<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div id="container" class="container font-size5">
<div style="display: block;" id="reader-header" class="header"> <font
size="-2"><a
href="https://al-shabaka.org/commentaries/bds-discussing-difficult-issues-in-a-fast-growing-movement/"
id="reader-domain" class="domain"><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://al-shabaka.org/commentaries/bds-discussing-difficult-issues-in-a-fast-growing-movement/">https://al-shabaka.org/commentaries/bds-discussing-difficult-issues-in-a-fast-growing-movement/</a></a></font>
<h1 id="reader-title">BDS: Discussing Difficult Issues in a
Fast-Growing Movement - Al-Shabaka</h1>
<div id="reader-credits" class="credits">by Omar
Barghouti on June 14, 2016</div>
</div>
<div class="content">
<div style="display: block;" id="moz-reader-content">
<div
xml:base="https://al-shabaka.org/commentaries/bds-discussing-difficult-issues-in-a-fast-growing-movement/"
id="readability-page-1" class="page">
<div class="post large-9 large-centered columns">
<p>Israel’s attacks on the Boycott, Divestment and
Sanctions (BDS) movement and other human rights
defenders living under occupation, such as Al Haq staff,
have dominated the headlines in recent weeks, including
the direct threats made by leading Israeli officials
against BDS activists and in particular against the
movement’s co-founder Omar Barghouti.</p>
<p>Beyond the headlines, the work goes on, as does
continuous debate and discussion to further the movement
amongst Palestinians at home and abroad as well as among
global solidarity activists. There is much to discuss
and some of the issues are difficult ones, including
questions of framing. Al-Shabaka Executive Director <a
href="https://al-shabaka.org/en/author/nadiah/">Nadia
Hijab</a> discussed some of these issues in a
wide-ranging conversation with Omar Barghouti.</p>
<p>Omar began by clarifying that all the views he
expresses here are his and his alone; they do not
necessarily reflect the views of the wider BDS movement
or its Palestinian leadership, the BDS National
Committee (BNC).</p>
<p><em><strong>Omar, thanks for making the time at this
especially difficult juncture (to put it mildly) for
the movement and for you personally. The BDS
movement’s goals – self-determination, freedom from
occupation, equality for the Palestinian citizens of
Israel, and the right of return – encompass
Palestinian rights under international law. But we
know that the BDS movement will not on its own
achieve Palestinian rights. What other movements are
needed and what mix of strategies is necessary? </strong></em></p>
<p>Boycotts have historically been one of the main popular
resistance strategies available to Palestinians of all
walks of life, and today, in the realm of international
solidarity, BDS is the most important and strategic form
of support to our struggle for self-determination. The
BDS movement has never claimed that it is the only
strategy to achieve full Palestinian rights under
international law. Nor is it possible to expect it to
deliver Palestinian rights by itself. Among other
strategies are, for example, local popular resistance
against the wall and colonies as well as legal
strategies to hold Israel and its leaders accountable
for the crimes they have committed against the
Palestinian people.</p>
<p>In fact, one of the most significant strategies
available to us that is hardly being pursued is
diplomatic and political work with parliaments and
governments across the world to isolate Israel’s regime
of occupation, settler-colonialism and apartheid and
have sanctions imposed on it similar to those applied to
apartheid South Africa. Taking this path is primarily
blocked by a complicit Palestinian officialdom that
lacks a democratic mandate, principles and vision.</p>
<hr>
<p align="LEFT"><span><em>"The BDS movement has never
claimed that it is the only strategy to achieve full
Palestinian rights...Nor is it possible to expect it
to deliver Palestinian rights by itself."</em></span></p>
<hr>
<p align="LEFT">A very important component of Palestinian
resistance to Israel’s regime are Palestinians in exile,
who represent half the Palestinian people. We are not
just talking about refugee communities, who are clearly
the most important to consider, but also Palestinians,
like those active in Adalah New York, Students for
Justice in Palestine chapters, social movements in the
UK or Chile, and their equivalent across the world of
Palestinian communities in exile, who play a leading
role in promoting Palestinian rights, including through
BDS-related actions.</p>
<p>Palestinian citizens of Israel are also often forgotten
when people talk about Palestinian resistance, despite
their crucial role not only in steadfastness in the face
of Israel’s regime of Zionist settler-colonialism but
also their active popular, academic, cultural, legal and
political resistance to the regime and its
institutionalized and legalized racist structures and
policies.</p>
<p>Some Palestinians in exile, however, claim they are
unwilling to support BDS because “Palestinians don’t
‘do’ solidarity with our own people.”</p>
<p>But the traditional Palestinian political discourse of
the 1960s, 1970s, and 1980s is largely gone. In South
Africa, the national liberation movement remained active
until the very last minute, but we have, unfortunately,
lost much of what made up the Palestinian national
liberation movement largely due to the Oslo agreements.
The Palestinian leadership, with the explicit or
implicit endorsement of most Palestinian political
parties, has surrendered basic Palestinian rights and
accepted dictates by the United States and European
Union to adapt to most of Israel’s regime of colonial
oppression.</p>
<p>The Palestinian people is now in a state of loss and
disarray. There is no longer a Palestinian “national
consensus,” if ever there was one. Even the Palestinian
political parties, right and left, Islamist and secular,
with almost no exception, talk of “independence” and not
national liberation, often forgetting the refugees and
always omitting Palestinian citizens of Israel from the
very definition of the Palestinian people.</p>
<p>It is up to the entire Palestinian people to determine
its future and the solution to this colonial conflict.
In the meantime, every Palestinian individual, group or
coalition must strive to weaken the Israeli regime of
oppression, as a prerequisite to attain Palestinian
rights under international law. We in the BDS movement
have opted for developing one, time-honored form of
Palestinian resistance and the most effective form of
grassroots international solidarity with it, based on
rights, not political solutions.</p>
<p>BDS of course recognizes that there are other
strategies and approaches; we’re just saying that we
chose to focus on the rights, not the solutions, because
for any political solution – determined by the majority
of Palestinians everywhere – to be just, comprehensive
and sustainable it must accommodate our rights under
international law. Moreover, to be effective you need to
have something close to a Palestinian consensus, and to
achieve that we had to stick to the most principled and
strategic lowest common denominator, to the most
significant and least controversial goals of the
Palestinian people that hardly anyone can object to:
Ending the 1967 occupation, ending the system of
apartheid, and fulfilling the right of return of
Palestinian refugees to their homes and properties from
which they were ethnically cleansed during and since the
Nakba. And we adhere to these rights strictly.</p>
<p>This approach has brought us broad support amongst
Palestinians. The BNC recently organized a relatively
large rally in Ramallah in a show of popular Palestinian
support for BDS. I personally do not see that kind of
street mobilization as a decisive indicator of popular
support, but my colleagues insisted we needed to do it
in order to demonstrate to the world the popular appeal
of BDS. There were over 2,000 people and many speakers
from political parties and grassroots movements and
unions, all of whom expressed strong support for BDS.
One of the outcomes of that rally was to defuse the
perception among some local circles that BDS was
“elitist”.</p>
<p>There are those who don’t want to support the
nonviolent BDS movement because it’s “below their
political ceiling.” Being revolutionary, in my view, is
not about raising “revolutionary” slogans that are not
implementable and that therefore have little chance of
contributing to processes aimed at ending the reality of
oppression. What is truly revolutionary is raising a
slogan that is principled and morally consistent and yet
conducive to action on the ground that can lead to real
change towards justice and emancipation. Otherwise you
remain an armchair intellectual.</p>
<p><em><strong>And yet the way the BDS movement is
sometimes represented makes it sound as though it
alone can actually achieve Palestinian rights. The
frequent references to South Africa convey that
impression, whether intended or not.</strong></em></p>
<p>We Palestinians always compare our strategies and
progress to South Africa and other movements for
justice, self-determination and human rights – and we
know that we’re missing key pillars that were critical
to their success.</p>
<p>In South Africa, for example, the African National
Congress-led struggle identified four strategic pillars
for the struggle to end apartheid: Mass mobilizations,
armed resistance, an underground political movement, and
international solidarity (particularly in the form of
boycotts and sanctions). There is no “copy-paste”
strategy to achieve liberation and human rights – every
colonial experience is different and has its unique
particularities. We have been engaged in evolving our
own Palestinian strategies that suit our environment of
struggle for justice and dignity.</p>
<hr>
<p align="LEFT"><span><em>“Being revolutionary… is not
about raising 'revolutionary' slogans … What is
truly revolutionary is raising a slogan that is
principled and morally consistent and yet conducive
to action on the ground that can lead to real change
towards justice”</em></span></p>
<hr>
<p>In the case of the Palestinian struggle, the pillar of
the underground movement is limited to Gaza, where it is
isolated. International law upholds the right of any
nation under a foreign occupation to resist it by all
means, including armed resistance, so long as all forms
of resistance themselves adhere to international law and
human rights principles. Aside from that, as human
rights advocates, we are obliged to consider the
cost-benefit of this pillar at this stage and to measure
the human price of any resistance.</p>
<p>As for mass mobilization, what we can do in the
occupied Palestinian territory in terms of popular
resistance, for example, against the Wall, is fairly
limited. And it is not really a mass movement in the way
that, for example, the recent teachers' strike was
popular, or the strikes against the Salam Fayyad
government’s neo-liberalism or against the social
security law were popular.</p>
<p>The whole question of the effectiveness of different
forms of resistance is key and we in the BDS movement
engage in the question of the effectiveness of our
nonviolent, international law-abiding strategies at
every stage.</p>
<p><em><strong>Another concern is that some of the BDS
movement’s discourse makes it sound as if
Palestinians are on the point of achieving their
rights. That comes out not only in the frequent
references to the South Africa “moment”, but also in
statements that say that a “tipping point” has been
reached.</strong></em></p>
<p>Yes, but when we speak of a tipping point, we mean a
tipping point only in terms of the specific pillar of
international isolation. The measure of effectiveness is
whether you’re achieving your goals or not. BDS is one
of the strategies of internal resistance and it is also
the most important international strategy. We never
claimed otherwise. Why, then, should BDS be held
responsible, say, for the inability of the Palestinian
people to achieve our goals of self-determination and
national liberation? At least give us credit for being
realistic.</p>
<p><strong><em>There are many and growing critiques of the
international law framework. Does that pose a
problem for the BDS movement given it is grounded in
international law?</em></strong></p>
<p>To be effective in mobilizing international pressure by
groups and individuals of conscience against Israel’s
regime of oppression, as well as morally consistent, we
must adopt human rights principles that are as universal
as possible as well as a language that can touch people
across the world and inspire them to action. That’s the
language of international law. We know the inherent
flaws of international law as well as anyone. But we
also know that it is either that or the law of the
jungle, and the latter does not work for us, on
principle and practically, given that we are by far the
physically weaker party.</p>
<p>We don’t want symbolic rhetoric: We’re sick and tired
of rhetorical support. We need effective, strategic
action that has a chance to undermine the system of
oppression in order to make it more realistic for the
Palestinian people to realize our UN-stipulated rights.
The minimal action people can take is to end their
complicity. That’s a profound legal and moral obligation
to end this injustice; it is not an act of charity.</p>
<hr>
<p align="LEFT"><span><em>“We Palestinians always compare
our strategies and progress to South Africa and
other movements for justice, self-determination and
human rights – and we know that we’re missing key
pillars that were critical to their success.”</em></span></p>
<hr>
<p>What are the alternatives to international law? It’s
true that the colonial empires wrote it. It’s true that
it is not weighted in favor of the peoples of the world,
but it is not a dogma or a static set of laws that are
engraved in stone. There is a simplistic view of
international law that doesn’t see it as something
dynamic, as something where we, through our persistent
and mass struggles, can affect the interpretation and
the application. After all, we are not asking for the
moon; we are simply working to consistently apply
international law to Israel and to end its exceptional
status as a state above the law. That is a simple yet
far-reaching demand that requires years of strategic
struggle.</p>
<p><em><strong>There is lack of clarity around the
normalization guidelines that is often a source of
tension with activists – and especially among
Palestinians who may engage in activities that are
said to be “normalizing” and who don’t appreciate
what seems like having their nationalism called into
question.</strong></em></p>
<p>The normalization guidelines are very clear. The
reference document to that was adopted by consensus at
the first national Palestinian BDS conference, held in
November 2007. Normalization, in this context, is
understood by Arabs, including Palestinians, to mean
making something that is inherently abnormal, like a
relationship of colonial oppression, appear deceptively
normal. According to the BDS guidelines, there here are
two main principles in order for a relationship between
a Palestinian (or Arab) party and an Israeli party not
to be considered normalization. The Israeli side must
recognize the comprehensive Palestinian rights under
international law, and the relationship itself should be
one of co-resistance to oppression, not “co-existence”
under oppression.</p>
<p>The whole point is that such relationships should not
legitimize, fig-leaf or whitewash Israel’s violations of
Palestinian rights. To consider an example that may not
be immediately obvious, say an organization in the
United States is organizing a conference and has
received sponsorship from Israel or an Israeli
institution that is complicit in violations of
Palestinian rights. And let’s say that the US
organization is willing to have a panel that would
include Palestinian speakers so as to provide space for
a Palestinian voice. Participation under these
circumstances would mean that we are effectively
normalizing Israeli sponsorship – in other words
normalizing the violations of our rights. This is too
high a price to pay for our voices to be heard, as
important as that is, given the mainstream media’s
suppression of these voices. So we work closely with
partners to apply pressure to rescind that Israeli
sponsorship, and if that fails we call for a boycott.</p>
<p><em><strong>But there are still gray areas, and it is
in the gray areas where problems can arise –
especially as some people take it on their shoulders
to speak on behalf of the BDS movement and to lay
down the law when in fact they have no authority to
do so.</strong></em></p>
<p>There are always gray areas. I would say 90% of the
cases that we deal with are indeed gray. When we come
across a gray area, we go back to the principle and try
our best to measure profit vs. loss. BDS, after all, is
not intended to be a dogma, but rather an effective
strategy to contribute to our struggle for our rights.</p>
<p>Some Palestinians want to have their cake and eat it
too. They allow themselves to engage in projects and
activities that clearly conflict with the
anti-normalization guidelines, adopted since 2007 by the
broadest coalition of political parties, unions and
networks in Palestinian society, yet they reject any
characterization of those activities as normalization
simply because they are “patriotic” and “no one should
call that into question.” In the BDS movement, we do not
call into question anyone’s patriotism and we never ever
label anyone or resort to personal attacks; that would
conflict with our principles as a movement. We also
reject any suppression of freedom of speech and the
simplistic and harmful dismissal of those engaged in
normalization activists as “traitors.”</p>
<hr>
<p align="LEFT"><span><em>“We attack positions and
statements but not individuals, and we don’t believe
in blacklists or any form of McCarthyism. It negates
our principles, it’s an abuse of power, and it’s
counter-productive.”</em></span></p>
<hr>
<p>The Palestinian BDS National Committee (BNC) simply
mobilizes <em>moral</em> pressure to expose
normalization activities in order to undermine
normalization. It is <em>vital</em> to counter
normalization activities because they constitute a key
weapon that Israel has used against the movement and
against the Palestinian struggle for rights in general.</p>
<p>And sometimes we do things that are seen as ahead of
their time or use language that is not yet accepted. For
example, when we first used apartheid as a key facet of
Israel’s regime of oppression or insisted on the right
of return in our international discourse, both were
frowned upon not only in the mainstream but even in some
Palestine solidarity circles in the west. Also, when the
2004 call by PACBI (the Palestinian Campaign for the
Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel) mentioned
Zionism as a racist ideology that has been a pillar in
Israel’s settler-colonial regime, this issue was hardly
discussed in most Palestine solidarity circles in the
west in the post-Oslo period.</p>
<p>It’s important not to conflate opposition to Zionism
and to Israel’s regime of colonial oppression and
apartheid as being an opposition to Jews: It is
absolutely not. The BDS movement has consistently and
categorically rejected all forms of racism, including
Islamophobia and anti-Semitism. The fact that 46% of
non-Orthodox Jewish-American men under 40 support a full
boycott of Israel to end its occupation and human rights
violations, according to a <a
href="https://libcloud.s3.amazonaws.com/862/5e/f/122/2014-jstreet-national-election-night-crosstabs.pdf">2014
poll</a>, partly attests to the inclusive, anti-racist
character of the movement.</p>
<p><em><strong>Can you give an example of what you do when
there is a gray area?</strong></em></p>
<p>We never take decisions as individual members of the
BNC or of its academic and cultural arm PACBI when
there’s a gray area; we always go back to the group and
decide collectively, based on the agreed upon
principles, not the personal opinions and biases of each
of us. We don’t give our advice or recommendation until
we reach consensus. If we have a deadlock we say to the
person seeking advice that we don’t have clear advice to
give them. We pick our battles. We don’t chase
everything, and we ignore so many targets based on
cost-benefit calculations.</p>
<p>We don’t issue edicts; rather, we issue advice. We
never say “thou shalt”.</p>
<hr>
<p align="LEFT"><span><em>“It is vital to counter
normalization activities because they constitute a
key weapon that Israel has used against the movement
and against the Palestinian struggle for rights in
general.”</em></span></p>
<hr>
<p>And we never use ad hominem attacks – we have never
done so since BDS was founded in 2005. We attack
positions and statements but not individuals, and we
don’t believe in blacklists or any form of McCarthyism.
It negates our principles, it’s an abuse of power, and
it’s counter-productive. Personally, I’ve never engaged
with anyone who, for example, attacks us as “agents of
imperialism” or similar ultra-left nonsense. We pick our
battles, as I said earlier, and we keep our eyes on the
real enemies.<br>
When we engage to stop a normalization activity, our
objective is always to first and foremost convince the
person involved to stop normalizing. You can’t use ad
hominem attacks and expect that person to side with you.
And in fact many Palestinians who were engaged in
normalization 10 years ago are now BDS supporters, and
that’s partly because we avoid personal injury. It’s
wrong on principle and it’s pragmatically wrong.</p>
<p>When someone has a question, we recommend seeking
advice from PACBI or the BNC, or one of our partners in
any given country and we seek to resolve it through
interactive debate. We now have much better mechanisms
to implement the guidelines.</p>
<p><em><strong>There is a gray area that was cited to me
as an example of something Palestinians don’t
understand, and indeed find problematic – that of
Arab passport holders entering Israel on a visa
issued by an Israeli embassy being treated as
normalization, as opposed to getting a permit issued
by the Israelis at the request of the Palestinian
Authority (PA). People don’t get the difference
because Israel issues both.</strong></em></p>
<p>That is a sticky point and a very difficult one. After
extensive debates, community meetings and discussions
with many Palestinian artists and cultural
organizations, we concluded that when an Arab passport
holder receives an Israeli visa he/she is normalizing
Arab relations with the regime of occupation,
settler-colonialism and apartheid by treating this
regime as if it were normal. Whereas obtaining a permit
from the Israeli occupation authorities through the PA
is not, despite the problematic nature of the PA’s role,
to put it mildly, because Palestinians under occupation
are in a coercive relationship with Israel: Palestinians
have no choice to receive family or friends from the
Arab world without dealing with the Israeli authorities.
But such dealings do not per se recognize Israel’s
regime as normal. Still, we recognize this as a
difficult area, and we admit that it is not the most
robust or irrefutable of our guidelines.</p>
<p>My question is this: Why don’t Palestinian BDS critics
at home or in exile write to us if they seek
clarification or want to share their criticisms in a
constructive way that strengthens our collective
movement? We get hundreds of emails daily from
solidarity activists but very few from Palestinians. A
few Palestinians attack BDS without bothering to first
write to the BNC and express their critique in a way
that can help make this already effective movement
better and more able to handle the many challenges
facing it. We are open to and we sincerely encourage
discussion and debate among Palestinians in our diverse
communities. I beg those with questions, criticisms, or
comments to communicate with us – just write to
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:pacbi@pacbi.org">pacbi@pacbi.org</a> or <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:info@bdsmovement.net">info@bdsmovement.net</a>. Despite the
workload we, as volunteers, have to deal with, we do our
utmost to respond to every email we receive, especially
one coming from a Palestinian sister or brother.</p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div> </div>
</div>
<div class="moz-signature">-- <br>
Freedom Archives
522 Valencia Street
San Francisco, CA 94110
415 863.9977
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.freedomarchives.org">www.freedomarchives.org</a>
</div>
</body>
</html>