[News] Israel's new strategy: sabotage and attack the global justice movement
Anti-Imperialist News
news at freedomarchives.org
Wed Feb 17 12:23:53 EST 2010
Israel's new strategy: "sabotage" and "attack" the global justice movement
http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article11080.shtml
Ali Abunimah, The Electronic Intifada, 16 February 2010
An extraordinary series of articles, reports and presentations by
Israel's influential Reut Institute has identified the global
movement for justice, equality and peace as an "existential threat"
to Israel and called on the Israeli government to direct substantial
resources to "attack" and possibly engage in criminal "sabotage" of
this movement in what Reut believes are its various international
"hubs" in London, Madrid, Toronto, the San Francisco Bay Area and beyond.
The Reut Institute's analyses hold that Israel's traditional
strategic doctrine -- which views threats to the state's existence in
primarily military terms, to be met with a military response -- is
badly out of date. Rather, what Israel faces today is a combined
threat from a "Resistance Network" and a "Delegitimization Network."
The Resistance Network is comprised of political and armed groups
such as Hamas and Hizballah who "rel[y] on military means to sabotage
every move directed at affecting separation between Israel and the
Palestinians or securing a two-state solution"
("<http://reut-institute.org/en/Publication.aspx?PublicationId=3769>The
Delegitimization Challenge: Creating a Political Firewall, Reut
Institute, 14 February 2010).
Furthermore, the "Resistance Network" allegedly aims to cause
Israel's political "implosion" -- a la South Africa, East Germany or
the Soviet Union -- rather than bring about military defeat through
direct confrontation on the battlefield.
The "Delegitimization Network" -- which Reut Institute president and
former Israeli government advisor Gidi Grinstein provocatively claims
is in an "unholy alliance" with the Resistance Network -- is made up
of the broad, decentralized and informal movement of peace and
justice, human rights, and BDS (boycott, divestment and sanctions)
activists all over the world. Its manifestations include protests
against Israeli officials visiting universities, Israeli Apartheid
Week, faith-based and trade union-based activism, and "lawfare" --
the use of universal jurisdiction to bring legal accountability for
alleged Israeli war criminals. The Reut Institute even cited my
speech to the student conference on BDS held at Hampshire College
last November as a guide to how the "delegitimization" strategy
supposedly works
("<http://reut-institute.org/en/Publication.aspx?PublicationId=3766>Eroding
Israel's Legitimacy in the International Arena," Reut Institute, 28
January 2010).
The combined "attack" from "resisters" and "delegitimizers," Reut
says, "possesses strategic significance, and may develop into a
comprehensive existential threat within a few years." It further
warns that a "harbinger of such a threat would be the collapse of the
two-state solution as an agreed framework for resolving the
Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and the coalescence behind a 'one-state
solution' as a new alternative framework."
At a basic level, Reut's analysis represents an advance over the most
primitive and hitherto dominant layers of Israeli strategic thinking;
it reflects an understanding, as I put it in my speech at Hampshire,
that "Zionism simply cannot bomb, kidnap, assassinate, expel,
demolish, settle and lie its way to legitimacy and acceptance."
But underlying the Reut Institute's analysis is a complete inability
to disentangle cause and effect. It seems to assume that the dramatic
erosion in Israel's international standing since its wars on Lebanon
in 2006 and Gaza in 2009 is a result of the prowess of the
"delegitimization network" to which it imputes wholly nefarious,
devious and unwholesome goals -- effectively the "destruction of Israel."
It blames "delegitimizers" and "resisters" for frustrating the
two-state solution but ignores Israel's relentless and ongoing
settlement-building drive -- supported by virtually every state organ
-- calculated and intended to make Israeli withdrawal from the West
Bank impossible.
It never considers for a moment that the mounting criticism of
Israel's actions might be justified, or that the growing ranks of
people ready to commit their time and efforts to opposing Israel's
actions are motivated by genuine outrage and a desire to see justice,
equality and an end to bloodshed. In other words, Israel is
delegitimizing itself.
Reut does not recommend to the Israeli cabinet -- which recently held
a special session to hear a presentation of the think tank's findings
-- that Israel should actually change its behavior toward
Palestinians and Lebanese. It misses the point that apartheid South
Africa also once faced a global "delegitimization network" but that
this has now completely disappeared. South Africa, however, still
exists. Once the cause motivating the movement disappeared -- the
rank injustice of formal apartheid -- people packed up their signs
and their BDS campaigns and went home.
Instead, Reut recommends to the Israeli government an aggressive and
possibly criminal counter-offensive. A powerpoint presentation
Grinstein made to the recent Herzliya Conference on Israeli national
security actually calls on Israel's "intelligence agencies to focus"
on the named and unnamed "hubs" of the "delegitimization network" and
to engage in "attacking catalysts" of this network. In its "The
Delegitimization Challenge: Creating a Political Firewall" document,
Reut recommends that "Israel should sabotage network catalysts."
The use of the word "sabotage" is particularly striking and should
draw the attention of governments, law enforcement agencies and
university officials concerned about the safety and welfare of their
students and citizens. The only definition of "sabotage" in United
States law deems it to be an act of war on a par with treason, when
carried out against the United States. In addition, in common usage,
the American Heritage Dictionary defines sabotage as "Treacherous
action to defeat or hinder a cause or an endeavor; deliberate
subversion." It is difficult to think of a legitimate use of this
term in a political or advocacy context.
At the very least, Reut seems to be calling for Israel's spy agencies
to engage in covert activity to interfere with the exercise of legal
free speech, association and advocacy rights in the United States,
Canada and European Union countries, and possibly to cause harm to
individuals and organizations. These warnings of Israel's possible
intent -- especially in light of its long history of criminal
activity on foreign soil -- should not be taken lightly.
The Reut Institute, based in Tel Aviv, raises a significant amount of
tax-exempt funds in the United States through a nonprofit arm called
American Friends of the Reut Institute (AFRI). According to its
public filings, AFRI sent almost $2 million to the Reut Institute in
2006 and 2007.
In addition to a state-sponsored international "sabotage" campaign,
Reut also recommends a "soft" policy. This specifically involves
better hasbara or state propaganda to greenwash Israel as a high-tech
haven for environmental technologies and high culture -- what it
terms "Brand Israel."
Other elements include "maintain[ing] thousands of personal
relationships with political, cultural, media and security-related
elites and influentials" around the world, and "harnessing Jewish and
Israeli diaspora communities" even more tightly to its cause. It even
emphasizes that Israel should use "international aid" to boost its
image (its perfunctory foray into earthquake-devastated Haiti was an
example of this tactic).
What ties together all these strategies is that they are aimed at
frustrating, delaying and distracting attention from the fundamental
issue: that Israel -- despite its claims to be a liberal and
democratic state -- is an ultranationalist ethnocracy that relies on
the violent suppression of the most fundamental rights of millions of
Palestinians, soon to be a demographic majority, to maintain the
status quo. There is no "game changer" in Reut's new strategy.
Reut is apparently unaware even of the irony of trying to reform
"Brand Israel" as something cuddly, while at the same time publicly
recommending that Israel's notorious spies "sabotage" peace groups on
foreign soil.
But there are two lessons we must heed: Reut's analysis vindicates
the effectiveness of the BDS strategy, and as Israeli elites
increasingly fear for the long-term prospects of the Zionist project
they are likely to be more ruthless, unscrupulous and desperate than ever.
Ali Abunimah is co-founder of The Electronic Intifada and author of
<http://electronicintifada.net/bytopic/store/548.shtml>One Country: A
Bold Proposal to End the Israeli-Palestinian Impasse.
Freedom Archives
522 Valencia Street
San Francisco, CA 94110
415 863-9977
www.Freedomarchives.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://freedomarchives.org/pipermail/news_freedomarchives.org/attachments/20100217/f290a423/attachment.htm>
More information about the News
mailing list