Advertisement

SKIP ADVERTISEMENT

letters

Appraising the B.D.S. Movement

Is it effective or misguided? Is it anti-Semitic? Readers are divided over boycotting Israel to protest its treatment of Palestinians.

Image
Pro-B.D.S. protesters outside New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s offices after he signed anti-B.D.S. legislation in 2016.Credit...Erik McGregor/Pacific Press, via LightRocket, via Getty Images
Image
Supporters of Governor Cuomo’s anti-B.D.S. legislation outside his office in 2016.Credit...Erik McGregor/Pacific Press, via LightRocket, via Getty Images

To the Editor:

ReA Look at the International Drive to Boycott Israel” (news article, July 28):

Thanks to The Times for publishing this largely evenhanded account of the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement. B.D.S. is working: Exhibit A is the massive investment by the Israeli government in seeking to combat it, and Exhibit B is this full-page article in The Times.

Israel’s claim to be a vibrant democracy is incompatible with its disenfranchisement of millions of Palestinians, and the B.D.S. movement makes that hypocrisy impossible to ignore. I support the B.D.S. movement as an American Jew because it reflects the essence of Judaism. We are taught that Hillel, when asked to explain Judaism while standing on one foot, said: “What is hateful to you, do not do to your neighbor. That is the whole Torah; the rest is commentary.”

Jethro Eisenstein
New York
The writer is a former chairman of the national board of Jewish Voice for Peace.

To the Editor:

ReDoes Anyone Take B.D.S. Seriously?,” by Eric Alterman (Op-Ed, July 30):

The problem with B.D.S. is that it is being used as a cudgel to demonstrate either one’s pro-Israel or progressive bona fides rather than as a means to solving an intractable conflict. Were it truly being used as a means to solve the conflict, it would recognize: 1) Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish homeland with secure borders; 2) that both sides have a claim on Jerusalem that must be shared and/or divided loosely based on population; and 3) that Israel can no more take in the millions of refugees who claim to be descendants of the 700,000 or so Palestinians who once lived there than the Arab countries can accept the roughly same number of Jews who were expelled or fled into Israel in 1948.

It’s not clear to me that boycotts are ever effective in an international setting, but it certainly won’t be effective as it’s being used here — unless the goal is to polarize support for Israel, and that’s its real danger.

Steven Roth
Great Neck, N.Y.

To the Editor:

While providing a glimpse into boycotts for Palestinian rights, “A Look at the International Drive to Boycott Israel” misses important context on why Palestinians are asking people to support their struggle for freedom.

For centuries, movements have used the tactic of boycotts to pressure states and complicit institutions to end discrimination, colonialism and apartheid. From the Boston Tea Party and the Montgomery bus boycott to apartheid South Africa and the anti-transgender law in North Carolina, the historical pedigree and legitimacy of boycotts as a tool to challenge injustice, including against another country, are unimpeachable.

Like my Indian relatives who tired of living under British colonial rule, Palestinians are asking for noncooperation with their undemocratic overlords. Yet their movement is being singled out with false charges of anti-Semitism for focusing on the state that denies them their rights. Those who wouldn’t accuse Gandhi (and his supporters) of being anti-white for singling out Britain should ask why they’re holding Palestinians to a different standard.

Radhika Sainath
New York
The writer is senior staff attorney for Palestine Legal.

To the Editor:

When the supporters and advocates of the B.D.S. movement throw away their cellphones and computers that are made in a China that treats its Muslim Uighur and Tibetan Buddhist populations markedly worse than Israel treats Palestinians, I will believe it is not anti-Semitic. Until then, they have all the credibility of President Trump claiming he is not a racist.

Steve Fankuchen
Oakland, Calif.

To the Editor:

As a United Methodist volunteer with a group that advocates for peace, justice and equality for the Palestinian people, I noted with sadness that there was no mention of the various church denominations that not only passed resolutions but have also actually divested and boycotted companies that enable the military occupation of Palestine or are doing business inside Israeli settlements in the West Bank.

There is ongoing discussion in our churches about the plight of the Palestinian people as we meet with our missionaries in the region and hear from our fellow Christians there.

These stories are so compelling that the United Methodist Church’s pension board sold its stock in G4S, a company that provides security equipment to Israel, in 2014, and in 2015 divested from two Israeli banks and put other Israeli banks on a do-not-invest list.

The writers might have used these examples and similar actions taken by other denominations, such as our fellow Presbyterians, Quakers, Lutherans, United Church of Christ, Church of the Brethren, Unitarians and Episcopalians, to strengthen the argument that B.D.S. has had actual accomplishments.

Lisa Bender
Harrisburg, Pa.
The writer is co-chairwoman of United Methodists for Kairos Response.

To the Editor:

Your article tries for even-handedness but ultimately offers a slanted perspective on the B.D.S. movement for justice in Israel and Palestine.

It asks “Is B.D.S. anti-Semitic?” Far from being anti-Semitic, the B.D.S. movement draws on the participation of many Jews precisely because of our obligation to pursue justice. For me and many others, that sense of obligation is even greater given that the Israeli government claims to be acting on our behalf.

I do not need anyone’s land confiscated or house demolished to remain Jewish, or even to retain a spiritual and cultural connection to the land of Israel. Indeed, a whole segment of the early Zionist movement sought Jewish renewal in Israel but not the creation of a Jewish state.

It is ironic that with right-wing anti-Semitism on the rise and white-nationalist-linked terrorists murdering synagogue-goers, politicians in the United States are focusing their alleged concern about anti-Semitism on a nonviolent boycott movement.

Amy Gluckman
Salem, Mass.

To the Editor:

“A Look at the International Drive to Boycott Israel” begins with the basic question of whether B.D.S. is “a movement that aims to eliminate Israel and traffics in anti-Semitism.” As related in the article, when Omar Barghouti, the most prominent of the B.D.S. movement founders, was asked whether the Jews could have their own state, he answered “Not in Palestine.”

It would be hard to be clearer. The answer to the question is a resounding yes. All else in the article is obfuscation.

Alan Stein
Natick, Mass.

To the Editor:

I agree with Eric Alterman that the B.D.S. movement is not a serious threat to the Jewish state and is being cynically used by politicians on both sides of the aisle. He is also right to worry about the increasing use of McCarthyite smear tactics by opponents of B.D.S.

Perhaps the ugliest manifestation of the anti-B.D.S. movement is a website called Canary Mission, which publishes profiles of students, academics and activists whom it deems anti-Israel and anti-Semitic. The accusations are often tendentious and not linked to anything the person in question actually said or did, but rather statements made by others with whom they are seemingly associated. The website is geared specifically to ruining the employment prospects of students engaged in pro-Palestinian activism.

In recent months, the shadowy website has targeted members of IfNotNow, a group of young American Jews that is critical of Israel’s occupation of the West Bank and East Jerusalem but does not take a position on B.D.S. As this country learned during the McCarthy era, one does not actually have to be a member of the targeted group to fall under the wider dragnet cast by those hoping to silence all opposition voices.

Abe Silberstein
Brooklyn

A version of this article appears in print on  , Section SR, Page 8 of the New York edition with the headline: Appraising the B.D.S. Movement. Order Reprints | Today’s Paper | Subscribe

Advertisement

SKIP ADVERTISEMENT