BDS: Bringing Down Success
Jonathan Kovac, DC ’19, challenges the potential effectiveness of the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement (BDS) in bringing peace to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
Arriving at Yale in the fall of 2015, I hoped to start a new chapter of my life and, most importantly, find my “real” identity. Growing up in Israel and serving in the Israeli Defense Forces, one of the first questions I faced on campus was how many Palestinians I had killed. This insensitive question made me aware that it was necessary I encourage a more open discourse, more debate and a more genuine understanding of each other regarding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
Many people feel forced to take a side in this conflict, including supporting the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement (BDS), which calls for a cultural, political and academic boycott of Israel.
This conflict is too complex, too fueled with religion, politics, and history to pick one side over the other. Let us take as an example the Great March of Return. I was appalled when I first heard that Israeli forces had shot into the crowds during the march. However, I was conflicted when I viewed footage of Palestinian women and children used by Hamas as human shields, missiles launched into Israel, and snipers locked on Israeli targets. Call me conservative, but this is not a peaceful demonstration. On the other hand, Israeli aggression is often disproportionate and rightfully receives a lot of criticism. This once again reminded me that on this matter, and probably on all matters, it is important that we follow various and diverse news sources. One event can be told in a million different ways, all depending on the writer’s intentions.
The BDS movement would discourage an open discussion merely by demanding a boycott on any Israeli. This discussion should not be about blame or partisanship; it is about having an informed opinion. When people ask me today if I am pro-Palestine or pro-Israel, my answer is always pro-peace. In the past two Israeli elections, I cast my vote for center-left parties, which currently oppose the Netanyahu administration. But I do not, and cannot, pick a side between Israel and Palestine, simply because it is counterproductive to the goal of achieving peace. The purpose of this article is not to pick a side, but to render clear the negatives of supporting the BDS movement.
The sad reality is that in the current political state, the negotiation table is not an option. The Israeli population, driven by anxiety, mistrust, and disappointment, continues to gradually shift to the political right, effectively silencing parties that show willingness to negotiate and make concessions. Let us hope that the elections in April will change that for the better. On the other side, the rift between Hamas and the Palestinian Authority (PA) disables any progress in foreign and domestic matters; the reason why Gazans enjoy electricity for only four hours a day is the PA’s attempt to put pressure on Hamas. Ironically, those four hours of electricity are directly supplied by Israel. With a political front that is far from being united, both sides easily argue that they have no negotiating partner. In the current reality, the BDS movement will not move both sides closer to the negotiating table.
The BDS movement has celebrated several successes of academic and cultural boycotts, such as stopping the academic cooperation between the University of Johannesburg and Israeli academic institutions. But is it effective to boycott Israeli academics, which include both Israeli Jews and Arabs, a demographic which already tends to be leftist and an advocate for peace? Does it help to boycott Israeli activists and artists, only because they are Israelis, regardless of their opinions? No. This only drives a further wedge in this conflict. These boycotts sound closer to hate-driven activism than fruitful action. Finally, a complete boycott on Israel is virtually impossible. When you send your next text message, remember that Israeli developers helped to create the concept of texting. Next time you unlock your IPhone with facial recognition technology, remember that it was developed by an Israeli startup technology company. When you get lost driving and pull up the Waze app on your phone, remember that Israeli technology is guiding you back to your suite.
By supporting the BDS movement, you neglect the many other players to blame. I did not hear BDS demand a ban on Egyptian goods although Egypt closed its border to Gaza, reducing the supply of fuel, food, and other necessities to a minimum. I did not hear calls to boycott other Arab countries who refuse to grant millions of Palestinian refugees full civil rights and economic opportunity even after 50 years of living in refugee camps. I also did not hear the BDS question where the enormous amount of money (in 2018, 825 million USD) flowing into the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA), Hamas, and the PA, goes. According to several estimates, Palestinians are the largest per capita beneficiaries of foreign aid, which unfortunately flows into the wrong tunnels. Israelis believe that foreign aid is often diverted to pensions for families of murderers, tunnels built directly under Israeli homes, and thousands of missiles launched by Hamas. Palestinians see US money funding the Occupation, through the purchase of fighter jets and tanks that bomb Palestinian homes. As is so often the case, this is a matter of perspective, and the BDS surely does not present both perspectives.
The BDS movement is far from being the right path. Assuming that BDS will work just because a boycott worked in South Africa points to a grave misunderstanding of basic history. South African apartheid was fueled solely by racial motives, whereas this conflict, as mentioned, has complex layers, with both sides making fair arguments and demands. In addition, can we advocate for a movement whose leaders have repeatedly called for the destruction of the state of Israel? Can we associate ourselves with a movement, whose founder, Omar Barghouti, described the two-state solution as a dead idea?
The real question we should ask ourselves is what can we do on an individual basis? First and foremost, when discussing this heated topic, do not forget that each side has very legitimate reasons to advocate for their cause. Keep in mind that fairly judging one side or a specific event from afar is nearly impossible, especially when we inform ourselves by very few sources. If you are looking to make a difference, do not post something on social media and think you have done your share. This symbolic activism, BDS included, is the last thing that will bring about peace. Debate, discuss, and argue — even when it is uncomfortable. Call out all parties involved: Israel, Palestine, the US, the EU, Arab countries. Assuming our goal is to coexist and live in peace, boycotting one side will harm such efforts. We, as Yale students and potential future leaders, need to encourage open debate, work towards fully comprehending this conflict, and finally pick one side: peace.
