Beinart raises questions for the solidarity movement
JVL Introduction
Peter Beinart’s commitment to the cause of Palestinian liberation is not in doubt.
So when he finds himself “really bothered” by a recent action of the solidarity movement his argument does need to be engaged with.
The action in question is an attack by PACBI (Palestinian Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel) on Standing Together, a group of Palestinian and Israeli citizens in Israel, for “serving Apartheid Israel’s propaganda” and “seek[ing] to whitewash Israel’s ongoing genocide in Gaza”.
Beinart argues fiercely that this is gross distortion of what Standing Together says and what it does, that the accusation flies in the face of all the evidence and is badly misjudged.
But he goes further, looking at the notion of “normalisation” and wondering what Palestinian citizens of Israel should be expected to do as their contribution to the struggle for liberation.
Beinart is persuasive in this particular case, but PACBI’s broad position addresses a real concern. The Israeli authorities actively promote normalisation initiatives, within Israel and globally, that obscure the real issues of occupation and apartheid behind a veil of togetherness. Such initiatives must be exposed and opposed. Beinart’s article articulates valid concerns about the way the anti-normalisation strategy is sometimes waged, but it remains, in JVL’s view, an important strategy for the Palestinian solidarity movement to embrace.
RK
This article was originally published by the Beinart Notebook on Mon 5 Feb 2024. Read the original here.
Why is the BDS movement attacking an organization trying to end the war?
Loading article text…
Very interesting exploration of the tensions between conscience and solidarity. The slight hesitancy in his words is quite endearing. So, when does criticising a movement open up space for wider discussion and more people to join? Versus, when is a criticism just a self-indulgence, or even worse a kind of quisling move? I’m sure a lot of us have been faced with those dilemmas at different times in our lives. It will be good to read what other JVL members feel about this.
There is an unstated assumption in the phrase ‘full equality of all Israeli citizens’. That is, that Palestinians in that land ‘between the river and the sea’ will actually become Israeli citizens. The ideal of a single, democratic state where all the people are equal before the law can hardly be criticised. But who are ‘the people’? Even Likud believes in a single state between the river and the sea. But it is not one in which West Bank or Gaza Palestinians will have any official rights as citizens.
A single democratic state including all the people living between the river and the sea, is something we can all get behind.
No, Rory, the clear logic of what Standing Together advocate is Two States (or, possibly, a single binational state) although the organisation itself, quite correctly, takes no official position on this but emphasises solidarity and reconciliation between Jewish and Palestinian citizens of Israel, together with the call for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza. The BDS attack on them is shameful and counterproductive.