The topic of boycotting Israel and its supporters occupies an important space in social media and mainstream media. It also takes up large areas of discussion among public opinion circles in the Arab world and, to some extent, the Islamic world, as the boycott is considered an effective weapon against the crimes committed by Israel against the Palestinian people.
The advisory opinion issued by the International Court of Justice regarding the illegality of the occupation, the necessity of its cessation, the illegality of settlements, and everything Israel does in the territories occupied in 1967, including East Jerusalem, will have a significant impact. This opinion will increase the level of boycotts against settlements and settlers and will increase pressure on Israel. This will serve to activate the weapon of boycotting the occupation and settlements. But what about the internal Israeli scene? Should we boycott every Israeli, regardless of their positions?
Many within the Palestinian scene tend to generalize the issue of contact or meeting with Israeli figures, considering it unacceptable and a form of normalization with the enemy. They do not distinguish between those who support ending the war, ending the occupation, and the Palestinian people’s right to freedom and independence in a state within the 1967 borders, that is, the two-state solution, and those who refuse to acknowledge the existence of the Palestinian people or any of their rights to their homeland. This generalization actually serves the Israeli government significantly by fighting everyone who supports the Israeli withdrawal from the occupied territories and the establishment of a Palestinian state. From the perspective of the extreme right in Israel, these people are traitors and must be fought. Even if the generalizers do not intend this, it is the result.
Let us look at our reality today: the overwhelming majority of the Palestinian people support the establishment of a Palestinian state within the June 4, 1967 borders and reaching a just solution for all issues of the conflict, especially the refugee issue. Perhaps the statement issued by the meeting of all Palestinian factions in China reflects this truth without any ambiguity. Thus, there is a near-consensus on this principle. Everyone knows that no solution guaranteeing the existence of a Palestinian state can be achieved without an agreement with Israel.
For Israel to agree, we need to apply significant pressure on the Israeli ruling establishment. There are two types of pressure: international external pressure that could reach the level of imposing sanctions or seriously threatening to do so. This might also include offering some attractive incentives, like regional peace, normalization, etc., which provide Israel with significant gains if it engages in a peaceful political settlement based on the two-state solution, similar to the idea of normalization with Saudi Arabia and Arab countries according to the Arab Peace Initiative. This requires a moderate Israeli government, not the current far-right one. There is also internal pressure from Israeli public opinion, which might be influenced by external pressures or by the continuation of the conflict and the price the Israeli society pays due to this situation, which threatens Israel’s security, stability, and future in the region.
There are significant elites in Israel who see the continuation of the occupation as an existential threat to the state. They even see the government of Benjamin Netanyahu, Smotrich, and Ben-Gvir as a threat not only to Israel’s future but also to the unity and coexistence of Israeli society. These elites believe that the current Israeli government should be overthrown, the war should end immediately, and the conflict should be resolved based on the two-state solution.
The large gathering held in Tel Aviv on the first of this month, which included 6,000 Israeli citizens from various peace organizations, can be seen as an embodiment of the views of these elites who adopt the aforementioned positions. Unfortunately, the number of Israelis who protested in Tel Aviv demanding a ceasefire is much higher than the number of Palestinians who came out in solidarity with Gaza.
These Israelis who support the two-state solution are primarily concerned with Israel’s interests and do not adopt the Palestinian historical narrative, just as all Palestinians who support the establishment of a Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza do not adopt the Zionist narrative. However, both sides agree on a common interest, which is a good thing, as no one would pursue a project without seeing some benefit in it.
Therefore, there is a major Palestinian national interest in strengthening and expanding the Israeli peace camp and making it a significant force in Israeli society and politics. This cannot be achieved by boycotting them but by expanding dialogue with them and strengthening their discourse in the Israeli street, especially by proving the existence of a Palestinian partner willing to settle on the basis of the two-state solution, contrary to what the extreme right in Israel claims, that the Palestinians want to eliminate the Jews.
To remind, a large number of Jews, including Israeli passport holders, are protesting against the war in America and Europe. Those who stormed the Capitol building in Washington were Jews, and most of the voters of the ruling Democratic Party are Jews who oppose the continuation of the war and support for the Israeli government. Those who sent a letter to the European Union demanding the immediate recognition of the State of Palestine as a full member were Israeli Jews.
These people should be dealt with as partners and coordinated with, not boycotted or criminalized for their communication. In reality, we need to review many of the slogans and positions that are often launched without consideration and do not serve us.
Author: Ashraf Ajrami