This Wednesday, UC Berkeley’s Student Senate will vote to override its President’s veto of a measure that calls for the University of California “to divest from companies that profit from and enable Israel’s occupation of Palestinian land, Israel’s illegal settlements, Israel’s illegal wall, and Israel’s demolition of Palestinian homes.” In a statement defending the veto, senate President Will Smelko — who had been inundated by e-mails opposing the meaure — cited the divisiveness of the proposal and that it would be unfair to single out Israel for divestment (J Street cites the ‘singling out’ argument too, in its opposition to the measure). Further reporting and background on the measure can be found here.
Yaman Salahi*** wrote ably that Singling out Israel is the right thing to do, but I don’t think he voices all of the arguments as to why in particular a single-minded activist focus on BDSing institutions connected to the illegal occupation of the Palestinian Territories is a great strategy and the right thing to do.
So, given that Israel is just one among many nations grossly violating the human rights of people under its control, why is it smart for activists to concentrate some of their activism on making Israel – rather than, for example, Iran, Sudan, Sri Lanka, or North Korea – stop its unjust, inhumane policies towards occupied Palestine? . . .
1. Chances for Success. Relative to those other places, focusing on Israel’s injustice toward the Palestinians in the illegally occupied Palestinian Territories is where activist efforts will likely be most successful. Naomi Klein writes, “Boycott is not a dogma; it is a tactic. The reason the BDS [Boycott, Divest & Sanction] strategy should be tried against Israel is practical: in a country so small and trade-dependent, it could actually work.”
2. `The West’ Is Already Handling Sudan, Iran & North Korea. Assuming those four other nations are a fair representation of where activists should be spreading their efforts, instead of concentrating them on Israel (not that there is any proof that Israel/Palestine activists – or defenders of Israeli policies for that matter – are singularly focusing their activism on Israel/Palestine), the U.S. government is already ably carrying the ball on the Sudan, North Korea and Iran injustice fronts. In fact, today President Obama convenes a conference whose purpose is to focus world efforts, including stiff boycotts and sanctions, on pressuring North Korea and Iran to go non-nuclear. (The UC Berkeley Student Senate, by the way, has in its history, passed divestment bills on Darfur, Sudan, and against apartheid South Africa.)
3. Injustice in the Palestinian Occupied Territories is Unambiguous. Sri Lanka (and an array of similar places of seeming injustice) is a different matter, its injustices largely ignored by the U.S. and ‘the West’. So, why are U.S. progressives and others much more active trying to right wrongs done to Palestinians rather than the wrongs done to the Tamils of Sri Lanka? Well, the obvious answer is that most of us know a lot more about the Israel/Palestine issue, and perhaps we are wrong but the Palestinian Territories injustice (occupation and colonization in direct violation of UN resolutions) in ‘I/P land’ seems unambiguous, while (perhaps because we are not knowledgeable enough) the injustice in Sri Lanka (and similar ‘ignored’ settings) is not nearly as clear.
4. Concentrate Activism Where Success is Most Likely. I hope it’s not repetitive to talk about `bang for buck’ theory, which means that it’s smart for activists to concentrate their efforts where they are likely to have the most success. That’s how human rights activists best leverage their activism. Justice for Palestinians in the Occupied Territories, for a variety of reasons, has a much greater chance for success than does justice for Sri Lanka’s Tamils. Not to diminish the efforts of the millions of individuals in the Tamil diaspora, but for whatever reason their cause is little known among most Americans and others in the West. Secondly, as I have mentioned, the clarity of the injustice against the Palestinians, an occupation and Israeli colonization specifically illegal under international law, makes it easier to persuade uncommitted individuals to be sympathetic to and supportive of the Palestinian cause. Thirdly, there already is a `Boycott, Divest, and Sanction’ movement that is having rapidly escalating success.
5. Concentrate Activism Where Success is Most Important. Finally, activists should focus their efforts on Palestine/Israel because correcting injustice there has much greater realpolitik significance than does correcting injustice in more localized conflicts (such as injustice in Sri Lanka). Israel’s policies toward Occupied Palestine is perhaps the most important stumbling block to long-term peace between `the West’ and the people of the Middle East, if not between the entire Muslim and Western worlds.
The ASUC meeting is scheduled to take place Wednesday, April 14, at 7 p.m, in the senate chambers, 400 Eshelman Hall on the UC Berkeley campus. Senate President Smelko’s e-mail address is president@asuc.org. The names and e-mail addresses of the Senate members are here.
***I particularly like these sentences from Salahi’s opinion piece:
Those who believe that confronting Israel is unfair are themselves relying on an unacceptable double standard, “singling out” Israel, so to speak, as the one country expressly permitted to wantonly attack and persecute its minority citizens and subjects while the rest of the world passively watches. However, there can be only one universal standard of human rights. Privileging one state or actor over all others to remove it from accountability creates double standards that undermine the integrity of social justice activism all over the world.
