One sign that BDS, the international boycott, divestment and sanctions campaign, is working is the fact that several hard-core opponents of BDS have begun to put pressure on the Israeli government to declare a freeze on settlements outside the Israeli barrier inside the West Bank. They are talking about just a partial freeze on a 48-year project of colonization, but the pressure shows that even diehard supporters who ascribe BDS to anti-Semitism acknowledge that the Israeli occupation is aiding the international campaign to isolate the country.
The latest to support a settlement freeze is the center-right Israeli politician Yair Lapid. Lapid has described BDS as the devil-incarnate: he told a NY synagogue that BDS is being led by the same people who orchestrated the 9/11 attacks on the U.S. But he now tells Jeffrey Goldberg that Israel has to do something to (in Goldberg’s words) “mitigate BDS in some way:”
There is an unholy alliance between the Israeli left and the Israeli right about the settlers. Both of them want to say that every settlement is the same. There’s no difference, for example, between Gush Etzion [south of Jerusalem] or Itamar [in the northern West Bank]. Why? Because the left wants to give away everything, and the right doesn’t want to give away anything. I’m saying, “No, it’s not the same.” In the future, we will not be able to be in Itamar because it doesn’t make any sense, because of where it is. And yes, we’re going to keep the [major settlement] blocs.
Lapid said that if Israel convened a regional peace summit in Cairo, with Israelis, Palestinians, Saudis, Jordan, the UAE, and the Palestinian Authority, the photographs that would go out to the world would undermine the BDS movement.
Think of saying to them, “These ideas you’re promoting, do they promote justice, or do they promote division and further dispute?” So yes, it would be very helpful if there will be any proactive, real try at negotiation.
Last week at the 92nd Street Y, former Israeli ambassador Michael Oren also endorsed the idea of a settlement freeze, though he predicated it on Hillary Clinton become president:
If she wins, I would hope that we would adjust our policies accordingly. I have very strong feelings about the peace process….You can’t call it the two state solution now, but you have a two state situation, de facto, in the West Bank, and let’s work to make it better, and let’s limit where we build our settlements, the most controversial thing. Let’s limit it to the settlement blocs, those areas that we all know are going to be part of the Jewish state if we ever have a two state solution. Whenever, no matter– let’s limit it. I think we’d have to adopt that kind of party policy if she were to be elected– to get in a different place.
Though Oren also said that Israel has a “diplomatic responsibility” to counter BDS by making policy changes to ameliorate the conditions of Palestinians under occupation.
So if we move ahead in the way I’ve suggested on the two state situation, I think that will also help us on BDS.
The other speaker at the event, writer Jonathan Rosen, asked whether Oren thought that Israeli settlement policies are affecting BDS. Oren responded:
Sometimes– sometimes they make BDS’s work easier for them.
So BDS is effectively pressuring these diehard Zionists to try and alleviate the occupation. This is what BDS proponents have always said about their campaign: that it is the only means of pressuring Israel to change its behavior; governments have failed to do so. Though of course BDS advocates human rights that go far beyond what Lapid, Oren, Shavit, and Foxman are talking about when they speak of a settlement freeze.
To understand what these men mean when they speak of the settlement blocs, look at this map from B’Tselem. It shows the Israeli barrier crisscrossing through the West Bank mostly east of the old Green Line. In a number of cases, the barrier juts out into the West Bank to include Ma’ale Adumim near Jerusalem, Gush Etzion around Bethlehem, and Ariel near Nablus. And the shaded area in the Jordan Valley is something else entirely: military occupation that Israel says it will not end, to defend itself on the east.
At last there is a voice from the centrist opposition calling for moderation of Likud’s stance, (best summarized by Deputy Foreign Minister Hotovely on what to say to the international community: “It’s all ours. G-d gave it to us. It says so right in the Torah. What else is there to talk about.”)
I predict a chaotic deterioration in Likud’s absolutism, leading to some event, a word from Netanyahu resetting practical goals: “it makes no sense to speak of peace with the international community, the Arab League, the Palestinians, before January 1 (or before they guaranty us the end of BDS),” or, alternatively, a vote of no confidence from the Knesset throwing the bums out.
“partial” key word.
Abe Foxman “because it’s smart for us to do it, regardless of whether we think it’s right or wrong” More rebranding efforts that will continue to fail. Although clearly one can never underestimate the efforts to stall making a real deal.
Obviously not a grammar person. Did see BDS written above as BCS “the photograph that would go out to the world would undermine the BCS movement”
Will any of your Mondo team be putting together a piece on the commercials undermining the P5+1 efforts that are now playing on MSNBC several times an hour? Probably more on Fox etc. Hammering the public with fear of Iran. Supported and paid for by the group “United against a nuclear Iran” Dennis Ross and team United Against Nuclear Iran
http://www.unitedagainstnucleariran
“Lapid said that if Israel convened a regional peace summit in Cairo, with Israelis, Palestinians, Saudis, Jordan, the UAE, and the Palestinian Authority, the photographs that would go out to the world would undermine the BCS movement”.
I presume you meant “BDS ” movement.
In any event , what needs to happen is to put a full freeze on fake peace talks.The Palestinians should flip their finger at any attempt to resurrect the same old time wasting talks about talks about talks.
Israel will continue killing and stealing and the usual crimes they commit as they know no other way.The illegal squatters will be out in force if any Israeli leader gives up one dunam of the so called “greater Israel”.Lapid has reached the outer limits of his imagination and is close to falling into a black hole.
The 2SS is dead and buried.Let it lie in peace.On with full bore BDS as obviously the zionists are getting very worried about the damage Israel can suffer at the hands of BDS.
As the saying goes, if you see your enemy drowning , throw him an anvil.
Zio-supremacists are interested in “peace” and in order to achieve it they’re prepared to give up as little as possible of what they have stolen.
But they continue to have absolutely no interest in justice, accountability and equality.
Phil know this is off topic but really wondering about why and how many mainstream outlets are quietly boycotting the Leveretts (Going to Tehran). As I shared last week on Friday I called into NPR’S ON POINT the phone screener stated that the Leverett’s lacked “credibility” We went on to have a mini conversation. Last time Leveretts were on that program was in 2009.
Hillary has been on Melissa Harris Perry’s numerous times, Washington Journal in March of this year, CNN periodically, British outlets, Al Jazeera. But really wondering why an outlet like ON POINT (one of their major sponsors is the Ruderman Foundation..are they an influential group?) would be boycotting them. Of course can guess. Think this could be an interesting piece if someone could directly contact Leveretts and find out who and why they have been quietly boycotted.
So telling that so many outlets really do not want to educate the public based on the facts about Iran.
Today Senator Cruz was on MSNBC Joe Scarborough ranting about Iran based on fueled myths. Not one individual around that table including BBC’s Katy Kay (in for Mika), Mike Barnacle, Joe Scarborough challenged Cruz’s unsubstantiated and inflammatory claims about Iran. Not one challenged during Cruz’s fear mongering rant.
In fact after the rant Joe reminded me of Meet the Press’s deceased host Tim Russert when he had Cheney on in the run up to the invasion of Iraq and after. When Cheney was asked about Iran he went on in a fearful rant about Iran. Russert did not challenge him AT ALL. Instead Russert asked Cheney “what can we do” (as if everything Cheney said was accurate). This is exactly what Scarborough did after Cruz’s fearful, inflammatory rant about Iran this morning. Scarborough sat back and asked “what can we do.” As if everything Cruz had said about Iran was accurate.
Last week Morning Joe had General Hayden on who ranted about Iran based on unsubstantiated claims. No challenges from anyone around the table on Morning Joe. Not one challenge.
We have witnessed this dangerous scene before