Skip to main content
Category

Cultural Boycott

British Government to ban public bodies from boycotting Israel

According to the bill, to be announced by Michael Gove, the Minister for Local Government, ‘substantial’ fines will be imposed on offenders

The British government plans to introduce legislation on Monday to ban local authorities and public bodies from boycotting Israeli products, The Telegraph reported on Saturday.

According to the bill, to be announced by Michael Gove, the Minister for Local Government, “substantial” fines will be imposed on offenders.

Gove explained to the newspaper that the aim of the proposed legislation was to combat the anti-Israel Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement, arguing that such initiatives are often accompanied by anti-Semitic rhetoric.

“It is simply unacceptable that public bodies have used taxpayers’ time and money to pursue their own foreign policy agenda,” he said. “The UK needs to adopt a coherent approach to foreign policy, defined by the British government.”

“This is not only damaging to UK foreign policy, it also leads to appalling anti-Semitic rhetoric and abuse. We have therefore taken this decisive step to end these disruptive policies once and for all,” he added.

The commitment to promote such a law was first mentioned in the election manifesto of the current ruling Conservative Party during the 2019 campaign. It was also mentioned in Queen Elizabeth II’s annual address last year, a few months before her death at the age of 96.

In the documents accompanying the Queen’s speech, Lancaster City Council’s decision to support Israel-related boycotts in 2021 was cited as an example, as was Leicester City Council’s similar decision in 2014.

According to British media reports, other councils, such as Swansea and Gwynedd, have also launched boycotts against Jewish settlements in the West Bank.

Read the original article here.

Cover photo: Shutterstock, Photo Contributor: JackStuart Stock Photo ID: 1980267017

RAD: The Modus Operandi of BDS

The modus operandi of the BDS movement can best be described as reductive, adaptable and discursive, or by the acronym RAD.

The Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement is the latest weapon in the ongoing war against Israel that has been waged since the state’s founding in 1948.

However, the boycott call of Israel is nothing new. It was initially launched before the State of Israel came into existence when the Arab League called for a total boycott of Palestinian goods. Back then, “Palestinian goods” were Jewish goods.

The boycott has continued since then. For instance, in 1967, after the Arab countries again failed to destroy Israel in a war of annihilation, the Arab League called for a boycott of Coca-Cola since it sold its products in Israel, banning the sale in all Arab countries. Clearly, the boycott movement hurts Arabs more than Israelis, as the Arab world suffered through decades of RC Cola and Pepsi while Israelis enjoyed the real thing.

It’s important to understand that the boycott isn’t about the West Bank and Gaza, as its pre-dates the 1967 war. It’s about all Palestinian territories, and for them, this includes all the land between the River Jordan and the Mediterranean Sea. Like the so-called “refugee problem,” the boycott is a political weapon utilized by the anti-Israel movement seeking to overturn the results of the 1948 War of Independence and dismantle and destroy the State of Israel.

The latest manifestation of this concerted campaign came in 2001, at the infamous United Nations hosted “World Conference on Racism” in Durban, South Africa, in September of that year. It was supposed to be an anti-racist forum, but it devolved into what observers deemed a forum of hate.

Keep in mind this was on the heels of President Bill Clinton-sponsored Camp David and Taba negotiations, where Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak accepted the Clinton parameters for a two-state solution, and Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat turned down the deal and launched the Second Intifada. President Clinton told Arafat then, “You are leading your people and the region to a catastrophe,” and later remarked, “I still didn’t believe Arafat would make such a colossal mistake.”

To prepare for the Durban Conference, leftist anti-Israel NGOs from Europe and elsewhere got together in Iran earlier in the year to plan their assault. Then in South Africa, outside the conference halls, thousands marched in anti-Israel demonstrations, holding signs that read “Hitler Should Have Finished the Job.” At the same time, booths sold copies of “The Protocols of the Elders of Zion,” and the Arab Lawyers Union distributed caricatures of Jews with hooked noses and fangs dripping with blood, clutching money. Jewish human rights activists were physically threatened, with mobs screaming: “You don’t belong to the human race!”

Inside the NGO forum of the conference, the participants, which included groups such as Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International, released a formal declaration that called for a complete boycott, divestment and sanctions of Israel, deeming the country to be a “racist apartheid state,” guilty of “genocide.” The declaration also called for the reinstitution of UN resolution 3379, deeming Zionism to be racism.

Needing a local Palestinian face for the movement, these anti-Israel NGOs found what they were looking for in Palestinian academic and activist Omar Barghouti, who has become the movement’s figurehead. In 2005, the BDS movement was officially launched under the guise of the Boycott National Committee (BNC), a conglomerate of “civil society” organizations that includes American and EU-designated terrorist groups Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, and the Popular Front for the Liberation Palestinian (PFLP), along with several of their front groups.

The boycott movement has now reinvented itself to use the language of critical social justice theory, which is so salient in Western discourse today. To people in the West, BDS presents itself as a social justice movement, an LGBTQ+ rights movement, an environmental movement, and a women’s rights movement. They co-opt any progressive cause, whether blaming Israel for George Floyd’s death or climate change. BDS claims that to stand in “solidarity” with progressive causes is to support the Palestinian cause. Never mind that BDS cleverly obscures their true motives—that their real aim is Israel’s demonization and eventual elimination.

To further these aims, the modus operandi of the BDS movement can best be described as reductive, adaptable and discursive, or by the acronym RAD. It is critical for organizations countering the BDS movement to understand how they operate in order to push back against them effectively.

Taking each element of this in turn, by being reductive the BDS movement wants to change how the Palestinian-Israeli conflict is discussed. It’s not a conflict; it’s genocide. Don’t dare talk about peace; it’s apartheid. It’s not a complicated situation; it’s settler-colonialism and ethnic cleansing.

BDS is trying to establish the narrative and control the rules of discourse. They try to shut down speech and silence people in a move right out of the woke leftist playbook.

BDS is trying to establish the narrative and control the rules of discourse. They try to shut down speech and silence people in a move right out of the woke leftist playbook. They are not interested in discussing history, nuance, or facts, but rather reducing the conflict to a few simple buzzwords that are meant to demonize Israel. The partition plan of 1947 and the Gaza coup in 2007 require discussion, but genocide and apartheid are easily understood. They are evil, just like Israel.

For instance, vocal anti-Israel BDS activist Mohammed el-Kurd recently stated on a webinar that he is not interested in discussing what the term apartheid really means or if Israel’s conduct meets the definition, he just wants Israel labeled with the “negative connotation it carries in the psyche of the public.”

The BDS messaging is also adaptable. The anti-Israel movement effectively weaponizes this language by co-opting the ills of any country and forcing people to see the Israeli-Palestinian conflict through that lens. In South Africa, Israel is an apartheid state; in America, Israel is a racist state and just another example of white people repressing people of color; and in Australia, where Aboriginal rights are so salient, Jews in Israel are simply the colonizers of the indigenous Arab population. In Europe, members of the BDS movement understand that antisemitic beliefs are still deeply held by many Europeans, even if below the surface. Just as the term “antisemitism” was coined to sanitize anti-Jewish bigotry in the late 1800s, “anti-Zionism” has now become an acceptable form to express this hatred. BDS pushing an anti-Zionist narrative in Europe finds a receptive audience there.

BDS is fungible. Whatever the worst thing a country has done in its history, whatever a country’s most loathsome qualities, Israel is doing it now.

For instance, labeling Israel as a settler colonial state is central to this new paradigm. The Jewish state is a foreign body, a cancer inserted into the Arab Middle East that must be excised. Unfortunately, the boycott movement and its supporters genuinely believe this to their core and preach it in their teachings. They have convinced themselves that Jews are not really from the Land of Israel, and, like the Afrikaans of South Africa, they will eventually give up the country and hand it over to the Palestinians. Even more troubling for those who genuinely want peace and a resolution to the conflict, these people think that victory is close at hand. Israel will fall if they can just hold on for a few more weeks or months. This is the Middle East’s big lie: a willful misunderstanding of who Jewish Israelis are and rejection of the Jewish peoples inalienable ties and attachment to the Land of Israel. According to a recent Palestinian poll, two-thirds say Israel will not celebrate the centenary of its establishment, and the majority believes that the Palestinian people will soon recover Palestine and return its refugees to their homes. Why make peace, why engage in dialogue, when Israel will be eradicated soon?

Finally, BDS is a discursive process that does not require its adherents and supporters to rely on facts but just to continuously make accusations. So anti-Israel activists simply ramble from one charge to the next. “The policing in America is Israel’s fault, George Floyd’s death was Israel’s fault, Jews have no connection to the land of Palestine, Jesus was a Palestinian not a Jew, Middle Eastern Jews are merely  a religious group and just Jewish Arabs, Jews from Europe are fake Jews and are really Khazars, Zionists caused the Holocaust to establish Israel, Israel is an apartheid state, Israel is a Nazi state, hundreds of Israeli laws are racist, Israel is responsible for Jeremy Corbyn’s ouster from the UK Labour party, the refugee issue is Israel’s fault, Oslo collapsed due to Israel, Israel keeps rejecting peace, before the Zionists came along, Arabs and Jews lived peacefully together as equals, etc.”

The goal is to keep Israel constantly on trial and in a position to defend itself, whether there is any validity to the claims made or not.

As British General Sir Ian Hamilton stated: “Propaganda is inverted patriotism, draws nourishment from the sins of the enemy. If there are no sins, invent them! The aim is to make the enemy appear so great a monster that he forfeits the rights of a human being.”

The BDS movement understands this intimately. While it claims to advocate for Palestinian rights, its far more concerned with the delegitimization and undermining of the very existence of the State of Israel. BDS proponents often employ manipulative rhetoric and misleading narratives to sway public opinion, painting a distorted picture of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Its deeply deceptive tactics hinder meaningful dialogue and compromise and perpetuate a cycle of hostility and division, ultimately impeding the prospects for a peaceful resolution to the conflict. BDS is anything but rad.


Ari Ingel is an attorney and the Director of Creative Community For Peace. You can follow him on Twitter at @OGAride.

Read original article here.

Cover photo: Shutterstock, Photo Contributor: Micah Casella Stock Photo ID: 1972117661

Winston Marshall, the former lead guitarist of Mumford & Sons, on the Cultural Boycott

Here’s why Big Thief was wrong to cancel a gig in Israel

By: Winston Marshall

 

The Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions (BDS) movement has claimed another scalp in its ceaseless attempt at a cultural siege of the Israeli state. But its latest choice of victim betrays the poison lurking in its shallow water. New York indie-rock four-piece Big Thief, whose bassist Max Oleartchik is an Israeli citizen, announced on 4 June that it would play two charity shows in Tel Aviv. All profits from the gigs were for “NGOs that provide medical and humanitarian aid to Palestinian children, including joint efforts between Palestinians and Israelis working together for a better future”.

On 9 June, Big Thief cancelled the gigs. BDS had got to them. No doubt a great deal of thought had gone into how the band could possibly play Israel in the first place. Thought and deliberation, I imagine, over many months and possibly years. The band had even played in Israel before, in 2017, in what must have been a meaningful homecoming for the bassist. On this occasion, a commendable resolution had been found. A show where money would pass from the pockets of music-loving Israelis to aid for struggling Palestinians.

It seemed, for a second, that these talented young musicians may also have a deft hand for conflict resolution. Gig-goers would be actively participating in the act of loving their neighbour. Big Thief were simply the middle man. A promising approach to music in the Promised Land.

But Big Thief’s big ideas brought big trouble. For all the thought and deliberation that preceded the announcement on 4 June, a whole lot more thinking seemed to have happened in the five days that followed. The band said as much in the ensuing regressive, mucky statement. They had been “in constant dialogue with friends, family, BDS supporters and allies, Palestinians, and Israeli citizens who are committed to fight for justice for Palestinians”. They confessed to “limitations to our perspectives based on our various layers of privilege” (intersectionalist dreck so risible I shall leave it to someone with more patience than me to dissect), then went on to explain that their original intent to play “stemmed from a simple belief that music can heal”.

This was surely the most staggering statement made by any musicians in the long history of nonsense statements uttered by musicians. (And as a musician myself, I confess to contributing more than my fair share to the cannon).The implication here is that music can not in fact heal.

Don’t get me wrong. There is nothing more cringeworthy than hippie-dippie rainbow-rhythms peace-and-love rock n’ rollers harping on that “music can heal”. It must rank high in the clichés regurgitated by every new generation of well-meaning young artists thrust in front of journalists as they do their worldwide press junkets. But music not healing? What a thing to declare and what an astounding discovery, made in five short days. It is a conclusion so shocking as to make The Sex Pistols seem as controversial as an empty yogurt pot. Sorry, poor Palestinians, no help or money for you, it would be against your interests. Silly you for thinking that music could heal.

Therein lies the truth about BDS. For it is BDS and not Big Thief who are the villains in this tale. They are not interested in healing. They are not interested in conflict-resolution. It’s clear enough on their website: “The BDS movement does not advocate for a particular solution to the conflict and does not call for either a ‘one state solution’ or a ‘two state solution’.”

More alarming still is their statement of intent. It cites “ending [Israel’s] occupation and colonisation of all Arab lands”, which is a coded denial of Israel’s right to exist.

If there was ever any doubt about the group’s priorities, in successfully dissuading Big Thief from performing a fundraiser for Palestinians, surely now we can all see them for the ruthless malevolent actors they are.

BDS organisers are so blinded by their political ambitions that they lose their sense of humanity. I’m familiar with how BDS works. Some years ago, a friend and musical collaborator, Senegalese singer Baaba Maal, was due to perform in Jerusalem. Baaba is a Muslim, I might add. Within days of his announcing the show, a BDS activist managed to call me on my (personal) phone, urging me to dissuade Baaba from doing the show. He told me that he would happily do it himself, if I preferred, I just had to put him in touch with Baaba. Suffice to say Baaba, unlike others, apparently still believes that music does have the power to heal. The shows went ahead.

Baaba is not the only musician to show pluck in the face of the BDS bullying. Australian singer Nick Cave, a lone, lambent light on so many issues, performed there in 2017. In so doing, he said he took “a principled stand against anyone who tries to censor and silence musicians”, adding: “So really, you could say, in a way, that the BDS made me play Israel.” But most suffer the same BDS intimidation tactics as Big Thief. It is a compelling (if formulaic) play in three parts. Act One: Artist announces show, often acknowledging Palestinian plight and usually offering support. Act Two: Social Media storms, BDS activists swarm. Act Three: show gets cancelled. Lana Del Rey in 2018. Lorde in 2017. Gorillaz in 2010…

But I won’t turn this into a listicle. BDS enjoyed a peculiar victory earlier this year, when Irish novelist Sally Rooney refused to have an Israeli publishing house print her latest book in Hebrew. BDS have a stranglehold that turns tight around the neck of the creative industries. Musicians For Palestine, launched in 2021, is an anti-Israel collective with over 600 members. A total of 1,524 signed the Artists’ Pledge for Palestine, vowing to boycott Israel, also in 2021. Artists For Palestine UK, a group advocating the cultural boycott of the Jewish state, enjoys the support of Brian Eno, Roger Waters, Ken Loach and over 1,500 others. Spare a thought for budding bassist Oleartchik. It seems his bandmates in Big Thief have put him in rather an awkward position. By their new self-imposed standards, musical and philanthropic endeavours in Israel are seemingly unacceptable.

And if they are strictly abiding by BDS guidelines, all “companies and industries” there are not to be touched. I don’t envy his predicament. His career opportunities have suddenly become significantly limited. Nor do I envy the conversations he’ll have to have with family and friends in Israel.

I’ve been to Israel and Palestine a couple of times. I once DJed a festival in Bethlehem, Palestine, to a few hundred locals (I felt no pushback from Israelis, I note), and some Israelis who crossed the border. I know well that the troubles there are of a complexity and age both deep and endless.

But I also believe (and on this occasion I don’t mind sounding cheesy) that music heals. I suspect that BDS will continue to penetrate the arts. Above all, I know that the real losers from this latest BDS victory are the ever-suffering Palestinians.

Winston Marshall, the former lead guitarist of Mumford & Sons, is a musician and writer. He hosts the Spectator’s Marshall Matters podcast

 

Photo credit: By Stefan Schäfer, Lich – Own work, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=62976334

UN releases ‘unprecedented’ report linking anti-Semitism to BDS movement

Israeli, Jewish and pro-Israel groups all applauded the publication of an ‘unprecedented’ United Nations report on anti-Semitism, that, among other issues, links anti-Semitism to criticism of Israel and the BDS movement.

“This report marks one of the first times the U.N. has addressed the issue of anti-Semitism in any detail,” said Anne Herzberg, Legal Advisor and U.N. Liaison at NGO Monitor. “The Special Rapporteur condemned the use of anti-Semitic tropes and denial of Israel’s right to exist by BDS activists. Importantly, the Rapporteur also recommends the IHRA definition as a useful tool in combating anti-Semitism. Hopefully, U.N. bodies, particularly the Human Rights Council, will follow the Rapporteur’s lead by adopting IHRA and ending their promotion of anti-Semitic tropes and attacks on Israel’s legitimacy.”

The report, “Combatting Antisemitism to Eliminate Discrimination and Intolerance Based on Religion or Belief,” that was released by the Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Religion or Belief, Ahmed Shaheed, defines anti-Semitism as a global phenomenon—not one largely confined to the United States and Europe—as has been the case in many previous U.N. reports. The Special Rapporteur recognizes that the sources of anti-Semitism are varied, coming from the far right, from members of radical Islamist groups and from the political left.

The report identifies violence, discrimination and expressions of hostility motivated by Jew-hatred as a serious obstacle to the enjoyment of the right to freedom of religion or belief. It expresses “serious concern that the frequency of anti-Semitic incidents appears to be increasing in magnitude and that the prevalence of anti-Semitic attitudes and the risk of violence against Jewish individuals and sites appears to be significant, including in countries with little or no Jewish population.”

Additionally, the report “notes claims that the objectives, activities and effects of the Boycott Divestment Sanctions (BDS) movement are fundamentally anti-Semitic.”

The report recommends that all U.N. member states adopt the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance working definitionof anti-Semitism. So far, 18 of them have done so.

“The Special Rapporteur recognizes that the IHRA Working Definition of Antisemitism can offer valuable guidance for identifying anti-Semitism in its various forms, and therefore encourages States to adopt it for use in education, awareness-raising, and for monitoring and responding to manifestations of anti-Semitism,” states the report.

Israel’s ambassador to the UN, Danny Danon, commented that “we welcome the release of this unprecedented report on the subject of anti-Semitism. The report reflects the organizational change towards Israel. The assertion that the BDS movement encourages anti-Semitism is an important U.N. statement. As I have said many times, anti-Semitism has no place in our society, and must be denounced everywhere and from every platform.”

“Thanks to Ahmed Shaheed’s methodical and determined leadership, the U.N. finally is recognizing the severity of this ages-old hatred against Jews, and offering constructive guidance to member states on how to combat anti-Semitism effectively in their own countries and globally,” said Felice Gaer, director of the American Jewish Committee’s Jacob Blaustein Institute for the Advancement of Human Rights.

The World Jewish Congress also applauded the report’s release.

“We hope that this report serves as an eye-opener to the United Nations and its member states and that they finally take concrete action to stem the surge of anti-Semitism across the globe,” said World Jewish Congress president Ronald S. Lauder. “We are grateful to have been able to take part in the facilitation of this research to ensure that the very real concerns facing our communities on a daily basis were not only taken into consideration, but also addressed as areas deserving of serious and direct attention.” JN

Read the original article here:

Cover photo: Wikimedia Commons via JNS.org

Arab Thinkers Call to Abandon Boycotts and Engage With Israel

By David M. Halbfinger

Nov. 20, 2019

Boycotting Israel is a failure, and has only helped that country while damaging Arab nations that have long shunned the Jewish state, according to a small new group of liberal-minded Arab thinkers from across the Middle East who are pushing to engage with Israel on the theory that it would aid their societies and further the Palestinian cause.

The group has brought together Arab journalists, artists, politicians, diplomats, Quranic scholars and others who share a view that isolating and demonizing Israel has cost Arab nations billions in trade. They say it has also undercut Palestinian efforts to build institutions for a future state, and torn at the Arab social fabric, as rival ethnic, religious and national leaders increasingly apply tactics that were first tested against Israel.

“Arabs are the boycott’s first — and only — victims,” Eglal Gheita, an Egyptian-British lawyer, declared at an inaugural gathering this week in London.

Calling itself the Arab Council for Regional Integration, the group does not purport to be broadly representative of Arab public opinion. Its members espouse a viewpoint that is, to put it mildly, politically incorrect in their home countries: Some have already been ostracized for advocating engagement with Israel and others said they feared retribution when they return.

Still, the few dozen members include more than a few well-known figures in places as far-ranging as Morocco, Libya, Sudan, Egypt, Lebanon, Iraq and the Persian Gulf, many of whom have begun to speak out, to varying degrees, in favor of engagement with Israel. The most recognizable name — to Western eyes, at least — may be that of Anwar Sadat, nephew and namesake of the Egyptian president who struck the first Arab peace treaty with Israel. He is also a critic of President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi who was expelled from Egypt’s Parliament in 2017.

One of the council’s main organizers, Mustafa el-Dessouki, the Egyptian managing editor of an influential Saudi-funded newsmagazine, Majalla, said that as he has wandered the region in recent years he has met many like-minded Arabs “who had kind of been waiting for somebody like me to come along.”

Arab news media and entertainment have long been “programming people toward this hostility” toward Israel and Jews, he said, while political leaders were “intimidating and scaring people into manifesting it.” But many Arabs — even, to his surprise, in Lebanon, a bitter Israeli enemy — “actually want to connect with Israelis,” he added.

To a degree, the group also reflects the geopolitical alignment now linking the Persian Gulf nations and other predominantly Sunni Muslim countries with Israel, against Iran and its Shiite proxies in the region, said Mr. el-Dessouki’s co-organizer, Joseph Braude, an American author and Middle East analyst of Iraqi-Jewish descent.

“The sense of Israel being somehow a greater friend or lesser enemy than Iran is a factor here,” he said. But it is also one that will not last forever, he said, creating an urgency to build ties “based on common humanity, not some fleeting shared-security concern.”

For the Palestinians, the council’s arguments fly in the face of decades of efforts to isolate Israel in the hope that this would force it to make concessions at the negotiating table.

Even Palestinian leaders who do not support the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement oppose fully normalizing Arab relations with Israel, arguing that Israel’s diplomatic gains from the Oslo peace process had only encouraged Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to expand settlements on the West Bank.

Husam Zomlot, who leads the Palestinian mission to the United Kingdom and did the same in Washington until the Trump administration closed that office, belittled the new council’s members as an “extreme fringe of isolated individuals.” From Tunisia, whose new president has called it treasonous to engage with Israel, he said, to Lebanon, where protesters are waving the Palestinian flag alongside their own, “the sentiment of the vast majority of the Arab world is going in the other direction.”

“They are playing into the hands of Netanyahu,” Mr. Zomlot said, because Mr. Netanyahu wants to “convince the Israeli electorate that he can have the cake and eat it too: keep the occupation and still normalize relations with the Arab world.”

Mr. Netanyahu, indeed, has long posited that Arab nations are so eager to engage with Israel, culturally and commercially, that they will come around to normalizing ties even in the absence of a Palestinian state.

The Arab Council’s members, however, explicitly reject the view that it is possible for Arab countries to reach formal diplomatic relations with Israel without resolution of the Palestinian conflict. And they argue that polls show that when Israelis are offered the enticement of acceptance by Arab nations, they become more willing to compromise, even by giving up land.

Mr. Sadat, for one, heaped enormous criticism upon Israel over its treatment of the Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza and of its own Arab citizens, as well as for “supporting the current autocratic regime in Egypt.” All those things, he said, were adding to what he called the “Egyptian guilt quotient” over having made peace with Israel in the first place.

Some participants urged measures like establishing a teachers college and research institute with campuses in Casablanca, Amman, Haifa and Manama. And an Iraqi counterterrorism expert living in Germany, Jassim Mohammad, urged Arab security services to stop the spread of “radicalism and hate” in the media, schools and mosques and to spread “corrective content about Israel and Jews” instead.

He called this a “matter of Arab national security.”

“The tools of scapegoating and blame deflection that initially targeted Jews and Israel have long since found new, local targets,” Mr. Mohammad wrote, like ruling elites or rival ethnicities and sects.

The attendees received piped-in encouragement from Tony Blair, the former British prime minister, who commended them for speaking out and said that nurturing stronger Arab-Israeli ties was vital to “any realistic possibility of an enduring peace” and a two-state solution.

Mr. el-Dessouki said some members were attending at considerable risk. Egyptian citizens, including Mr. Sadat, were warned not to attend by security officials, he said.

Members praised a Lebanese cleric from Tripoli, Saleh Hamed, who attended in spite of the possibility of reprisal upon his return. “We do not deny the rights of the Jews to have a country,” Sheikh Hamed said, citing the Prophet Muhammad’s kindness toward Jews. But he was careful to add that the Palestinians “should have their lands according to the 1967 borders.”

Sukayna Mushaykhis, a Saudi news anchor in Dubai, recalled seeing Lebanese officials abruptly exit a meeting in San Francisco when they learned that their hosts were Jews. “And yet today,” she said, “I hear a man of faith coming from a state that is governed by Hezbollah, and he talks with so much bravery and courage.”

The group met privately, citing security concerns, but allowed The New York Times to monitor the proceedings, which were held in Arabic, by live stream on the condition that it not report on them until the conference had concluded. The conference was funded strictly by American donors, but organizers said they planned to raise money in the region as a going concern.

They stressed that they received no aid from any government and that no Israelis were involved in any way.

In a founding document, the members urged their adversaries to debate them constructively “rather than resort to old methods of silencing critics and demonizing reformers.”

Only one Palestinian was in attendance: Mohammed S. Dajani Daoudi, an academic who said he lost his post at Al Quds University in East Jerusalem after his bridge-building efforts with Israelis led him to take a group of Palestinian students to Auschwitz to learn about the Holocaust.

Mr. Dajani called for educating a new generation of peacemakers, lamenting that the Oslo process had failed to achieve peace in part because the “peace discussed between diplomats and generals was never fully matched by preparations for a wave of peace between peoples, allowing spoilers on both sides to win the day.”

Asked why the only Palestinian participating was already something of an outcast, Mr. Braude said that younger Palestinians were interested, but that there were none well-established enough in their careers yet to withstand the blowback.

“We didn’t want to burn them,” he said.

See entire article here.

Is B.D.S. Anti-Semitic? A Closer Look at the Boycott Israel Campaign

Main photo: Demonstrators in Bethlehem calling for the boycott of the Eurovision song contest in Israel in May.
Credit: Musa Al Shaer

JERUSALEM — In a matter of months, a campaign to boycott Israel has moved from the margins of politics — liberal college campuses and protest marches — to Congress, where the freshman representatives Ilhan Omar of Minnesota and Rashida Tlaib of Michigan have become its most vocal backers, drawing fire from the White House.

On Tuesday, the House overwhelmingly passed a resolution condemning the campaign, the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement. With its adherents prominent in the British Labour Party and critics fighting it in Washington and dozens of state capitals, B.D.S. has become a proxy for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in the United States and Europe, with all the emotion the conflict stirs.

The movement’s supporters are routinely accused of anti-Semitism. Opponents are accused of trampling on free speech. Yet B.D.S. is often misunderstood and misrepresented by people on both sides. Is it a legitimate, nonviolent protest to protect the rights of Palestinians, or a movement that aims to eliminate Israel and traffics in anti-Semitism?

Here are answers to some of the most difficult questions.

What is B.D.S.?

The B.D.S. movement seeks to mobilize international economic and political pressure on Israel in solidarity with the Palestinians. Modeled on the fight against the apartheid regime in South Africa, it calls for countries, businesses and universities to sever ties with Israel unless it meets three demands:

• Ending its occupation of all land captured in 1967 and dismantling the wall and fence that separate Israel from much of the West Bank, dividing many Palestinian neighborhoods.

• Granting “full equality” to Palestinian citizens of Israel.

• Assuring the right of Palestinian refugees and their descendants to return to the homes and properties from which they or their ancestors were displaced in the wars that led to the establishment of Israel in 1948.

Many who embrace B.D.S. see it aimed primarily at ending Israel’s occupation of the West Bank. Its demands sound innocuous enough: Israel already claims to give its Arab citizens equal protection under the law. Withdrawing from Palestinian territory would create space for a coherent Palestinian state. The fate of Palestinian refugees would have to be addressed in any ultimate resolution.

But many Israelis say the movement’s real goal is the elimination of Israel as a Jewish state. Full equality for Arab citizens of Israel would require overturning or amending Israeli laws that grant Jews automatic citizenship and define Israel as the nation-state of the Jewish people. Granting a right of return to the Palestinians classified as refugees — the original refugees and their millions of descendants — would spell the end of a Jewish majority.

In an interview, Omar Barghouti, a top B.D.S. spokesman, called the Israeli laws racist and exclusionary. A democratic state could still provide asylum for Jewish refugees, showing “some sensitivity to the Jewish experience,” he said, “but it cannot be a racist law that says only Jews benefit.” Asked if that means Jews cannot have their own state, he said, “Not in Palestine.”

Omar Barghouti, center, a top B.D.S. spokesman, says that Israeli laws favoring Jews are racist and discriminatory.

CreditRob Stothard/Getty Images

Who is behind it?

B.D.S. describes itself as a loosely connected, nonhierarchical network of activists, though coordination is provided by the Palestinian B.D.S. National Committee, of which Mr. Barghouti, a Palestinian resident of Israel, is a co-founder.

A host of affiliated groups lead the charge for B.D.S., such as Students for Justice in Palestine and Jewish Voice for Peace in the United States, the Palestine Solidarity Campaign and War on Want in Britain, and the World Council of Churches in Europe.

Within the West Bank and Gaza, sponsors include a broad coalition of unions and nongovernmental organizations. B.D.S. enjoys at least the tacit support of a large majority of Palestinians, according to Khalil Shikaki, a Ramallah-based pollster.

Elsewhere, it appeals to those, including a significant number of politically liberal Jews, who are frustrated by the Israeli occupation of the West Bank, and the blockade and frequent bloodshed in Gaza.

Is B.D.S. anti-Semitic?

Leaders of B.D.S. insist that it is not anti-Semitic, and the movement’s umbrella group explicitly rejects anti-Semitism.

But many Israelis and American Jews say it is, using the so-called three-Ds test to distinguish fair criticism of Israel from anti-Semitism: Does the criticism delegitimize Israel, apply a double standard or demonize it?

B.D.S. does all three, its critics say, by questioning Israel’s right to exist, and by singling out Israel for its treatment of Israel’s Arab citizens when minorities in some countries suffer far more. The columnist Ben-Dror Yemini, a critic of the movement, said B.D.S. supporters also demonize Israel when they portray the country as “the great danger to humanity.”

Rebutting the double-standard charge, B.D.S. leaders say that Palestinians fighting for their own rights should not be expected to give equivalent attention to abused minorities elsewhere. And Kenneth Stern, director of Bard College’s Center for the Study of Hate, urges a distinction between effect and motivation: Palestinians who feel no ill will toward Jews but yearn for self-determination in the land of their forebears may rightly argue that to disparage that yearning is a form of bigotry.

Is B.D.S. anti-Zionist?

Yes, loudly and proudly. Its founding documents explicitly reject Zionism — the belief in self-determination for the Jewish people in the biblical land of Israel — calling it the “ideological pillar of Israel’s regime of occupation, settler colonialism and apartheid.”

“A Jewish state in Palestine in any shape or form cannot but contravene the basic rights of the indigenous Palestinian population and perpetuate a system of racial discrimination that ought to be opposed categorically,” Mr. Barghouti said.

Is it nonviolent?

In its original 2005 call, B.D.S. urged strictly “nonviolent punitive measures,” and Mr. Barghouti said B.D.S. “considers violence targeting noncombatants as illegal and immoral.” Still, he said, B.D.S. treats resistance to what it sees as Israeli oppression, including by armed struggle, as a legitimate right. Asked if B.D.S. condemned violence that targeted Israeli soldiers, he declined to comment.

Opponents have attacked B.D.S. not just for failing to condemn violence but for allowing terrorists and their supporters under its umbrella. The B.D.S. National Committee’s members, for example, include the Council of National and Islamic Forces in Palestine. The council includes several groups designated by the United States as terrorist organizations, including Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine.

A protest in the Gaza Strip in March supporting the right of Palestinian refugees and their descendants to return to their ancestral lands in Israel — a goal of the B.D.S. movement.

CreditMohammed Saber/EPA, via Shutterstock

How does B.D.S. propose to solve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict?

It does not. B.D.S. does not advocate for any specific outcome.

Critics say B.D.S. is actually counterproductive to resolving the conflict, because it rejects Israel’s right to exist in spite of settled international law; encourages Palestinians to insist on the right of return for all refugees, which Israel is unlikely to ever accept in negotiations; pressures only one side to make concessions; and discourages bridge-building efforts between Israelis and Palestinians on the grounds that they “normalize” Israel. They say its rejection of the Jewish state distracts from debate over how to end the conflict and plays into the hands of right-wing Israeli opponents of a Palestinian state.

How entrenched has B.D.S. become in the United States?

As an organized movement, not very. B.D.S. does not appear especially well financed, its leadership is atomized and at the grass-roots level even its most enthusiastic backers do not always agree on what they are trying to achieve. Still, the idea has significant support, and may be gaining ground. A survey released in February suggested that one in five Americans approved of B.D.S. as a way of opposing Israeli policy toward Palestinians. A December 2018 University of Maryland poll of a much larger sample put support at 40 percent.

Actual accomplishments have been minimal: a few dozen resolutions in university student assemblies; a handful of decisions by law-enforcement agencies to stop training with the Israeli military; votes by two faculty groups last year — the Association for Asian American Studies and the larger American Studies Association — for limited boycotts of Israeli academia.

Opponents of B.D.S. have more to show for their efforts. Legislatures in at least 26 states have passed laws barring government agencies from contracting with or investing in companies that support B.D.S. In New York, Gov. Andrew Cuomo signed an executive order to that effect in 2016.

The state laws are being challenged in the courts, where opponents argue that they impinge on free speech. Some of the state laws have been struck down for violating the First Amendment.

The Republican-led Senate approved a federal version of an anti-B.D.S. bill in February that would allow state and local governments to break ties with companies that join the boycott. The House passed a weaker version on Tuesday, condemning B.D.S. but with a nonbinding resolution that left out the controversial measure allowing governments to boycott companies that support the movement.

Graves vandalized with swastikas at a Jewish cemetery in Quatzenheim, France, in February. Anti-Semitism has increased in Europe but any link to B.D.S. is unclear.

CreditFrederick Florin/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images

Is there a link between the resurgence of anti-Semitism in Europe and B.D.S.?

Anti-Semitism has increased in Europe because of numerous factors, including globalization, populism, loss of national identity and the perceived oppression of Palestinians by Israel. A growing Muslim minority, mostly from North Africa, has viewed Israeli policies toward the Palestinians as anti-Muslim, leading many to support B.D.S.

There is some overlap between support for B.D.S. and anti-Semitism.

But while the European Union and some member states have introduced labeling requirements for products from the occupied West Bank and have denied funding to academic institutions in West Bank settlements, B.D.S. has had very little impact outside university settings.

Generally there has also been far less political pushback to B.D.S. in Europe than in America, partly because Jews in Europe are fewer and less organized than in the United States. European countries have strict nondiscrimination laws that would make official adherence to B.D.S. difficult.

Thousands of tourists came to Israel for the Eurovision song contest, held in Tel Aviv in May, despite a call for a boycott.
CreditTsafrir Abayov/Associated Press

Is B.D.S. working?

In the most tangible ways, not so much. Despite scattered pullouts from Israel by some companies, foreign direct investment in Israel is at an all-time high. Israel’s economy is well-suited to resist boycotts because it is less dependent on exports of commodities, which can be sourced elsewhere, than on sales of intellectual property, like software, and business-to-business products, against which it is harder to mobilize consumers. And while Ireland advanced legislation to ban imports of goods produced by Israeli settlements on the West Bank last year, the B.D.S. movement acknowledges that few foreign governments have imposed sanctions on Israel.

Reputational damage is harder to quantify, and B.D.S. frequently scores public-relations victories: The singer Lana Del Rey pulled out of a Tel Aviv music festival last year and the Argentine national soccer team canceled a match in Israel. But an effort to boycott the Eurovision song contest in Israel in May failed to make much of a dent.

How do Israelis view B.D.S.?

Not kindly, though some are happy to exploit it.

Many in what is left of the peace camp support a targeted boycott of settlement products, but see a boycott of all of Israel as unacceptable.

Israel’s government has embraced two seemingly opposing views, boasting on the world stage that B.D.S. is having no effect while warning Israelis that it is a strategic threat. In domestic politics, exaggerating the threat of B.D.S. adds to the sense that Israel is besieged and that the Palestinians are not really interested in peacemaking, bolstering right-wing arguments for continued expansion of Jewish settlements in the West Bank.

Correction: 

An earlier version of this article incorrectly described the status of legislation in Ireland concerning goods produced by Israeli settlements in the West Bank. Ireland has advanced legislation to ban the import of those goods, it has not banned them. Also, the article misstated the status of Omar Barghouti, a B.D.S. spokesman. He is a Palestinian resident of Israel, not a citizen.

David M. Halbfinger reported from Jerusalem, Michael Wines from Washington, and Steven Erlanger from Brussels.

Original article here.

Reggae star Anthony B performs in Israel for Bob Marley’s 74th birthday

Rastifarianism is not a religion but a spiritual culture, explains Anthony

Jamaican reggae sensation Anthony B took to the stage in Israel with performers around the world to celebrate the late reggae legend Bob Marley’s 74th birthday over the weekend with a “One Love” concert.

In an exclusive interview with i24NEWS, he describes the impact of visiting the holy places he learned about growing up.

“And as we say, experience is the greatest teacher, so what you hear about Israel and what you read about Israel — when you come here it’s a different vibration.”

During the concert at the ancient amphitheatre in Caesarea, a video message was shown onstage from Palestinian singer Rami Aman and others in the Gaza Strip wishing happy birthday to Bob Marley and thanking him for his message of peace and love spread through his music.

“We are here in Gaza sending our love and greeting for him and for all,”

“I’m here with a Jewish lady from America, I’m from Jamaica, we’re in Israel, I’m wearing a Palestinian headwrap; so you see it’s all about peace and love, it doesn’t matter where you’re from,” Anthony B said during his interview with i24NEWS Culture Correspondent Emily Frances.

Rastifarianism is not a religion but a spiritual culture, explains Anthony, that believes they are one of the lost tribes of Israel, descending from the first emperor of Ethiopia Menelek,who is thought to be the son of King Solomon and Queen Sheba

“The dreadlocks are a holy sacrament taken before Christ never to trim or shave, instead letting the locks grow until the days are manifested,” Anthony explains of the rastafarian custom of growing out their hair into dreads.

He also explains the Rastafarian practice of smoking “ganga” as founded on the belief that the only thing to grow at Solomon’s gravesite was the marijuana plant.

“Everyone who thinks he’s a wise man wants to smoke marijuana because he wants to be as wise as Solomon,” he says in jive.

“Jerusalem, Bethlehem — these places didn’t even sound like a place on earth,” he says in awe of the biblical places he learned about as a child.

Original Article

Israeli-Palestinian orchestra brings message of peace to divided America

By OLIVIA HAMPTON

WASHINGTON (AFP) — Israeli, Palestinian and other Middle Eastern musicians brought a message of peace this week to an America torn by caustic political discourse.

For nearly 20 years, youths from sworn enemy countries have performed classical music together at the West-Eastern Divan Orchestra, the brainchild of conductor Daniel Barenboim and late Palestinian American scholar Edward Said.

“We are looking for something almost impossible, but still we try,” said Kian Soltani, 26, a rising Austrian Iranian cellist who gave a fiery performance Wednesday at Washington’s John F Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts.

The orchestra opened its program with Richard Strauss’s symphonic poem “Don Quixote,” inspired by the early 17th century novel about the romantic knight-errant who combats imaginary tyrants.

In many ways, the piece is a metaphor for the orchestra itself.

“If somebody would tell us that peace in the Middle East was impossible, we wouldn’t stop fighting. We would still continue like this because we believe it’s possible,” Soltani, who played the title role, told AFP.

Michael Barenboim (L), the orchestra’s concertmaster, performs during a rehearsal at the Kennedy Center in Washington, DC on November 7, 2018. (Olivia Hampton/AFP)

“It’s the same for Don Quixote. He thinks he’s a knight, he thinks his dream is possible. Everyone is telling him it’s not, but he doesn’t care.”

Quixotic as it may be, the project is making its first coast-to-coast American tour just as the United States reels from a series of deadly hate crimes.

Politics and war have thwarted a goal to perform in all the members’ home countries. There was a concert in the West Bank city of Ramallah, in 2005, and none in Israel.

“It’s a pity,” violist Miriam Manasherov, 37, told AFP.

“The day that will come that we can all play in Israel or in the other Arab countries that I can’t go to, that will be a huge success.”

She plays the rotund Sancho Panza, who supports his master gone mad as he pursues his ideals on love, justice and peace in an ugly world.

The pair also performed with their sections for Tchaikovsky’s Fifth Symphony, which evolves from dark to light in four movements linked by a recurring “Fate” theme.

In “Don Quixote,” the hero ultimately gives up on his dream, returns home and dies among his loved ones. The orchestra is hoping to march toward a different future.

Changing attitudes

While he acknowledges that the orchestra — which borrows its name from Goethe’s German lyrical poems inspired by Persian poet Hafez — has not had much impact on the ground in the Middle East, Barenboim says the project has left a “terrific” stamp musically.

Daniel Barenboim (photo credit: CC-BY-Alkan, Wikimedia Commons)

Daniel Barenboim (CC-BY-Alkan, Wikimedia Commons)

“It has changed the attitude of every person who has been through it. That’s about 1,000 people,” said Argentine-born Barenboim, who also claims Israeli, Palestinian and Spanish citizenship.

“Nobody who comes into this with whatever preconceptions he has, goes away thinking the same way.”

The orchestra’s first coast-to-coast US tour is a homecoming of sorts for Barenboim, 75, who stepped down as the Chicago Symphony Orchestra’s director in 2006 after more than four decades that also saw him serve as conductor and pianist there.

The Midwestern city was the tour’s first stop, on Monday, ahead of performances in Washington, New York’s Carnegie Hall, Berkeley, California and Los Angeles.

During their last US visit, in 2013, the orchestra performed the Beethoven symphony cycle at Carnegie Hall, as well as in Boston and Providence, Rhode Island.

“It is a conflict between two people who are deeply convinced they have a right to the same little piece of land, preferably without the other,” Barenboim said about the intractable Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

The West-Eastern Divan Orchestra performs during a rehearsal at the Kennedy Center in Washington, DC on November 7, 2018. (Olivia Hampton/AFP)

“You cannot solve this militarily, unless you kill everybody, and you cannot solve it politically.

“You can only solve it by coming to the point where both sides understand that their destinies are inextricably linked and therefore accept the existence of the other.”

Deceptively simple as it may seem, that is the thrust behind the orchestra and the Barenboim-Said Akademie in Berlin, which trains gifted musicians mainly from the Middle East and North Africa for a professional career.

To drive the point home, the concert’s closing encore was the overture of Richard Wagner’s “The Mastersingers of Nuremberg,” a work widely used in Nazi propaganda and subverted once more by the orchestra’s unique make-up, to raucous applause and a standing ovation.

Original Article

ANTI-ISRAEL GROUP CALLS ON E.U. TO CANCEL ISRAELI-PALESTINIAN GATHERING

BY KHALED ABU TOAMEH  OCTOBER 3, 2018

The anti-Israel Palestinian Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel (PACBI) has called on the EU to cancel a program to bring together young Israelis and Palestinians in December under the pretext that the event promotes normalization between the two people.

The group said that it sent a letter last month to Ralph Tarraf, Head of the EU delegation in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, protesting the planned event, which is scheduled to be held in the context of a program called “Israeli and Palestinian Young Leaders at the European Parliament.”

The campaign targeting the EU program is likely to prompt some of the Palestinian participants to withdraw from the events out of fear of facing a shame campaign on social media.

Palestinian activists regularly target meetings between Israelis and Palestinians, claiming that such encounters promote normalization between the two sides.

Last month, Palestinian activists, some of them affiliated with the ruling Fatah faction, disrupted a meeting at east Jerusalem’s American Colony Hotel marking the 25th anniversary of the signing of the Oslo Accords. Israeli and Palestinian participants were forced to call off the meeting.

The PABCI letter claimed that the EU program “violates the relevant BDS guidelines agreed upon by the vast majority of Palestinian civil society.” The letter also accused the EU of being “highly complicit in Israel’s violations of Palestinian rights and international law.” It urged the EU to “end all forms of complicity and to halt all its normalization programs.”

The group said it decided to publish the letter in public after it did not receive a response from the EU delegation chief. “We therefore share the letter publicly so that Palestinians and Europeans alike will realize how harmful these EU-funded normalization projects are to the popular Palestinian struggle for freedom, justice and equality.”

The group also called on Palestinian participants to cancel their participation in the event so as to “avoid becoming themselves complicit in undermining the Palestinian struggle for our inalienable rights under international law.”

Original Article

Jewish and Palestinian Teens Reach for Understanding One More Time

By Daniel Gordis, Bloomberg

“When your soldiers shoot us at checkpoints,” a Palestinian teenager asked a group of Israelis his age, “is it because they are genuinely afraid, or is killing us more like a sport for them?”

“Aren’t you ashamed,” an Israel teen later asked of the Palestinians, “to be part of a culture that glorifies terror and murder?”

Israeli and Palestinian teenagers hardly ever meet, much less find themselves in a setting where such questions are not only acceptable but also encouraged. The Roots program that brought these teens together, however, is the brainchild of a Palestinian peace activist, Ali Abu Awwad, and is now co-directed by Ali’s brother Haled.

The 47-year-old Abu Awwad is in many ways an unlikely advocate of nonviolence. His mother, active in the Palestine Liberation Organization, was jailed by Israel when he was 10 years old. A brother was later killed by Israeli soldiers, under circumstances that are still contested. Abu Awwad himself spent time in jail for attacking Israeli soldiers during the First Intifada.

What turned him around, he told me when we met at his home, was the sight of Jewish tears. He was attending a meeting of Jews and Palestinians who had lost family members in the conflict, and in the course of the conversation, a Jewish woman wept. The sight, he said, shocked him. Perhaps hyperbolically, he said that it had never crossed his mind that Jews cry, too. It was then, he said, that he decided to devote his life to a different solution to the endless conflict.

The location of the Roots program in the Etzion region, just south of Jerusalem, is intentional and fraught. Gush Etzion (Hebrew for Etzion region), or the “Gush” as it is commonly called, had been populated with Jews before Israel’s creation in 1948. It fell to the Jordanians just days before Israel’s independence, and remained under Jordanian control for 19 years. Almost as soon as Israel wrested it back in the 1967 Six Day War, the children and grandchildren of the men who had died trying to defend it returned to the Gush and began to build.

Today, the Gush is home to a number of Jewish communities. Surrounding these towns (“settlements” in international parlance) are numerous Arab villages. The proximity of their homes notwithstanding — Israelis and Palestinians in the Gush even frequent the same shopping centers — the two populations almost never talk and know virtually nothing about each other. Abu Awwad’s program aims to change that.

A few dozen Jews and Palestinians, all teenagers, meet regularly, their discussions facilitated by translators. All of them encounter resistance, even hostility, from other members of their own community for having agreed to participate. Together, they slowly break down stereotypes.

One Jewish participant, Elnatan Bazak, wrote a Facebook post in August about his two years of participation in the group, claiming that what he had learned to do was to hear another side without weakening his own commitments. “I discovered,” he wrote, “that it is possible to sing and dance … wrapped in an Israeli flag on Jerusalem [Unification] Day, and then to join an interfaith service praying for the city’s peace.” Similarly, he said, he’d learned that it was possible to organize a joint trip to Yad Vashem, Israel’s national Holocaust memorial and museum, and then, with equal interest, to visit the site of an Arab village that was destroyed in 1948. Those are not the sort of sentiments common — or popular — among many of his fellow settlers.

The program’s leaders are quick to note that its impact extends beyond the few dozen teenagers involved at any one time: It opens the eyes of their families, and then circles beyond. David Palant, the father of one Jewish participant from the settlement of Alon Shvut, noted in an open letter he wrote about the program that when his son “returned from a joint Shabbat near Hadera, and told us that there were Palestinians in the group who had never before seen the ocean, my heart broke.”

Palant described what happened when he attended a Roots program on the Ninth of Av, a deeply nationalist day on which Jews mourn the destruction of the two temples: He heard a lecture by a sheikh from Jaffa and “was deeply impressed by what he said, by things he told about which I had no idea, and I was mortified. How was it possible that in all my years, in the thousands of hours that I had devoted to Jewish and general education … I had never found the time to learn anything about the culture of the people who live next to me?”

In the highly ideological and often monolithic settler community, going public with such a letter requires more than audacity — it is throwing social caution to the wind. Even if in small numbers, Palestinian and Jewish families involved in Roots are choosing to do just that.

This election cycle is a reminder of why such encounters matter. When Yesh Atid, Israel’s centrist party, recently posted its platform online, it stated: “We are not looking for a marriage with the Palestinians but a divorce from them. … Our aim is to create a demilitarized Palestinian state alongside a strong and secure Jewish state of Israel, with strict adherence to security arrangements and freedom of operation for the IDF. The settlement blocs will remain part of Israel. We will not recognize a right of return for Palestinians and Jerusalem will forever remain the united capital of Israel.”

To the majority of Israelis, that stance makes perfectly good sense. To most Palestinians, it is a nonstarter. Given the political stalemate, if relations between the two peoples are to inch forward, it may just be in meetings between adults, and even teenagers, far from the glare of headlines.

“I have another question,” an Israeli teenager asked her Palestinian counterparts at a recent meeting. “Is there anything about our culture that you actually like?”

The Palestinian kids were quiet for a moment, and then they laughed. “We love your music,” they said. Specifically Eyal Golan, an Israeli rock star who sings in Hebrew, but in a Middle Eastern, almost Arabic-sounding style. “We don’t understand the Hebrew; but we listen to him all the time; we know all the words by heart.”

Original Article

X