Boycotters of Israel are often silent about greater violations of human rights
Last week over 300 British university academics decided to boycott Israel over ‘commitment to Palestinian rights’. The writers vowed to maintain the boycott ‘until Israel complies with international law, and respects human rights’, in a pro-BDS (Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions) demonstration against violence in the West Bank and Gaza.
Similarly the European Union is being pushed by NGOs to boycott all Israeli products made in ‘Judea and Samaria’ (West Bank) as ‘part of a larger economic war’.
The rise in Palestinian knife attacks and ensuing Israeli retaliation has left 11 Israelis and 69 Palestinians dead in the latest insurgency, mirroring the historically skewed number of casualties in the conflict. Those calling for Israeli boycott cite this numerical disparity, while calling out ‘apartheid state’ Israel’s ‘illegal occupation’ of Palestinian territory.
While it’s hard to argue against the discrepancy in force and violence, it should be equally hard to counter that violations of a much greater degree are being exercised by states around the world. And so one wonders why those jumping the gun on Israeli boycott remain silent on other states’ brutalities.
For instance, no one seems interested in boycotting China for its ‘illegal occupation’ of Tibet, or its blatant anti-Muslim policies in its largest province Xinjiang. There are not many protests against China’s ‘Islamophobia’ when it bars Muslims from fasting during Ramadan, or bans beards and ‘Islamic dressing’.
China’s ‘cultural genocide’ uses the actions of fringe Uighur radicals as justification for a broader state clampdown against all Muslims. The province itself has been occupied territory since 1949, with a separatist movement for self-recognition brimming over for decades.
For those wanting to demonstrate against colonial occupation, the recently signed Sino-Pak agreement over the $46 billion economic corridor should be a good rallying cause, considering it connects Xinjiang with Pakistan-occupied Balochistan, primarily benefiting Islamabad and Beijing. Just like China usurped Islamic Republic of East Turkestan (Xinjiang), Pakistan took over Balochistan immediately after the Indo-Pak partition.
Balochistan is witnessing its fourth insurgency since 1947 as it continues fighting for autonomy. Meanwhile, Pakistan Army continues to lift and dump Baloch citizens at will, in one of the goriest examples of human rights violations in the world, which has left over 23,000 missing persons.
Another mutual Sino-Pak occupation was that of the Kashmir region. While Beijing majorly withdrew, the occupied region has become a point scoring tool for India and Pakistan, with not much heed paid to locals’ rights. Even though the Pakistan-occupied Kashmir is still relatively peaceful, albeit without actual autonomy, India’s only Muslim-majority state has suffered savage human rights abuses since 1947.
The recent surge in Hindu radicalism, following right-wing BJP’s return to power in India, has seen Hindu mobs lynching Muslims over beef, as the state ups the ante on torture in Kashmir.
Meanwhile, Bangladesh’s ruling Awami Party is acquiescing to a killing spree targeting atheist and secular bloggers because it isn’t sure about the viewpoint of the ‘moderate Muslims’ – a significant vote bank. A little eastwards Myanmar is engaged in ethnic cleansing of indigenous Rohingya Muslims.
In addition to these South (east) Asians countries, another broader category of ‘Muslim world’ witnesses mass human rights violations. These 13 countries punish atheism by death – all Muslim majority states. While multiple factors – including Western imperialism – have marred progress in the Muslim world, most of these states have their own decades-long policies to blame for their volatility.
These include democracies and Western allies like Turkey, which occupies Cyprus and targets Kurds in the garb of the anti-ISIS fight, and Pakistan whose multi-pronged apartheid belittles Israel’s ostensible apartheid. In fact the uncanny semblance between the ugliest shades of Pakistan and Israel should be worthy of some attention from the anti-Israel protestors.
While the majority of the Muslim world doesn’t recognise the Israeli state anyway, all Muslims who seriously consider boycott as a means of protest, should actually self-reflect and start with Muslim countries. This year’s Hajj stampede death toll in Saudi Arabia should’ve instigated a mass boycott movement of the Saudi kingdom and the Muslim pilgrimage itself.
None of these wrongs make Israel’s injustices right. However, a complete lack of nuance and perspective in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict obviously aggravates the historical crisis.
While the Palestinian clerics and leaders’ incitement to violence is given a pass, and genocidal Islamists like Hamas are deemed freedom fighters, while global activists don’t even know – or care – about what’s going on in Balochistan, Kashmir, Xinjiang or Kurdistan, it’s easy to understand the common Israelis’ sense of victimhood.
Blatant depiction of Israel as evil and Palestinians as victims strengthens right-wings (Likud and Hamas) in both territories. Paranoid citizens worrying about their security don’t care much for ideologies, as Erdogan-led AKP’s return to a majority in this week’s Turkish elections testifies.
Anyone who doesn’t accept a two-state answer to the conflict can’t obviously be a part of the Palestinian solution. The same is true for all those who paint either of the two sides as the sole culprit.
An Israeli-Palestinian peaceful solution can only be reached via strengthening the inward-looking moderates who acknowledge and highlight their own side’s wrongs. An Israeli boycott that dubs the Jewish state as the ultimate evil would silence actual peacemakers on both sides.
Kunwar Khuldune Shahid is a Friday Times journalist. Follow him on Twitter
To reach hundreds of thousands of new readers and to make the biggest impact we can in the next general election, we need to grow our donor base substantially.
That's why in 2024, we are seeking to generate 150 additional regular donors to support Left Foot Forward's work.
We still need another 124 people to donate to hit the target. You can help. Donate today.
227 Responses to “Comment: The hypocrisy of boycotting Israel”
Sid
These academcics support misogynist, homophobic, violent, anit-democratic and illiberal organisations that would never allow them similar freedoms which they get in the west and would probably get in Israel too !!!
Caleb Powell
Well done.
I can debate with pro-Israelis on the injustice of the settlements or how Israel aggravates the problem, we can agree to disagree.
I mean, just go to Ha’aretz and there seems to be a diversity of views, from pro-BDS to pro-Likud, all debating.
However, when I discuss with the pro-Palestine side (often rabidly anti-Israel), it seems much harder to get anyone to condemn the egregious violence that Palestinians inflict on random targets and civilians. Yes, there are belligerent views on both sides, but I find it weighted heavily toward the “I’m Pro-Palestine so Palestinian violence is justified and Palestinians never are wrong” side.
You nail it: “None of these wrongs make Israel’s injustices right. However, a complete lack of nuance and perspective in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict obviously aggravates the historical crisis./While the Palestinian clerics and leaders’ incitement to violence is given a pass, and genocidal Islamists like Hamas are deemed freedom fighters… it’s easy to understand the common Israelis’ sense of victimhood.”
Daniel Luqman Malcolm
ah hasbara bingo number 7 – look those people are bad too! If this isnt a deliberate obfuscation of the issue i would strongly suggest the writer seriously study the situation and figure out what an unbiased perspective really is. not this 2 sides nonsense that ignores the entire context of the issue
Kevin
Graham, Why not address the issues raised? For example, why is it that these academics (and up here in Scotland, many writers) call for a boycott of Israel but not of Uganda for introducing life sentences for gay people or Saudi Arabia for its misogynist policies or China for its occupation of Tibet? What makes Israel different from these countries? And why are there different standards expected of Israel than of Palestine? An example: at the 2014 Edinburgh Festival, a group of Israeli performers were met with demonstrations, calls for the group to be banned and, amid safety concerns, the venue decided to cancel the performances. At this year’s Edinburgh Festival a group of Palestinian performers were welcomed and faced no problems. Why this double standard? The one thing that sticks out as a major difference is that Israel is a predominantly Jewish country. Many of those who oppose Israel, particularly from the right, do so on anti-Semitic grounds. Those who do so from a left wing perspective should think about this (though the likes of George Galloway do seem to have a lot in common with the far right). As a gay man, I would feel a lot safer in Israel than in Gaza!
Graham Thompson
So you think I should do an analysis and comparison of every state in the world and their humans rights record, and the movements protesting or campaigning against those states, and their comparative numbers and influence, before criticising Israel?
The people in the UK who campaign against human rights abuses in Saudi or China are THE SAME PEOPLE who campaign against human rights abuses in Israel.
The people who ask why the anti-Israel lobby don’t campaign against other brutal regimes don’t know that, because they don’t campaign against anything.