Why BDS is the Wrong Option (part 2)

BDS is morally unjustified. This may seem a touch bold given that campaigners in favour of BDS claim that their action is in pursuit of justice for Palestinians. I don’t know which theory of justice they are appealing to but two fairly obvious objections to BDS is that it is racist, and an unjustified form of collective punishment. Clearly this is not about Justice.

A third and perhaps understated objection to BDS is that it is the wrong policy. By that I mean that unless its aim is merely to exclude Jews and Israelis from the life and community of nations, it is certain to fail to achieve its aims. Yet when we start to examine the aims of the BDS movement we realise that these are far from clear.

In South Africa, it was clear what the boycotters wanted; an end to Apartheid legislation and the enactment of universal suffrage. Contrast this to the case of Israel; campaigners for BDS are a broad church; some are in favour of a one-state solution, others are in favour of two states for two nations. Thus the call to boycott is not accompanied by any clear standards which would guarantee the ending of the boycott. This is itself an objection to the argument in favour of BDS. After all, even if a boycott were justified (which it isn’t), it isn’t justified to boycott a nation without telling that nation what they must do in order to end the boycott.

This reality has been enunciated by none other than Norman Finkelstein. In a Frank exchange posted on YouTube, Finkelstein states unambiguously that the campaign for BDS is disingenuous. This is because BDS does not seek to create a Palestinian state, rather the aim of the boycott is to punish Israel until it agrees to national suicide; accepting the non-existent right of return for Arabs to sovereign Israeli territory or other demands which amount to the end of Jewish sovereignty. The campaign for BDS cloaks itself in the language of human rights but even Norman Finkelstein recognises that its unstated aim is to deny the Jewish people the right to self-determination of nations in their ancient homeland. It goes without saying that this is an unreasonable demand, which has no justification in either law or morality.

It’s natural to say that of the aim of BDS is to reverse the outcome of the 1948-49 war then this is a non-starter. Yet, even in the best case scenario that BDS is a tactic to secure a Palestinian state in the territories east of the Green line and bring peace to the region, it is still the wrong tactic.

Source: freedigitalphotos.net. Photo by digitalart 

Only the Israeli people can agree to withdraw back to the Green Line and so any measure taken must convince the Israeli people. There is a long history of boycotts of Jews. Even if there were no anti-Semitism; BDS would still be interpreted by the overwhelming majority of Israelis as an attack not on their government but as an attack on them as Jews. If the aim is to pressure the general population, it would backfire spectacularly. Jews in Israel would not reconsider Israeli policy but rather lurch to the right in the face of what they would understand as a racist attack.

So if you still support BDS then you support something that is unjustified (because it is racist and strips Jews of human rights). Much worse BDS is ultimately futile. If you really want to help the Palestinian Arabs, then encourage co-existence projects and support moderate voices on both sides. Silencing and excluding Israelis won’t achieve anything.