While Democrats are fighting a civil war over the Fast Track trade promotion authority bill that is growing increasingly nasty, a sidebar squabble over amendments to the legislation involving efforts to discourage boycotts of Israel is also starting to draw attention. As Politico reports, there is a bipartisan effort to include provisions that seek to prevent American trading partners from boycotting, divesting or sanctioning (BDS) commercial activity with Israel or “Israeli-controlled territories.” That last phrase is the sticking point for many on the left who are using it to label the measures “pro-settlement” and “anti-peace.” But while some in Israel and even those who believe they are friends of Israel draw a broad distinction between boycotts of all of Israel and those targeting business within Jewish communities in the West Bank, this is a false distinction that shouldn’t confuse the issue. What is at stake here is a vicious international BDS movement that dovetails with the rising tide of anti-Semitism in Europe is making rapid strides to isolate the Jewish state while assisting an economic war whose ultimate goal is its destruction.
Some of the amendment’s critics claim that any effort to oppose the BDS movement is, in effect, an effort to use trade to suppress speech that is critical of either Israel or the settlements. But it’s useful to put this issue in historical perspective. A generation ago, the pro-Israel community, with the help of both Democrats and Republicans, successfully used America’s economic power as well as its diplomatic influence to combat the Arab boycott of Israel. The point was that the boycotters had achieved great success by intimidating business in the Third World, Europe and even the United States. They were warned that any company that did business in Israel could not do so in the Arab world. But legislation put the world on notice that companies that observed the boycott faced penalties in the United States. That helped break the economic blockade of Israel.
The BDS movement is just another variation of the same discriminatory theme. Its object is not just to isolate Israel but also to bully foreign institutions and businesses into shunning the Jewish state. Since it seeks to subject the one Jewish state in the world and its people to a standard that is not applied to any other nation, it is a form of discrimination that is indistinguishable from anti-Semitism. That is a point that has recently been made clear when pro-BDS advocates targeted Jewish students who opposed their position.
Seen in that light, Congressional efforts to both oppose and penalize those who engage in BDS efforts is in keeping with American values and our foreign policy interests that rest in part on preservation of the nation’s sole democratic ally in the Middle East.
In reply, so-called pro-peace groups on the left like J Street as well as open supporters of BDS like Jewish Voices for Peace, say that by including “Israeli-controlled territories” as an area that should not be boycotted, Congress will be legitimizing settlements and harming the cause of peace. But this is another false argument.
The first problem with this argument is that while it is possible for some on the Jewish left to draw a line between the Israeli Jews they want to boycott and others they wish to leave alone, that is a distinction that is lost on Israel’s numerous enemies and anti-Semites either in the Middle East or in Europe. While there is a vigorous debate in Israel and elsewhere about whether the settlements can or should retained by Israel, treating Israeli citizens who are in their homes and businesses with the permission of their country’s government as lawbreaking pariahs is both inappropriate as well as an invitation to boycott all Israelis wherever they live. When one takes into account that the overwhelming majority of “settlers” live in communities near the 1967 lines or in Jerusalem — places that would be retained in any peace deal with the Palestinians — that makes the discrimination even more prejudicial. When one considers that Israel has offered the Palestinians peace and independence (including possession of most of the West Bank and a share of Jerusalem) only to be turned down each time, the insistence that the settlements is the obstacle to peace must be seen as nothing more than a canard.
Boycotting settlements won’t bring peace closer by one day nor will it facilitate a two-state solution that the Palestinians have repeatedly rejected. In fact the boycotts make peace less likely because they encourage the Palestinians not to negotiate and prejudges the outcome of talks that should be resolved by the parties, not foreign governments, institutions or businesses. The focus on settlements (that Israel has already proved that it is willing to give up for peace as they did in Gaza in 2005) is nothing more than an attempt to divert attention from the real obstacle that is Palestinian intransigence and unwillingness to recognize the legitimacy of a Jewish state no matter where its borders are drawn.
It is telling that those on the left that would like to speak for American Jews are opposing this legislative effort to defend Israel against BDS while AIPAC — the true voice of the pro-Israel community that embraces both Democrats and Republicans — is championing the amendments.
To the credit of Congress and both parties, bipartisan majorities in committees in the House and the Senate have already approved the anti-BDS amendments. They should not be stripped out of the final trade bill through the machinations of left-wing critics of Israel. Nor should the unions and their allies, who oppose the trade bill, altogether, collude with the left or the Obama administration (which rightly supports the trade bill but is always happy to take a shot at Israel) to undermine the effort to stop boycotts of Israel. While it is not surprising that those who seek to oppose Israel’s right to exist and to defend itself would oppose anti-BDS efforts, those who support those principles should not be misled into opposing this effort.
