Boycott: Where To?

[Image from unknown archive.] [Image from unknown archive.]

Boycott: Where To?

By : Nimer Sultany

The Haifa-based Mada al-Carmel – Arab Center for Applied Social Research released its latest issue of the electronic quarterly Jadal entitled: Boycotting Israel: Between Theory and Practice. This issue provides a preliminary assessment and critical reflection on the question of boycotting Israel. So far, discussions on this subject have ranged between either an outright dismissal and knee-jerk rejection by pro-Israel groups, or an enthusiastic endorsement by pro-Palestine groups. Jadal aims to provide a thoughtful and reflective engagement of the question of boycott by authors who are generally sympathetic to the boycott movement and support its broad goals.

The question of boycott arises against the backdrop of the debate over the ways in which Israel can be forced to comply with the demands of international law and the international community. The perceived ineffectiveness of previously deployed methods (UN resolutions, International Court of Justice’s advisory opinion, Oslo process negotiations, Israeli legal system, and the second intifada) leads many to see boycott, divestment, and sanctions (BDS) as a more promising path. The hope is that civil society groups can provide the pressure and deliver the outcomes that official channels of decision-making and diplomacy have failed to provide. This hope seems to be vindicated by the recent uprisings in the Arab world, wherein official and long established political mediums—as in existing political parties—have been bypassed and rendered irrelevant through direct action of social movements and ordinary citizens. BDS is not, in this sense, a despair of politics but a different form of politics. Many are also attracted to BDS since it utilizes the language of universal human rights, draws a strong analogy to South Africa, and is a non-violent strategy to end the occupation and discrimination. BDS seems also to be supported and championed by proponents of the one-state solution. Israel has replied strongly against BDS, viewing it as a delegitimation strategy, and has recently enacted a law to provide civil sanctions against calls for boycott inside Israel (including the settlements) by Israelis.
 
But what is boycott? What are its goals? How can they be achieved? Is it important that boycotts be effective because boycott is an instrumental tool for achieving political ends? Or is boycott a strategy that should be pursued for moral reasons regardless of the efficacy question? Is the analogy to South Africa appropriate? What are the limitations of boycott? In this issue of Jadal, several scholars and practitioners grapple with the questions that the idea and the practice of boycott give rise to.

In his essay "Three Comments on the Boycott Movement," attorney Nimer Sultany warns against three potential pitfalls that the boycott movement should avoid: non-violence should not become a new dogma; the discourse of the movement should not be highly legalistic; and the occasional excess of rhetoric should be avoided. Sultany argues that Palestinian political discourse should not be reduced to the question of boycott, and boycott should not be reduced to a moral discourse lacking political efficacy.     

How can this efficacy be achieved? Professor Esmail Nashif argues in "Entrenching the Boycott in the Principles of the Resistance" that the difficulty with the boycott campaign is that it is a partial reaction to a larger colonial project, as opposed to an action within a larger resistance project. Indeed, boycott is primarily a reaction to the reality of the West Bank. Thus it is bound to produce limited, results especially if it does not take a critical distance from its instrumental character. He argues that boycott, rather than being a substitute to a project, should be considered a tool to advance a project.

In "Lessons From South Africa," attorney Diana Buttu elaborates on the lack of a larger political strategy. For Buttu, BDS is not likely to be effective if such a strategy remains lacking. She compares the case of Palestine to the boycott movement in South Africa. The existence of a larger political strategy pursued by a credible leadership in South Africa, in which BDS was only one tool out of many, paved the way to success. Without a similar development in Palestine, boycott will remain selective and ineffective. Thus, it will be no more than a moral discourse of shaming. 

Turning to one specific area of boycott, professor George Bisharat makes the case for boycotting Israeli academic institutions in his essay "On Academic Boycott." He points out that these institutions are involved in various ways in maintaining oppression and discrimination against Palestinians. Academic boycott, Bisharat maintains, may encourage internal critical Israeli reflection on the policies that led to Israel’s isolation.  

The questions raised by boycott are not hypothetical questions for academics to ponder. Building upon his own experience, activist and law student Yaman Salahi discusses in his essay "Boycott on US Campuses: From Moral Language to Political Practice" the lessons learned from boycott activism on US campuses by student groups. There, students have faced the question of transforming the slogan “boycott Israel” into a concrete political agenda. He argues that it is insufficient to make the moral case against Israeli oppression. Rather, it is highly important to critique the institutional arguments against boycotting corporations involved in the Israeli occupation.

Past is Present: Settler Colonialism Matters!

On 5-6 March 2011, the Palestine Society at the School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS) in London will hold its seventh annual conference, "Past is Present: Settler Colonialism in Palestine." This year`s conference aims to understand Zionism as a settler colonial project which has, for more than a century, subjected Palestine and Palestinians to a structural and violent form of destruction, dispossession, land appropriation and erasure in the pursuit of a new Jewish Israeli society. By organizing this conference, we hope to reclaim and revive the settler colonial paradigm and to outline its potential to inform and guide political strategy and mobilization.

The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is often described as unique and exceptional with little resemblance to other historical or ongoing colonial conflicts. Yet, for Zionism, like other settler colonial projects such as the British colonization of Ireland or European settlement of North America, South Africa or Australia, the imperative is to control the land and its resources -- and to displace the original inhabitants. Indeed, as conference keynote speaker Patrick Wolfe, one of the foremost scholars on settler colonialism and professor at La Trobe University in Victoria, Australia, argues, "the logic of this project, a sustained institutional tendency to eliminate the Indigenous population, informs a range of historical practices that might otherwise appear distinct--invasion is a structure not an event."[i]

Therefore, the classification of the Zionist movement as a settler colonial project, and the Israeli state as its manifestation, is not merely intended as a statement on the historical origins of Israel, nor as a rhetorical or polemical device. Rather, the aim is to highlight Zionism`s structural continuities and the ideology which informs Israeli policies and practices in Palestine and toward Palestinians everywhere. Thus, the Nakba -- whether viewed as a spontaneous, violent episode in war, or the implementation of a preconceived master plan -- should be understood as both the precondition for the creation of Israel and the logical outcome of Zionist settlement in Palestine.

Moreover, it is this same logic that sustains the continuation of the Nakba today. As remarked by Benny Morris, “had he [David Ben Gurion] carried out full expulsion--rather than partial--he would have stabilised the State of Israel for generations.”[ii] Yet, plagued by an “instability”--defined by the very existence of the Palestinian nation--Israel continues its daily state practices in its quest to fulfill Zionism’s logic to maximize the amount of land under its control with the minimum number of Palestinians on it. These practices take a painful array of manifestations: aerial and maritime bombardment, massacre and invasion, house demolitions, land theft, identity card confiscation, racist laws and loyalty tests, the wall, the siege on Gaza, cultural appropriation, and the dependence on willing (or unwilling) native collaboration and security arrangements, all with the continued support and backing of imperial power. 

Despite these enduring practices however, the settler colonial paradigm has largely fallen into disuse. As a paradigm, it once served as a primary ideological and political framework for all Palestinian political factions and trends, and informed the intellectual work of committed academics and revolutionary scholars, both Palestinians and Jews.

The conference thus asks where and why the settler colonial paradigm was lost, both in scholarship on Palestine and in politics; how do current analyses and theoretical trends that have arisen in its place address present and historical realities? While acknowledging the creativity of these new interpretations, we must nonetheless ask: when exactly did Palestinian natives find themselves in a "post-colonial" condition? When did the ongoing struggle over land become a "post-conflict" situation? When did Israel become a "post-Zionist" society? And when did the fortification of Palestinian ghettos and reservations become "state-building"?

In outlining settler colonialism as a central paradigm from which to understand Palestine, this conference re-invigorates it as a tool by which to analyze the present situation. In doing so, it contests solutions which accommodate Zionism, and more significantly, builds settler colonialism as a political analysis that can embolden and inform a strategy of active, mutual, and principled Palestinian alignment with the Arab struggle for self-determination, and indigenous struggles in the US, Latin America, Oceania, and elsewhere.

Such an alignment would expand the tools available to Palestinians and their solidarity movement, and reconnect the struggle to its own history of anti-colonial internationalism. At its core, this internationalism asserts that the Palestinian struggle against Zionist settler colonialism can only be won when it is embedded within, and empowered by, the broader Arab movement for emancipation and the indigenous, anti-racist and anti-colonial movement--from Arizona to Auckland.

SOAS Palestine Society invites everyone to join us at what promises to be a significant intervention in Palestine activism and scholarship.

For over 30 years, SOAS Palestine Society has heightened awareness and understanding of the Palestinian people, their rights, culture, and struggle for self-determination, amongst students, faculty, staff, and the broader public. SOAS Palestine society aims to continuously push the frontiers of discourse in an effort to make provocative arguments and to stimulate debate and organizing for justice in Palestine through relevant conferences, and events ranging from the intellectual and political impact of Edward Said`s life and work (2004), international law and the Palestine question (2005), the economy of Palestine and its occupation (2006), the one state (2007), 60 Years of Nakba, 60 Years of Resistance (2009), and most recently, the Left in Palestine (2010).

For more information on the SOAS Palestine Society 7th annual conference, Past is Present: Settler Colonialism in Palestine: www.soaspalsoc.org

SOAS Palestine Society Organizing Collective is a group of committed students that has undertaken to organize annual academic conferences on Palestine since 2003.

 


[i] Patrick Wolfe, Settler Colonialism and the Transformation of Anthropology: The Politics and Poetics of an Ethnographic Event, Cassell, London, p. 163

[ii] Interview with Benny Morris, Survival of the Fittest, Haaretz, 9. January 2004, http://cosmos.ucc.ie/cs1064/jabowen/IPSC/php/art.php?aid=5412