â€
The use of name-calling like â€œanti-Semitesâ€ and â€œdelegtimizersâ€ is problematic for a number of reasons, not only because its claims are untrue, but also because it takes the focus off the real issue at hand â€“ whether and how Israel is, in fact, violating international law and basic human rights principles â€“ and, instead, recklessly impugns the characters of those advocating for Israel to be held accountable.
Criticisms, even extremely harsh ones, of the Israeli state or calls to make a state democratic and adhere to equal rights for all its citizens are not anti-Semitic. Rather, anti-Semitism is about hatred of, and discrimination against the Jewish people, which is not anywhere to be found in the call for BDS, and these kinds of accusations also serve to trivialize the long and ugly history of anti-Semitism.
Most recently, the anti-BDS effort has moved to the legislative front. A bill, introduced in the New York State Assembly last month, would have trampled academic freedom and the right to support BDS in its quest to punish the ASA and deter any who might dare to emulate its endorsement of the academic boycott. Those supporting the bill were opposed by a broad coalition of education, civil rights, legal, academic, and Palestine solidarity organizations, as well as Jewish social justice groups. The bill was withdrawn, but a revised version has been introduced that is designed, like the original, to punish colleges that use public funds for activities related to groups that support boycotts of Israel, including mere attendance at their meetings.
The Jewish Community Relations Council (JCRC) worked closely with the sponsors of the New York bill.
Like the JCRC, rather than engaging in substantive debate about the issues raised in relation to BDS, the Israeli government and many Jewish communal organizations choose, instead, to try to discredit and derail the efforts of those supporting BDS.
For example, as recently reported by Haâ€™aretz, the Israeli Knesset is debating how to continue to counter BDS efforts across the globe, that is, â€œwhether to launch an aggressive public campaign or operate through quieter, diplomatic channels.â€ It is also considering what the role of AIPAC might be in introducing anti-boycott legislation and how to best bolster military surveillanceâ€“which has significant funding behind itâ€“against supporters of BDS.
American Jewish communal organizations have also expended massive resources and energy in their campaigns to demonize endorsers of BDS. The Israel Action Network (IAN)â€“which describes itself as â€œa strategic initiative of The Jewish Federations of North America, in partnership with the Jewish Council for Public Affairs (JCPA), created to counter assaults made on Israelâ€™s legitimacyâ€â€“has funded the anti-BDS effort to the tune of at least six million dollars over a three-year period.
The IAN website characterizes supporters of BDS as â€œdelegitimizersâ€and says that, in order to gain support from â€œvulnerable targets,â€ which include â€œcollege campuses, churches, labor unions, and human rights organizations,â€ delegitimizers utilize Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) tactics, â€œthe same tools used to isolate and vilify apartheid South Africa, Iran, or Nazi Germany. BDS activists, IAN continues, â€œpresent distortions, fabrications and misrepresentations of international law in an attempt to paint Israel with the same brush.â€
In another example of name-calling without any substance, the Anti-Defamation Leagueâ€™s (ADLâ€™s) July 2013 report attacked Jewish Voice for Peace (JVP), featuring ad hominem accusations (JVP â€œintentionally exploits Jewish cultureâ€), rather than discussing JVPâ€™s actual positions. (A JVP report on the ADL points out that the ADL not only targets JVP but is well-known for its long history of spying on Arabs and supporters of the Palestinian movement.)
On the charge of anti-Semitism, the Simon Wiesenthal Center, in its call to fight the BDS movement, urges it supporters to â€œlearn the facts behind this hypocritical and anti-Semitic campaign,â€ and the ADLâ€™s Abe Foxman echoed those same sentiments: â€œThe BDS movement at its very core is anti-Semitic.â€ And most recently, in his speech to AIPAC, Prime Minister Netanyahu, after shamelessly drawing upon classic anti-Semitic imagery of Jews to speak of supporters of BDS, says: â€œSo you see, attempts to boycott, divest and sanction Israel, the most threatened democracy on earth, are simply the latest chapter in the long and dark history of anti- Semitism.â€
The demonization of BDS is not only the domain of the Israeli government and the mainstream Jewish community. The self-declared liberal J-Street, in its seemingly relentless quest to stay under the Jewish â€œtent,â€ has also jumped on the anti-BDS bandwagon, sometimes in partnership with the IAN, which (precisely because J Street is positioned as a peace group) proudly documents its relationship with J Street in fighting BDS. Discussing how J Street is gaining acceptance in the mainstream Jewish community, JCPAâ€™s CEO Rabbi Steve Gutow points to â€œits role in pushing back against the boycott, divestment and sanctions movementâ€¦â€
Further, the refusal of both liberal land mainstream Jewish groups to discuss substantive issues around Israelâ€™s actions or BDS also reveals itself in language that admonishes BDS as being â€œbeyond the pale.â€ Recently, for example, as reported by the director of JVP in an op-ed in the Forward, the director of the JCRC of Greater Boston, who has a history of involvement in liberal organizations, explained that â€œany organization that supports BDSâ€¦doesnâ€™t belong at the communal table. In fact, he was referring specifically to Jewish Voice for Peace. He even argued that opening the public conversation to BDS is roughly akin to welcoming the Ku Klux Klan.â€
This attempted silencing of those simply discussing BDS plays out even in seemingly minor local skirmishes. For example, last year, the liberal rabbi of a large New York City synagogue cancelled the synagogueâ€™s facilities-usage contract with a group of Jews who, he feared, might, on his premises, discuss BDS. That, he said, would be â€œbeyond the pale.â€
These attacks against BDS appear to be an almost desperate reaction to the increasing successes of BDS, not only in the world at large, but also within the broader Jewish community itself. Respected members of the liberal Jewish community as well as a few liberal Zionist groups that were vehemently anti-BDS are now calling for boycotts against products made in the settlements and are engaging with the issue publicly. Further, the mission and vision of groups like Jews Say No and Jewish Voice for Peace â€“ â€œa diverse and democratic community of activists inspired by Jewish tradition to work together for peace, social justice, and human rightsâ€ â€“ are resonating with increasing numbers of Jews who support BDS as a natural outgrowth of their commitments. And that movement is growing in partnership with the broader Palestinian-led movement for justice.
How should the rest of the Jewish community respond? Ad hominem attacks on BDS just will not do. It is time for BDS opponents to take a deep breath. Consider this: BDS is a principled response to Israelâ€™s actions and behavior as an occupier. It is a profound call by Palestinians â€“ and supporters world-wideâ€“for justice. It is not BDS that should be opposed, but, rather, the very policies and practices that have made BDS necessary.
Donna Nevel, a community psychologist and educator, is a long-time organizer for peace and justice in Israel/Palestine. She was a co-coordinator of the 1989 landmark Road to Peace Conference that brought PLO officials and Knesset members together to the US for the first time. More recently, she was a founding member of Jews Say No!, is a member of the board of Jewish Voice for Peace, and is on the coordinating committee of the Nakba Education Project, U.S.
Originally published on the Tikkun Daily Blog
There are a lot of benefits of a wholesome lifestyle. But can medicines help us? In fact, it is not so easy to find trusted web-site. Choosing the best treatment version for a racy disease can get really confusing considering the merits and demerits of the existing treatment methodologies. Diflucan (fluconazole), the first of a new group of synthetic antifungal agents, is existing as a powder for oral suspension. Viagra which is used to treat erectile dysfunction and similar states when hard-on is of low quality. Cialis is a medicine prescribed to treat a lot of complaints. What do you know about buy cialis online cheap? Our article focuses on the treatment of erectile dysfunction and buy cialis cheap. Generally, both men and women suffer from sexual dysfunctions. What are the symptoms of sexual disorders? In fact, a scientific reviews found that up to three quarters of men on such preparation experience erectile malfunction. Such disease is best solved with professional help, commonly through counseling with a certified physician. Your sex therapist can help find the treatment that is better for you and your partner. The most common objectionable side effects of such medications like Cialis is dizziness. This is not a complete list of potential side effects and others may occur. Even if this preparation is not for use in women, this medicine is not expected to be harmful to an unborn baby.