Indeed, as fate would have it, the BDS (Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions) movement has been nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize.
I’d first just like to say that there is no dichotomy at hand here, where opposing BDS must automatically imply unwavering support of Israel, as it’s entirely possible for one (like, say, me) to be both critical of BDS and Israel.
And I’ve found that I’m in some respectable company, in my disapproval of BDS...
Invest in Peace is a Bay Area based organization (my rabbi and my mayor are signatories on this page) which supports cooperative enterprises between Israelis and Palestinians. They believe in “a two-state solution with an independent, autonomous and economically viable Palestinian state living side-by-side with a democratic, Jewish state of Israel”, and that “the best way to end the conflict between Israelis and Palestinians is to create economic and people-to-people partnerships among Palestinians and Israelis.” They also state,
Invest in Peace opposes the BDS Movement, aimed at punishing and harming Israel.
Thus the Nobel committee, when considering BDS for the Peace Prize, I think ought to seriously reflect on the fact that an organization expressly devoted to promoting peace between Israelis and Palestinians, is against BDS.
I also happened to come across another group that is very explicitly anti-BDS…
They “oppose any effort to delegitimize Israel, including at the United Nations or through the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions Movement.” And Golly Gee Willikers- it’s none other than the Democratic Party! (The glue that binds us all…)
But of course, it isn’t enough to just say “lots of really cool people share my view”. Positions must always be defended by sound arguments.
And I’ve actually already given these arguments in another diary, but here’s the general gist of it: I don’t have a problem with BDS’s methods (economic tactics are boatloads better than senseless violence- I will say that any day of the week). The main issue with BDS is its goals, in that they’re wildly unrealistic.
So given this, BDS’s grand strategy essentially amounts to making Israel suffer such tremendous, crushing economic hardship, that after (God alone knows how long) Israel finally caves in, the level of economic distress having outweighed the severe consequences of the extreme demands.
(Yes, this is the bundle of cheeriness that is currently a contender for the highest honor this planet has to give...)
But imagine instead- a campaign whose official platform was something like the following:
We call for a consumer boycott, financial divestment, and economic sanctions to be imposed upon the state of Israel until Israel conforms to requirements A, B, & C.
Once Israel satisfactorily complies with A, B, & C, then the boycott, investment ban, and sanctions shall all be completely lifted, so that relations with Israel will be fully normalized.
Where “A, B, & C” are both very specific, AND are all things that Israel is actually capable of doing (and it doesn’t necessarily have to be 3 things, naturally- “A, B, & C” can represent any number of items, they all just have to be CONCRETE, FAIR, and ACHIEVABLE).
Can anyone, give me one damn reason why BDS can’t sound more like this??
And, well, I’m just going to be blunt: narrow-minded obstinacy doesn’t do the Palestinians any favors. Reasonableness is the way to peace (and prosperity), and unreasonableness only leads to perpetual strife (and suffering).
But this is actually only half of BDS’s shortcomings…
There cannot be peace unless all obstacles to peace are addressed.
Suppose Israel reformed all of its policies to such an extraordinary degree, that Amnesty International became so impressed that it created a special new award- “Best Human Rights Record In The Whole World, By Far”- specifically to bestow upon Israel.
Could there be peace in this scenario, if the other side remained committed to Israel’s destruction?
Remember when Israel forcibly removed its settlers from Gaza (literally kicking & screaming) a few years ago, and then Hamas rewarded Israel for this by launching over 4,500 rockets into Israel? Menachem Ben Yakov sure hasn’t forgotten it, and I’d bet neither have most Israelis.
There are a great many people, who (legitimately, in my view) are not feeling that “warm fuzzy vibe” from Hamas, that is so key to attaining peace. Like (in contrast) the positive vibes I do get from the Palestine-loves-Israel and Israel-loves-Palestine groups, and from a number of other wonderful organizations as well.
But I honestly can’t say that I sense this underlying amicable spirit, in BDS.
Yes, they do declare that they are not in any way hateful. But if all the rest of their stance seems inconsistent with this, then it shouldn’t come as any huge surprise that their pronouncements are called into doubt. I think BDS needs to recognize that their grossly imbalanced perspective (and their unreasonable demands, as well) are projecting a hostile & unappealing image to a significant number of people (regardless of whatever claims BDS might make on the surface). This is critical, because boycotts- by their fundamental nature- require popular support in order to be successful. Thus I feel that BDS really ought to do some honest self-examination as to how they may be missing the mark in this regard, for the factor in all of this that I don’t see getting proper consideration is the prolonged all-around human suffering associated with being relentlessly unyielding (I know I’ve already said this but I feel it’s important enough to be worth repeating). ☮