Solidarity with the Palestinians, not boycott of Israel
Links not Boycott | 08.06.2007 12:12 | Palestine | Workers' Movements
Statement in opposition to the calls to boycott Israeli institutions in resolution 54 and resolution 53, submitted to the conference of the public services Unison which starts on 19 June 2007. To support this statement, please email us at 
links.not.boycott@gmail.com, with your name and Unison branch.
All signatories in a personal capacity unless otherwise stated or obvious.
links.not.boycott@gmail.com, with your name and Unison branch. All signatories in a personal capacity unless otherwise stated or obvious.
As democrats, socialists, critics of the policies and actions of the Israeli government, advocates of Israeli withdrawal from the Occupied Territories, and supporters of the right of the Palestinians to an independent state alongside Israel, we, the undersigned members of Unison, oppose the proposals at this year's National Delegate Conference calling for a boycott against Israeli institutions.
At first glance the idea of a boycott answers the need we all feel to "do something" in response to the seemingly endless carnage. But in fact a boycott would do more harm than good.
A boycott of Israel would at best exert only the most marginal pressure on the Israeli state. The movement to boycott South Africa continued for more than three decades, with only the most marginal effects on South Africa. Apartheid did not begin to crumble until the new black-majority workers' movement and the population of the townships rose up.
Moreover, boycotts of whole nations and their institutions are the crudest political weapons. They hit opponents of the government being boycotted, those who share the viewpoint of the boycotters as well as supporters of what the boycotters object to.
This objection had far less weight for South Africa because everyone saw it as pressure towards majority rule rather than aimed at crushing the whole country.
Apartheid was the exploitation by a small white oligarchy of a black majority deprived of rights. The Israeli-Jewish state in its pre-1967 borders did not depend on the exploitation of Arabs, and does not now depend for its existence on exploitation of the Occupied Territories.
A boycott would contribute to strengthening the sense of being under siege in a world of enemies which is a strong element in the power of the Israeli right, and weaken those in Israel who want a just settlement with the Palestinians.
The boycott brands all Israeli Jews (or all who do not pass some prescribed political test) as beyond talking to.
In Britain, a boycott-Israel movement would, inexorably, become an anti-Jewish movement, directed against those closely linked to Israelis, i.e. Jews.
Resolution 54 calls for a "boycott against Israeli institutions". Does that include such "Israeli institutions" as the Israeli trade union federation, the Histadrut? Or Israeli anti-occupation groups?
We understand and strongly sympathise with the desperation which has driven the Palestinian trade unions and some other civil society organisations to call for a boycott, but we do not believe it will help.
Much better, a positive labour movement campaign of solidarity with the Palestinians, with the Israeli peace movement, and with workers on both sides.
Signed by:
Alexander Hay
Alison Brown, Yorkshire Ambulance
Anita Downs, secretary, Guys & St Thomas' hospital, London
Caroline Henry, shop steward, Sheffield Local Government
Castle Morpeth Unison branch Executive
Chris Allen, Political Officer, Leicestershire Health
Chris Leary, Surrey Local Government
Dion D'Silva, Wandsworth Local Government
Ed Whitby, Newcastle City Unison Campaigns Officer, Northern Regional Committee
Jacky Offord, Suffolk Local Government
Jean Lane, Tower Hamlets Local Government
Jill Mountford, Lewisham Local Government
Kate Ahrens, Leicestershire Health
Lesley Smallwood, Leeds Metropolitan University
Lynne Moffat, Islington Local Government
Mark Catterall, Todmorden
Mark Nevill, Leeds
Mike Fenwick, Airedale Health
Mike Perkins, Hampshire Local Government
Monika Schwartz, Islington Local Government
Nick Brereton, Newcastle City
Nick Holden, Leicestershire Health
Paul McGarry, Manchester Local Government
Pete Allen, Manchester Local Government
Rob Hope, Cardiff
Stephen Lintott, Chair, North West Anglia Health
Stuart Jordan, Youth Officer, Haringey Local Government
Vinothan Sangarapillai, Camden Local Government
At first glance the idea of a boycott answers the need we all feel to "do something" in response to the seemingly endless carnage. But in fact a boycott would do more harm than good.
A boycott of Israel would at best exert only the most marginal pressure on the Israeli state. The movement to boycott South Africa continued for more than three decades, with only the most marginal effects on South Africa. Apartheid did not begin to crumble until the new black-majority workers' movement and the population of the townships rose up.
Moreover, boycotts of whole nations and their institutions are the crudest political weapons. They hit opponents of the government being boycotted, those who share the viewpoint of the boycotters as well as supporters of what the boycotters object to.
This objection had far less weight for South Africa because everyone saw it as pressure towards majority rule rather than aimed at crushing the whole country.
Apartheid was the exploitation by a small white oligarchy of a black majority deprived of rights. The Israeli-Jewish state in its pre-1967 borders did not depend on the exploitation of Arabs, and does not now depend for its existence on exploitation of the Occupied Territories.
A boycott would contribute to strengthening the sense of being under siege in a world of enemies which is a strong element in the power of the Israeli right, and weaken those in Israel who want a just settlement with the Palestinians.
The boycott brands all Israeli Jews (or all who do not pass some prescribed political test) as beyond talking to.
In Britain, a boycott-Israel movement would, inexorably, become an anti-Jewish movement, directed against those closely linked to Israelis, i.e. Jews.
Resolution 54 calls for a "boycott against Israeli institutions". Does that include such "Israeli institutions" as the Israeli trade union federation, the Histadrut? Or Israeli anti-occupation groups?
We understand and strongly sympathise with the desperation which has driven the Palestinian trade unions and some other civil society organisations to call for a boycott, but we do not believe it will help.
Much better, a positive labour movement campaign of solidarity with the Palestinians, with the Israeli peace movement, and with workers on both sides.
Signed by:
Alexander Hay
Alison Brown, Yorkshire Ambulance
Anita Downs, secretary, Guys & St Thomas' hospital, London
Caroline Henry, shop steward, Sheffield Local Government
Castle Morpeth Unison branch Executive
Chris Allen, Political Officer, Leicestershire Health
Chris Leary, Surrey Local Government
Dion D'Silva, Wandsworth Local Government
Ed Whitby, Newcastle City Unison Campaigns Officer, Northern Regional Committee
Jacky Offord, Suffolk Local Government
Jean Lane, Tower Hamlets Local Government
Jill Mountford, Lewisham Local Government
Kate Ahrens, Leicestershire Health
Lesley Smallwood, Leeds Metropolitan University
Lynne Moffat, Islington Local Government
Mark Catterall, Todmorden
Mark Nevill, Leeds
Mike Fenwick, Airedale Health
Mike Perkins, Hampshire Local Government
Monika Schwartz, Islington Local Government
Nick Brereton, Newcastle City
Nick Holden, Leicestershire Health
Paul McGarry, Manchester Local Government
Pete Allen, Manchester Local Government
Rob Hope, Cardiff
Stephen Lintott, Chair, North West Anglia Health
Stuart Jordan, Youth Officer, Haringey Local Government
Vinothan Sangarapillai, Camden Local Government
Links not Boycott
e-mail:
links.not.boycott@gmail.com
Homepage:
http://www.links-not-boycott.org.uk
Comments
Hide 1 hidden comment or hide all comments
The Deluded Left Wing of Imperialism
08.06.2007 12:35
There is no middle ground -- it is either two states or the Islamic-Arabic revanchist fantasy."
Workers Liberty's position is based on the assertion that there are two options:
1. A single secular state, they oppose this because they believe it is actually a "drive the Jews into the sea" position (of course it isn't...).
2. Two states.
But in reality there is the third way: the reality that is being created on the ground: the ethnic cleansing of Palestine -- this will lead to a single state solution if Israel is not stopped.
Death Empire
Duped by Imperial Propaganda
08.06.2007 13:46
"The catastrophe that befell the Palestinians in 1948 could not have happened had not a coalition of Arab states invaded Israel. In that war, Egypt proclaimed its war aim to be to "drive the Jews into the sea"."
"The June 1967 war - which led to Israeli occupation of the West Bank and other territory - was precipitated by Egyptian war moves against Israel."
"Identification of Israel with apartheid South Africa is part of the demonisation of Israel. It is nonsense. Israel does not exploit the Palestinians as the South African white caste exploited the South African black majority. Israel's existence is entirely separable from the things consistent democrats and socialists object to in its dealings with the Palestinians: Israel is nothing like apartheid South Africa."
"If, in the course of a new US war on Iraq, a cornered Saddam Hussein decides to go down in history as the destroyer of Israel - with germ warfare, nuclear bombs, or whatever - they will see that as progressive work."
[From the AWL Pamphlet - "Two Nations, Two States", Second edition: 2004.]
Strange that they didn't see fit to get rid of the last quote above, not in 2004 nor when they reposted this article to their web site a few days ago -- they clearly fell for the imperial propaganda that Iraq had WMD's, like they fell for the Roger Windsor / MI5 setup of Scargill... they have a track record of being duped...
The AWL -- only a pawn in their game?
Death Empire
Boycott racist Israeli state
08.06.2007 13:51
In addition, the war crimes of Israel are legion - the latest being the one million unexploded munitions it deliberately spread all over southern Lebanon a few months ago. This alone is an act worthy of invoking a boycott of the Israeli state.
Gary McFarlane
e-mail:
gazmac4@yahoo.co.uk
ooohhh pleeeaaase
08.06.2007 14:37
Oh comrades, let us engage in negotiations[sic] (cause we know that, at the eleventh hour we can provoke an incident to break them off).
Oh comrades, let us not engage in violence (cause we got the monolpoly on reckless random shelling, shooting & bombing of civilians & their infrastructure).
Oh comrades let us not build devisive movements (cause we represent one of the many splintered hydras of progressive[sic] movements that serve a different agenda - our agenda).
Oh comrades, let us work against an arms build up in the area (cause we already got a huge military - free - and can't be having a fair fight).
Oh comrades let us not impose enconomic blockades (cause our one against the Palestinians is so working right now, with shortages in even basic medical necessities & dangerous amounts of children suffering from malnutrion - they'll never make strong fighters, he he!).
Oh comrades let us trade together for piece (cause our business men rob the Palestinian farmers and producers blind at checkpoints, if they haven't taken their land already) - a piece, a large piece, the largest piece infact, FOR US.
The sound of namby pamby middle class sayanim wailing is the death knell for any movement.
zionist as liberal
No, nonono, wrong
08.06.2007 15:00
But the latter half where it talks about the boycott being prejudiced against the average israeli - fuck off. And fuck off with emotive racial language like 'israeli jew' - israeli citizen is just fine thanks. There are plenty of arab israelis. This is an attempt to call the boycott anti-semitic.
Now, the specific circumstances of israel lend themselves to a boycott. For starters israel relies on international support. If a boycott grows and grows, with entire markets being shut off to israel, this will be effective. Israel-Palestine is the size of Wales. Its fucking tiny.
Secondly, the idea that a palestinian movement against their oppressors is the better option, like in south africa - that sounds lovely, do you have any idea about the history of the conflict? Unlike SA israel is not an internationally reviled baddy. There have been several wars between the countries and its neighbours, Israel today has the ability to do whatever it likes with a military basis and justification, using the cover of defence. And palestinians have tried the ghandian strikes and non-cooperation option - it was called the first intifada. It was met with bullets.
The boycott will go on and it will grow. Support for it is growing and support for israel is waning.
I don't know who you lot are, but your attempts to subvert the peace movement are unwelcome and i suspect they are cheap political point scoring too.
If you are really concerned, get involved with the boycott and channel it towards the right targets
Rob Cohen
"Unlike SA israel is not an internationally reviled baddy"
09.06.2007 01:14
Danny
Expalining the political reality
09.06.2007 11:22
You really need to try to understand WHY the boycott campaign against South Afrika was possible/effective and what the differences are that make a boycott Israel campaign problematic. ESPECIALLY given the British tradition of what "boycott" means (extension to those refusing to join the campaign).
The point I am trying to make is that in the case of South Afrika there were NOT large numbers of Afrikaners all over the world. If what you are trying to say is something like "but the Jews don't have to become secondary targets, they can join our anti-Israel campaign" your head is in the sand. IF you polarize the situation totally, the Jews will choose tribal solidarity over all their other concerns in your local politics. In other words, all of your OTHER issues will take a hit as your opponents on these issues will be able to make deals with the Jews --- the Jews help them against you (on these other issues) or at least stand neutral (cases where the Jews would otherwise be your allies on these other issues) and they help the Jews against your boycott campaign.
In other words, you need to carefully decide just how important is THIS issue to you compared to all your other issues because it's those other fish you have to fry that will pay the price. The Jews don't reckon history the way you do, decades is "recent" and centuries "modern" -- LONG memories. You figure to be moving on to other things a few years from now but they wil be extracting a political price indefinitely.
Mike Novack
e-mail:
stepbystpefarm mtdata.com
Hide 1 hidden comment or hide all comments