Irving Wallach is a Sydney barrister. Over the years he has been an honorary officer and executive member of the NSW Jewish Board of Deputies, and a board member of Mount Sinai College and Moriah College. Irving was president and a founding board member of the New Israel Fund Australia.
IRVING WALLACH: By fixing a red line that labels one side as ‘good’ and the other as so ‘evil’ that it deserves to be shunned, BDS excludes any moral view other than its own
AFTER THE EMOTIONAL roller coaster of the Sydney Festival boycott for the past few weeks, a light bulb moment came with recent release of Israeli writer David Grossman’s new book, More Than I Love My Life. Grossman has been hailed as the conscience of the nation. He is an outspoken critic of the moral corruption that the Occupation has engendered in Israel.
Grossman represents those Israelis who speak out and know that a viable independent Palestinian state alongside Israel is essential to the security and future of both nations. That is the correct thing in every possible way.
So wouldn’t the international Palestinian Boycott Divestment and Sanctions movement (BDS) support Grossman and other Israelis who are against the Occupation? These Israelis must be their counterparts from over the border. After all, Grossman has written several novels and countless articles publicly condemning the Occupation and calling for its end.
Grossman has not been alone. Another Israeli who is outspoken against the Occupation is choreographer Ohad Naharin, creator of Decadance, the dance work that became the focus of the Festival boycott call.
Israel’s peace camp overwhelmingly includes Israeli artists, academics and ordinary Israelis – even soldiers who object to military service in the occupied West Bank. In Israel they have been vilified by the ugly nationalist right, ranging from former prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu, settlers and annexationists.
The perplexing and absurd nature of BDS is that they boycott anything and everything Israeli, including the peace and two-state camp.
The perplexing and absurd nature of BDS is that they boycott anything and everything Israeli, including the peace and two-state camp. BDS is a blunt and blind movement. This has caused many to doubt whether BDS is for two states, Israel and Palestine side by side, or just one big Palestinian state.
Indeed, its charter remains ambiguous about this guiding principle. Do its proponents favour justice for both Palestinians and Israelis or merely “justice” for their side only?
It seems that the only common ground shared by BDS and the Israeli ultra-nationalist anti-Palestinian camp is that they wish to silence the Israeli peace movement. If Grossman wanted to read from one of his novels supporting peace and a Palestinian state, BDS would boycott him.
Their boycott is not against Israelis who are against a Palestinian state and independence. Their boycott is against all Israelis including those who speak out and have acted against the Occupation.
The ramifications of this blind and blunt boycott go even further precisely because it is aimed at all Israelis, not just those “bad” Israelis who support the Occupation. Next come those who do not support a total boycott, (but support, for example, a boycott of goods and services produced in the settlements,) even local outspoken opponents of the Occupation, others for political reasons, or those who say that culture and politics should not mix.
Many doubt whether BDS is for two states, Israel and Palestine side by side, or just one big Palestinian state. Its charter remains ambiguous.
The result is that BDS fixes a rigid red line through the broader Australian community. BDS monopolises the moral high ground in a one-sided argument. It made the completely unexplained and glib claim that the Israeli embassy partnership brought about an “unsafe” space for Palestinians.
On this shaky basis BDS claims the very presence of an Israeli choreographer (even or especially one who is pro-peace) in the Sydney Festival makes this “an unsafe” space for Palestinians. Given their total boycott approach, I believe BDS would anyway have taken aim at an Israeli dance work. Israeli government funding only gave the protesters an easy target.
But the BDS red line through the broader Australian community isn’t just about an argument over a distant Middle East dispute. It sets up and fixes a clear line of communal division, a line that separates two sides and labels one side as “good” and the other as being so “evil” that is deserving of being shunned.
It has very real consequences for those who live within our Australian community because it excludes any moral view other than its own. The BDS movers have forgotten that this is a very real dispute for many in Australia’s community, which includes people with strong connections to both sides in Palestine and Israel. Knowing Sydney’s Jewish community, I can say that almost all of us have family and relatives living in Israel.
For the first time BDS has made division and exclusion among Australians respectable.
Observers of Jewish gatherings routinely note Jews debating almost every topic. Debate and dissent are in our blood. That includes Israel and extends to Palestine and the Occupation. While there is no monolithic opinion about the Occupation, the overwhelming majority would nevertheless describe themselves as supporters of Israel as a Jewish homeland who are concerned for its security.
And that is the sting in the BDS tail. It is concerned with the Occupation but remains deliberately non-committal about the existence of Israel. In doing so, BDS has become a force for division and exclusion. Despite all its otherwise apparently praiseworthy claims, BDS has mainstreamed division and exclusion as a political tool in Australia. For the first time BDS has made division and exclusion among Australians respectable.
Who’s unsafe now?
by Irving Wallach, ” first published by Plus61J”.
