By Pinhas Avivi & Frank Sobchak
One of the most controversial debates in Israel today is the degree of danger presented by the Boycott, Divestment & Sanctions (BDS) movement and how Israel and its friends should respond. A series of studies have hypothesized that the movement will have a negligible impact, noting that Israel’s GDP has doubled in the decade from 2006 to 2015, despite BDS calls for economic punishment over the same time frame. Other studies have warned that if the campaign gains political traction, it could result in $47 billion of economic losses over a similar ten-year span. Because of the vast differences in anticipated effects, some argue that BDS should be ignored while others contend that extreme measures should be taken to discredit the amorphous movement and its leaders.
Although the economic impact of BDS is in dispute, those who love Israel and care deeply for her well being ignore the potential dangers of the movement at great peril. We live in an era where social media can spawn change at lightning speed and at unprecedented levels. Financing, recruiting, and spreading propaganda have been facilitated greatly by the technological upheavals of the information age. Revolutions have been sparked, seemingly overnight, by postings on YouTube and Twitter. Such a revolution played out inside the Labour Party in the United Kingdom, where Corbynization transformed that party from a long-time friend and ally into a home for supporters of the BDS movement. A similar frightening transformation has quietly been occurring within the Democratic Party in the United States, where a recent poll indicated 44% of party members supported BDS.
Israel’s March election provides a historic opportunity to counter the narrative of this dangerous movement and roll back its support among traditional friends. If the political coalition that earns the most votes were to extend an offer to form a government to elements of the Joint List (excluding Balad) of 4 Israeli-Arab parties, that action would undermine the message of the BDS movement and could open pathways towards peace and normalization which themselves would be effective ways to combat BDS. This is just one reason why such an offer is appropriate.
In a war of words or information war such as the one being waged by BDS, it is critical to challenge their narrative not only with words, but more importantly with actions that conclusively prove their contentions to be falsifications. Extending an offer for the Joint List Arab parties to join the government would undercut one of the central messages of the BDS movement, which speciously claims that Israeli-Arab citizens do not have the same rights as other Israelis. Even if the Arab parties decided to not accept the proposal, history would unequivocally record that the option for full inclusion in the government as part of a multi-faith and multi-identity coalition, was offered. Such a momentous move would make news globally, especially given the heightened attention attracted by Israel’s third election in a year- itself a historic election that aims to break electoral deadlock. This offer would also establish a clear narrative that Israeli Arabs, who have been an integral part of the fabric of Israeli society since its inception in the medical, pharmaceutical, academic and tourism fields, were also welcome, to the fullest extent, in Israeli politics.
While such an action would obviously not destroy BDS nor change the minds of its most fervent supporters, it would undoubtedly impact recruitment, funding, and political support for the movement. Sympathy gained from such an inclusive move would also likely improve relations with the Palestinians and could be a good first step on the path towards peace and normalized relations, which itself is one of the most potent ways to combat the BDS movement. Towards that end, the connections between the Palestinians and Israeli Arabs should be seen as an asset rather than an obstacle, knowing that positive gains within Israeli society for Israeli-Arabs will likely pay dividends when it comes to Israel's relations with the Palestinians.
Some would argue that such measures would do little damage to BDS, and that more aggressive and direct measures should be taken. Rumors of the establishment of a “dirty tricks” unit to discredit BDS leaders have made news, and some Israeli leaders have joked that BDS leaders should be targeted for “civil elimination.” Most clearly, the 2017 anti-boycott law has been used to ban entry of BDS supporters, including two U.S. congresswomen. While such measures seem rational, attacking BDS directly may be counterproductive as it contributes to their narrative of Israeli aggression.
The best way to fight darkness is with light, by showing the world the inaccuracy of the BDS movement through positive action on the part of the people and state of Israel. Hitting back against BDS and its leaders only serves to give them more attention and lends credence to their message.
The overwhelming majority of Israeli-Arabs consistently show themselves to be loyal citizens of Israel. On the many occasions when Israel was attacked or invaded by its neighbors, Israeli-Arabs never engaged in sabotage. Offering them the opportunity to be part of a governing coalition, perhaps holding ministerial positions such as health or construction – rather than insisting that they remain outside the system - would help to maintain that loyalty.
Barring them from becoming part of a sitting government coalition keeps them outside of the political system and is not sustainable in the long-term. For those who claim that the bifurcated Israeli-Arab identity of Israeli and Palestinian-Arab creates problems in terms of loyalty, one only needs to look to the dual identity of American Jews who simultaneously are unquestionably loyal to America, but also deeply proud of their cultural and religious heritage as Jews.
The question of the nature and character of the state of Israel has been debated since its founding. Although the legal definition was settled as a Jewish and Democratic state by the Basic Law of 1985, the notions of democracy, freedom, and equality for all its citizens were clearly enshrined in the Declaration of Independence. It is time to live up to that identity and for the winning coalition to extend an offer to the Israeli-Arab parties to be part of the government. Such an offer would be noted by many as being the right thing to do and would help to undermine the clear and present danger presented by the BDS movement, therefore and could even yield new opportunities for peace and normalization.
Ambassador Pinhas Avivi is a former Senior Deputy Director General of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Israel, where he was responsible for global, strategic and multilateral affairs. Read full bio here.
Frank Sobchak is a PhD candidate in international relations at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy and has taught at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, Tufts University, The Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, and The Massachusetts Institute of Technology. He holds a BS in Military History from West Point and a MA in Arab Studies from Georgetown University. Read full bio here.