As a long-time advocate for peaceful resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, I am pained that frustration over failure to achieve a just and lasting peace has led allies in the struggle to end up at odds over tactics like boycotts, divestment and sanctions (BDS).
Two years ago, the organization I head, J Street, was honored with an invitation to speak at a breakfast hosted by a Presbyterian Church (USA) peacemaking group -- a long-time ally in the struggle for Middle East peace. But we attended with heavy hearts.
A PCUSA committee had just offered an alarming and problematic Middle East study report referencing J Street as a source of inspiration. We explained then, and have reiterated ever since, that, in our view, the one-sided, extreme rhetoric that accompanies the Global BDS Movement makes a mutually agreeable solution more difficult to achieve, not less. Thankfully, at that time, the Church heard our arguments and rejected the divestment resolutions.
Now, two years later, PCUSA is poised again to consider divestment this week at its General Assembly. As an activist, as an ally and as someone to whom the future of Israel and Palestine matters enormously, I'm hoping they will once again avoid this unproductive path.
As the Presbyterian Church knows, the solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has been clear for decades: the establishment of two states, living side by side in peace and security; a mutually acceptable resolution of the refugee issue; and a shared Jerusalem. For years, the PCUSA has supported a two-state solution on this basis.
I would say to the Church's leaders as they again consider joining forces with the BDS Movement, that the Movement's rhetoric and tactics are not only a distraction, but a genuine threat to conflict resolution. Even the limited divestment approach under consideration by PCUSA falls under the rubric of larger BDS efforts to place blame entirely on one side of the conflict. Such an approach encourages not reconciliation, but polarization. Further, too many in and around the BDS movement refuse to acknowledge either the legitimacy of Israel or the right of the Jewish people as well as the Palestinian people to a state.
Pro-peace, pro-Israel advocacy has gained traction in the American Jewish community by embracing the mutuality inherent in the two-state solution. We reject a zero-sum approach, which says that to be pro-Israel means one must be anti-Palestinian -- or vice versa. We seek a win-win solution.
We want to see Israel thrive as a Jewish homeland and a democracy, and we want to see a Palestinian state established, because Palestinians deserve to live in dignity in their own state too.
Thus, the Jewish pro-peace, pro-Israel community calls for an end to settlement expansion, the promotion of human rights, securing Israel's future as a Jewish democracy and establishing a thriving Palestine. We call for bold American and international diplomatic initiatives, starting with a push to define mutually-agreed borders.
But turning to tactics like BDS deepens divisions and fails to promote reconciliation.
I understand that frustration is rising over diplomatic stagnation, and I know that advocates for peace are attracted to tactics like BDS that create the impression of action. But, to date, pursuit of these tactics has promoted little more than debate and division -- and done nothing to facilitate movement toward reconciliation.
Advocates for peace and two states are fighting an uphill and increasingly urgent battle. Just as the opportunity to achieve a two-state peace grows narrower, the debate over BDS is sapping the resources of those working for peace by creating new and deep divisions among those who should be allies working together for a peaceful resolution to the conflict.
If PCUSA disregards the voices of its Jewish allies in the quest for a two-state solution and votes to support divestment, it won't bring a just peace any closer. It will merely lose the good will of many American Jews and further dissipate the energies we so desperately need to apply to the task at hand.
At base we share a common goal: to see the establishment of a two-state resolution of the conflict. Everything we do needs to be geared toward that goal. Several American Christian organizations have made the choice to continue the fight for two states by advocating for bold American leadership in achieving a two-state solution on Capitol Hill and embracing positive steps, including economic development, programs that foster reconciliation and other constructive work, for the shared benefit of Israelis and Palestinians alike.
I call on PCUSA to do likewise -- to not move away from its natural allies, but to stick with us. Reject divestment, and embrace full-on pursuit of the diplomatic efforts necessary to create genuine and lasting peace for Israel and the Palestinian people.
Jeremy Ben-Ami is the president of J Street, the political home of the pro-Israel, pro-peace movement.
Follow Jeremy Ben-Ami on Twitter: www.twitter.com/jstreetdotorg
Rabbi Joshua Levine Grater: Israel at 64: Love is Complex
What other conflict other than Palestine has people morally equating the occupied with the occupiers?
How does a "Jewish democracy" work if up to 20 percent of the citizens are not Jewish? I doubt J Street would support a Christian democracy (complete with compulsory demands for non-Christians to swear allegiance to a Christian state) in the US.
People all over the world are rejecting the tired hasbara rhetoric of those like J Street seeking to maintain the status quo of apartheid by another name in Israel.
I applaud the courage of the Presbyterians who face enormous pressure and threats and urge they vote to divest.
:)
If not BDS now, when? Another year? five? another decade?
And how many more settlements will there be by then?
"Just one more Oslo agreement to have come and gone?
I believe that the time for two state solution is over.
If israel supporters in the US think the world will accept israel fully-occupying the West Bank but ejecting all the Palestinians to random countries around the region for israels benefit then theyre OUT OF THEIR MIND.
Its simply not going to happen.
The United Church of Canada has released the 26 page report of its Working Group on Israel/Palestine Policy, which the church will consider introducing as policy when the denomination's 41st General Council convenes in Ottawa August 11-18. The Working Group indicates that its recommendations were put forth in search of truth, justice and reconciliation when in fact it does little or nothing of the sort. It refers to Israel as the "thief," the "occupier," and the "oppressor," and compares Israeli policies to those of South Africa under apartheid, and more shockingly to Sudan, despite the fact that people from Africa risk their lives to get to Israel to escape the Islamist apartheid rampant throughout African countries such as Sudan, South Sudan and Nigeria, to name but a few.
While acknowledging Israel's right to exist, this biased and scathing report against Israel calls for "Christian economic action" against it, and points out that Canada does not recognize permanent Israeli control over territories occupied in 1967. Nevertheless it omits that these territories -- under dispute -- were taken by Israel in a defensive war, the second that united Arab countries had initiated against it since Israel's founding in 1948. It is difficult to imagine a view advanced by the United Church working group, along with the automatic majority of autocracies in the United Nations, that countries which start wars and then lose them should be rewarded.
Only to be turned away.
>> . Nevertheless it omits that these territories -- under dispute -- were taken by Israel in a defensive war,
No one but Israel consideres tehm disputed and they were taken in an agressive war. Furthermore, Israel accepted it had to withdraw from these territories under UNSC242. Building on them is a massive violation.
Israel took the land in a defensive war in 1967. No withdrawal until an agreement is reached with the "Palestinians" under 242. Israel can build wherever it wants.
Unfortunately, the Netanyahu regime is either too stupid or too venal to care and construction continues.
In a perfect world Obama and the Congress would figuratively grab Netanyahu by the throat and say "Stop the construction NOW, or we will stop giving aid to Israel!" In a perfect world, U.S. leaders would force Israel to stop the construction madness BEFORE it reaches the point of no return for a two-state solution. (Note that I am not saying we should make U.S. aid contingent on unilateral Israeli WITHDRAWAL from the territories. We should only stop aid if Israel continues to make things worse.)
But unfortunately, we do not live in a perfect world. This is why it is so important for those who want Israel to survive over the long term to join the BDS movement. When your best friend's life is going down the tubes because he is addicted to drugs you have to figuratively knock him upside the head and drag him to a rehab clinic. Call it tough love.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/thefoolishanalyst/boycott-divestment-and-sanctions-puts-allies-at-odds_b_1640476_166071423.html
********************************************
2) Sooner or later American support for Israel may evaporate if an incident or series of incidents of Israeli brutality in the West Bank goes viral on Youtube. Alternatively, American public opinion about Israel could change for the worse if a blockbuster movie is ever made from a Palestinian point of view. American support for Israel could also evaporate almost overnight if they drag us into a war with Iran and the war goes badly.
http://themessinglink.com/Iran_War_Could_Feed_Anti-Semitism
These two factors may act synergistically to undermine support for Israel if it adopts the "boot in the face forever" approach.
The first part of my comment appears here:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/thefoolishanalyst/boycott-divestment-and-sanctions-puts-allies-at-odds_b_1640476_165957997.html
***Start 2nd part of comment***
Putting the morality of an unending occupation aside, this situation is untenable in the long run. Israel requires the U.S. to send it $3 billion in military aid for its survival. It relies on the continued good will of the American people. This cannot be counted on in the long run for two reasons:
1) The Muslim population is growing faster in the U.S. than the Jewish population. At least one study suggests that there are now more Muslims then Jews.
http://www.jweekly.com/article/full/15599/muslims-in-u-s-now-outnumber-jews-study-estimates/
Some question the accuracy of this study because it is based on a questionable assumption. But even if Muslims do not outnumber Jews currently, the trend indicates that their population will soon be bigger. The voice of Muslim Americans who detest the occupation will only get louder in the future as their population grows.
(To be continued)
BDS for South Africa didn’t succeed for 35 years, then – it did!
$146.00 to fill-up in New York or £227.00 in London with gas/petrol @ $9 gall/ £4 /litre?
These would be the probable immediate consequences of an Israeli inspired attack upon Iran.
The doubling in price of food and essential supplies would likely follow within weeks, as would a collapse in stock market prices by up to 20% depending on the length of time that the Strait of Hormuz is blocked. It could be months before shipping could be resumed, if ever.
However, this would not be the most serious consequence. That would be the deployment of nuclear weapons by Israel to defend it's cities from long-range rockets fired by Iran against its attacker, in retaliation.
Unfortunately, radioactivity knows no national boundaries and nuclear weapon attacks by Israel would soon bring Pakistan and then India into the escalating conflict.
Iranian cells in western cities would be activated in revenge with unknown consequences. Â However, the entire Middle East would be heavily, if not permanently destabilized.
This is the likely scenario of a Israeli/ US attack against Iran in order to secure Israeli nuclear superiority throughout the region. Is that what you want - a small state of less than 8 million to control hundreds of millions? Â Is that a sensible strategy conducive to peace and to the continuance of essential oil supplies? Is it?
Finally, if you think that this is merely scaremongering, then check out the unprecedented size of the US seaborne battle group now headed for the Gulf.Â
That woudl explain why Michael Oren keeps wooing the right wing evangelical fantatics.
Im glad though theyre finally being more honest and realistic about the crimes of the state of israel. Good for them.
There is 'stagnation' because Israel has zero interest in peace. Boycotts are the only way to go, not just on Settlement goods, but Israeli goods as well.
How about givign up more than half of the land they were allocated under UNG181?
Israelis will then be faced with two choices. They can either agree to a one-state solution in which Jews are a minority. In an ideal world, this one state would be a democracy that protects minority rights. In an ideal world minority Jews would be allowed to practice their religion and live their way of life in peace. In an ideal world, the Jews would not have to worry about vigilante justice coming from the Palestinian majority eager to revenge past grievances.
But I have my doubts that we live in an ideal world. And there is no way the Jews of Israel are going to bet their lives that they will be treated as equal citizens under a one-state solution.
If a two-state solution is precluded by Jewish settlements in the West Bank, then the only remaining alternative is the status quo. Israel will have to continue the occupation indefinitely and the West Bank Palestinians will have to live with a boot in the face forever.
(To be continued)
Besdie that money is hardly 1% of Israe GDP.... so get off your high horse, it is a wooden one.
And if the weapons we sell Israel are overpriced then Israel is free to either stop buying them, to build them herself or to buy similar ones from another country. Evidently Israel sees value in our weapons or she wouldn't continue buying them.
Yes it does. The trade agreement between Israel and the US alone is massively distported to Israel's benefit - so much so that it has been described as a 10 billion dollar annual grant.
Meanwhile Israel imposes strict trade protection on it's end.
>> Israel spent three times that amout in the US annually and provide good paying jobs to American wrokers.
False. Quite the opposite in fact.
When Isrlae placed the order for the 20 F35s JSF's, Lockheed did a deal with ongress to outsource some of teh production to Israel - a deal worth billion and thousands of jobs - so that Israel could afford to buy the planes with their US welfare cheque.
Can anyone ( in his right mind of course) explain to this Peace hoping Israeli how anyone intends to put this BDS thing together. Also dont forget the Arabs all have a one product export. In many fields US comanies rely on Israel. (60minutes calls us the 2nd silcone valley). All major electronic companies have huge instements here. Buffet for eg invested in a plant on the Lebanese border - one billion dollars and his only foreign investment - you tell him his plant is boycotted - not me!