Lifted from aftenposten.no (google translate – not too bad, actually)
A dead end for frustrated emotions
It has vicarious , partly immoral motives – and the effect is far less than the resources used.
Chronicle Anne Broadcaster , writer and lecturer, recipient of the Freedom of Expression Prize 2014
It is easy to understand the frustration many feel about the unresolved conflict between Israelis and Palestinians . Is a boycott of academic, cultural and economic relations with one party what it takes to resolve the conflict ? Is occupation sole cause of the conflict , and it is only Israel can make peace?
Boycott as a tool against Israel began as opposition from Jews in the U.S. who protested against the huge aid to Israel’s military defenses with their tax dollars . Palestinian Marwan Barghouti followed up in 2005 with the establishment of the movement ” boycott , divestment and Sanctions ” ( BDS ) . It included a sudden requirement for full return to Israel for Palestinians – without including issues around the same number of Jewish refugees who were simultaneously displaced from Arab countries. Is it fruitful for two people who are both there to be , that a new generation of Palestinian and Jewish children being raised without the knowledge and experience through interaction with each other?
Palestinian people are made redundant
If we only look at the economic boycott , without remembering that there are rogue states who ought to have had the activists’ focus, it becomes almost immoral not to give the Palestinians all the help they can get. International presence of industry and commerce who can provide expertise and development, without being client -building assistance is critically important. Both potential and actual Palestinian jobs will disappear by an economic boycott of Israel and weaken the Palestinians the most. Also today banning Palestinians from neighboring countries will exacerbate poverty and make unemployed Palestinian youth easy prey for radicalization and demonization of the party they should make peace with .
A full support from the West for such insulation line will strengthen victim mentality and lack of willingness to compromise. At the same time weaken the intellectual will to self-criticism and human legal thought , as the Palestinian society sorely also need to be a state their citizens will live in. The occupation is unjust and discriminatory , but has not blamed for everything that goes wrong in the Palestinian areas. Education , debate , criticism, adjustment and negotiations must be learned and practiced on many levels – not left to corrupt management layer and violent militias. A two-state solution depends on two parties want something, even if the Israeli settlement enterprise is little constructive feed and hated , so the cultivation of Islamic religious violence rhetoric does. The solution is that both parties both experience and recognize that they must negotiate.
Blinded by lack of historical knowledge
What makes such a boycott by Israelis ?
Boycott Campaigners believe symbolic efficacy against Israel is important, but the truth of history prevents them from seeing that isolation and stigmatization give very different images in the collective Jewish memory. The activists may reject it as much as they want, but the Holocaust experience and Europe’s betrayal sits just under the skin . It must empathy to recognize the depth of this.
Obviously also strengthened victim mentality , and also prevents the necessary self-criticism and willingness to equal treatment in Israeli society . Especially in those who must make decisions about security and existential threats from the Arab winter effects . Boycott activists say they “do not defend helpless Palestinian violence against Israel ‘s own citizens or corruption ” but they actually condemn them either. Whether it’s the naivety , historieløshet or anti-Semitism , so support disheveled resistance in practice such attitudes .
If we lay aside ideology and emotion and look at the facts shows that Israel gets along well anyway .
Europe is Israel’s main trading partner , accounting for 33 percent of the country’s exports. Soon it negotiated an agreement both parties obviously sees as important as Israel can deliver services and products Europe needs . At the same time tourism and exchange of students, conferences and research visits from all other parts of the world.
EU 28 countries will thus unlikely to agree on joint sanctions against Israel , as a free market just means that firms are partners in the West Bank and in Israel anyway – without including the Palestinians. Banks unlikely to stop trade with Israel as long as the world’s largest companies in many sectors , especially computer technology , now established there. Research on water , agriculture , health and safety systems are world leaders .
No major effects
The statistics from Israel Chamber of Commerce also shows that attempts boycott had little effect. In addition, there are now oil and all that entails. Self-sufficiency with oil and trade with Brazil , China and the Far East will essentially prevent significant effects of any full or partial boycott.
Is the goal to weaken Israel economically particularly realistic – and in the Palestinian interest? Provides boycott alternative solutions for Palestinian needs? Will it change the policy in practice for both parties in the right direction? If we add to boycott cultural and academic institutions in Israel – who loses? Would not the liberal forces lose heart and give in to the ” everyone is out to get us” metaphor ? Who shall then negotiate and compromise ? Many questions without clear answers .
Divide and polarize
It’s not a lack of awareness about the Palestinian situation is the problem, but confidence. In Norway, the boycott campaign never got the wind in its sails , rather the brand and increasing polarization . Various Christian communities and youth cheer for each conflict party and invoke Our Lord’s support for their side . Norwegian universities touching anxiety for all Jewish weakens an already barren knowledge about Judaism and Israel , while the cultural boycott is not really to understand: Those who just intellectual awakening ( alertness ) that targets must be blind in one eye .
Is the absence of trust from one party idea if you like Norwegian private organization or state actor wants to contribute to peace?
My contention is that the resources used in the boycott campaign far exceeds the effect that the action based on the error analysis , the vicarious and sometimes immoral motives and is a dead end. Perhaps the most a measure of committed people in the West who need an outlet for their feelings ?