|
| |
Boycott Israel
An Israeli comes to the painful conclusion that it's the only way to
save his country.
By Neve Gordon
August 20, 2009
Israeli newspapers this summer are filled with angry articles
about the push for an international boycott of Israel. Films have been withdrawn
from Israeli film festivals, Leonard Cohen is under fire around the world for
his decision to perform in Tel Aviv, and Oxfam has severed ties with a celebrity
spokesperson, a British actress who also endorses cosmetics produced in the
occupied territories. Clearly, the campaign to use the kind of tactics that
helped put an end to the practice of apartheid in South Africa is gaining many
followers around the world.
Not surprisingly, many Israelis -- even peaceniks -- aren't signing on. A global
boycott can't help but contain echoes of anti-Semitism. It also brings up
questions of a double standard (why not boycott China for its egregious
violations of human rights?) and the seemingly contradictory position of
approving a boycott of one's own nation.
It is indeed not a simple matter for me as an Israeli citizen to call on foreign
governments, regional authorities, international social movements, faith-based
organizations, unions and citizens to suspend cooperation with Israel. But
today, as I watch my two boys playing in the yard, I am convinced that it is the
only way that Israel can be saved from itself.
I say this because Israel has reached a historic crossroads, and times of crisis
call for dramatic measures. I say this as a Jew who has chosen to raise his
children in Israel, who has been a member of the Israeli peace camp for almost
30 years and who is deeply anxious about the country's future.
The most accurate way to describe Israel today is as an apartheid state. For
more than 42 years, Israel has controlled the land between the Jordan Valley and
the Mediterranean Sea. Within this region about 6 million Jews and close to 5
million Palestinians reside. Out of this population, 3.5 million Palestinians
and almost half a million Jews live in the areas Israel occupied in 1967, and
yet while these two groups live in the same area, they are subjected to totally
different legal systems. The Palestinians are stateless and lack many of the
most basic human rights. By sharp contrast, all Jews -- whether they live in the
occupied territories or in Israel -- are citizens of the state of Israel.
The question that keeps me up at night, both as a parent and as a citizen, is
how to ensure that my two children as well as the children of my Palestinian
neighbors do not grow up in an apartheid regime.
There are only two moral ways of achieving this goal.
The first is the one-state solution: offering citizenship to all Palestinians
and thus establishing a bi-national democracy within the entire area controlled
by Israel. Given the demographics, this would amount to the demise of Israel as
a Jewish state; for most Israeli Jews, it is anathema.
The second means of ending our apartheid is through the two-state solution,
which entails Israel's withdrawal to the pre-1967 borders (with possible
one-for-one land swaps), the division of Jerusalem, and a recognition of the
Palestinian right of return with the stipulation that only a limited number of
the 4.5 million Palestinian refugees would be allowed to return to Israel, while
the rest can return to the new Palestinian state.
Geographically, the one-state solution appears much more feasible because Jews
and Palestinians are already totally enmeshed; indeed, "on the ground," the
one-state solution (in an apartheid manifestation) is a reality.
Ideologically, the two-state solution is more realistic because fewer than 1% of
Jews and only a minority of Palestinians support binationalism.
For now, despite the concrete difficulties, it makes more sense to alter the
geographic realities than the ideological ones. If at some future date the two
peoples decide to share a state, they can do so, but currently this is not
something they want.
So if the two-state solution is the way to stop the apartheid state, then how
does one achieve this goal?
I am convinced that outside pressure is the only answer. Over the last three
decades, Jewish settlers in the occupied territories have dramatically increased
their numbers. The myth of the united Jerusalem has led to the creation of an
apartheid city where Palestinians aren't citizens and lack basic services. The
Israeli peace camp has gradually dwindled so that today it is almost
nonexistent, and Israeli politics are moving more and more to the extreme right.
It is therefore clear to me that the only way to counter the apartheid trend in
Israel is through massive international pressure. The words and condemnations
from the Obama administration and the European Union have yielded no results,
not even a settlement freeze, let alone a decision to withdraw from the occupied
territories.
I consequently have decided to support the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions
movement that was launched by Palestinian activists in July 2005 and has since
garnered widespread support around the globe. The objective is to ensure that
Israel respects its obligations under international law and that Palestinians
are granted the right to self-determination.
In Bilbao, Spain, in 2008, a coalition of organizations from all over the world
formulated the 10-point Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions campaign meant to
pressure Israel in a "gradual, sustainable manner that is sensitive to context
and capacity." For example, the effort begins with sanctions on and divestment
from Israeli firms operating in the occupied territories, followed by actions
against those that help sustain and reinforce the occupation in a visible
manner. Along similar lines, artists who come to Israel in order to draw
attention to the occupation are welcome, while those who just want to perform
are not.
Nothing else has worked. Putting massive international pressure on Israel is the
only way to guarantee that the next generation of Israelis and Palestinians --
my two boys included -- does not grow up in an apartheid regime.
Copyright © 2009, The Los Angeles Times
Neve Gordon
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Neve
Gordon,
born 15 June 1965, is a Senior Lecturer and head of the Department of
Politics and Government[1] at Ben-Gurion
University of the Negev,
who writes on issues relating to the Israeli-Palestinian
Conflict
and human
rights.
A third-generation Israeli, Gordon did his military service in a IDF Paratrooper unit,
and suffered severe injuries in action at Rosh
Hanikra,
as a result of which he has a 42 percent disability. During the first
Intifada he
served as director of Physicians
for Human Rights,
Israel. He is an active member in Ta'ayush,
Arab-Jewish Partnership.[2] He
identifies himself as a member of the Israeli
peace camp,
having described Israel as an 'apartheid
state'.[3]
|
