Why Norway Is BDS Central And What It Says About BDS

Norway sets the standard again.

It is quite fitting that Norway is a state-pioneer in the Boycott, Divest and Sanctions or BDS movement for Palestinian rights. It was in this nation's capital, Oslo, that a peace process bearing that name was initiated with so much hope that a two-state solution would be achieved and Palestinian rights finally respected by Israel.

bds is working pdThj 19672

For Israel's agreement to the accord's mandate, the Jewish state was rewarded with a great rise in its international standing as many nations which had previously refused any relations with Israel in solidarity with the Palestinians, now started to recognize Israel after the PLO did so itself. But during this so-called "peace process" Israel, practically from Day One, violated the primer demand on both sides: neither side is to take action prejudging the final outcome of negotiations.

What this means is simple: neither side can take action which will affect final negotiations. But Israel had other plans. During the "peace process" it laid down over 200,000 illegal settlers on stolen Palestinian land, land which was supposed to be the basis of a future Palestinian state which Israel claimed it was working toward. A 100% fold increase in illegal settlers. None other than supposed Israeli dove Yatzhik Rabin told the Knesset days after signing Oslo that if the Israelis build more settlements during negotiations they can them claim them as "facts on the grounds" and this will allow Israel to expand its borders when final negotiations are held (thus prejudging the final talks). This was a deliberate scheme of a last-minute land garb under the cloth of peace talks.

But those talks broke down as this period which was supposed to lead to a Palestinian state instead saw an acceleration of illegal settlers and the necessary theft of Palestinian land, and the necessary settler-only roads which divided the West Bank into islands and the necessary checkpoints which were set up in order to provide security for the settlements. So what was supposed to be a period which would lead to a de-construction of Israeli military occupation and the stranglehold on the Palestinians, and slowly make way for an independent Palestinian state instead Palestinians witnessed a build-up of an Israeli matrix of control which now divided them more than every from other Palestinians villages and now they were more than ever having to deal with brutal and petty Israeli occupation troops at military checkpoints. This is why the Palestinians started a civilian uprising.

So in the end Israel did nothing to advance peace, furthered the injustice of its occupation, but pocketed international dividends under the smokescreen of peace talks.

If Israel refused to respect Palestinian rights and national aspirations when the world was offerings carrots in the forms of international recognition, then a new tactic was to now be adopted: using sticks in the form of international isolation.

This is what BDS is about. Giving Israel the legitimacy it craves only emboldened Israeli occupation, injustices and indulgences. Being nice failed. Now BDS is doing the opposite and it is simple: Make Israel pay for its occupation and crimes and maybe this tough approach will force an Israeli reevaluation of its cruel conduct and an eventual change in its policy which will bring about real peace. If Israel sees a setback for its standing, if it is made to face consequences instead of the past naive benefit of the doubt accorded to it, if Israel is actually made to pay a felt price it is more likely to cease its condemned acts.

And it really does.

And, to belabor the aforementioned, it is quite fitting that Norway would be a pioneer in this regard. The center that gave us Oslo is now a center which is strengthening BDS and a new approach toward peace which is more realistic and more appropriate and more likely to succeed:

The two Israeli firms were excluded from the portfolios of the Norwegian governments pension fund due to their construction work on West Bank, since they contribute in “grossly unethical activity”, according to a press release from the Minister of Finances, Sigbjørn Johnsen today.

The two companies are Africa Israel investments, the Lev Leviev outfit (he of the diamond shop on Madison Avenue in NY) and its subsidiary Danya Cebus.

And Israeli are starting to understand this point:

>When the well-connected Israeli policy group, the Reut Institute, released a February 2010 report on what it labeled the "delegitimization challenge" from the global Palestine solidarity movement, Ali Abunimah of the Electronic Intifada pointed out that the report "never considers for a moment that the mounting criticism of Israel's actions might be justified."

In the aftermath of the May 31 Israeli attack on the Gaza flotilla, the institute may have done some rethinking on how Israel should combat the "delegitimization" problem. While most of a new report--titled "The Gaza Flotilla: The Collapse of Israel's Political Firewall"--repeats their smearing of boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) activists as people who want to see Israel "dissappear" and charges that the BDS movement actively collaborates with the "Resistance Network" (Hamas and Hezbollah), one of the recommendations to the Israeli government lines up with some of the BDS movement's goals.

The institute writes, as one of their "principles and guidelines for addressing Israel's delegitimization," that Israel should undertake:

A consistent and honest Israeli commitment to end its control over the Palestinians, advance human rights, and promote greater integration and equality for its Arab citizens is essential in fighting the battle against delegitimization. Such commitment must be reflected in a coherent and comprehensive strategy towards Gaza and the political process with the Palestinians.

It's not all that the BDS movement is calling for, but it's somewhat close. The right of return, of course, is not touched upon in this case study, but one would think that allowing Palestinian refugees to come home classifies as "advancing human rights."

This is not to say that the Reut Institute has good motives; the report on the flotilla still calls on Israel to "systematically collect intelligence on delegitimization activities and identify key catalysts promoting them. On that basis, Israel should formulate and implement an action plan to contend with catalysts of delegitimization."

But their partial acknowledgment that it is Israel's actions that are "delegitimizing" itself is interesting, and is perhaps a tacit sign that the BDS movement and Israel's "flotilla problem" are forcing sectors of Israel's political elite to confront head on Israel's real problem: their continued strangulation of Gaza and the decades-old occupation that has denied Palestinians basic human rights. The Reut Institute, it seems, has recognized that Israel's "branding" campaign is not going to go anywhere unless there are fundamental policy changes.

BDS is the only consequences-based approach with potential for actual peace consequence.