The following report confirms that more and more people are now beginning to realize that BDS is irrational and not promoting peace in any form. Its main objective seems to be eliminating the State of Israel from the map.
The journalist below has withstood the pressure from BDS activists to cancel his visit and explains why.
Jake
Wallis Simons May 5th, 2014
We're not normally called upon to justify a decision to travel abroad.
Few people would challenge me if I were visiting China, despite that country’s
appalling human rights record, repression of free speech, and colonisation of
Tibet. If I was travelling to America, even though Predator drones kill
hundreds of innocent people each year, and even though Guantanamo Bay still
holds 154 detainees, nobody would complain.
I would not be criticised for travelling to Egypt, which has become a
police state that imprisons journalists, attacks protesters, and sentences
political opponents to death. Nobody would suggest that I boycott India; or
Pakistan; or Venezuela; or Saudi Arabia; or indeed Britain, which – I seem to
recall – ignored the United Nations and attacked Iraq.
I could go on. But later this month, I am planning to travel to Israel
to appear in the Jerusalem literary festival. As surely as night follows day, I
have received an “open letter” from a group of 71 activists calling themselves
the British Writers in Support of Palestine (BWIP), led by a poet and
“professional Tarot card reader”. They were, I was informed, “extremely
disappointed” by my decision, and “respectfully encouraged” me to boycott the
event. But I am honoured to have been invited to Israel, and will be proud to
attend. Here’s why.
It is my strong belief that Israel is, relatively speaking, a force for
good in the world. I’m not saying that it is free from controversy, and I’m not
saying that I have no sympathy with Palestinians. But every country that abides
by the democratic process, enshrines in law the rights of women and minorities,
and conducts itself with compassion both in war and in peace – or at least
aspires to do so – deserves our support and respect.
But what about Israel’s flouting of international law, I hear you ask?
Very well: but has Britain always been squeaky clean? I have already mentioned
the example of Iraq. Britain intentionally bombed civilian targets during the
Second World War, which was the last time we were under existential threat (the
Area Bombing Directive ordered the RAF to attack the German workforce and
destroy morale). Moreover, the Army’s Combined Services Detailed Interrogation
Centre, based in Kensington Palace Gardens, London, between 1940 and 1948, carried
out systematic torture on enemy prisoners. If we were at war again, against an
enemy that was able to strike at the heart of our civilian population centres,
how would we behave?
Would we, perhaps, be tempted to react as we did when the IRA were
terrorising the streets of London? Would we reprise the British Army’s
Operation Demetrius of 1971, which allegedly included detention without trial,
beating, starving, hooding for long periods, harassment with dogs, placing
nooses around prisoners’ necks, forcible head shaving, denying prisoners
clothes, forcing them to run barefoot behind Army vehicles, burning them with
cigarettes, dragging them by the hair and pressing guns to their heads? Would
Bloody Sunday, in which 26 protesters and bystanders were shot by British
paratroopers, happen again?
These examples are particularly relevant when you consider the
geographical, topographical and historical context in which Israel exists. The
Jewish state is roughly the size of Wales, with a ridge of high ground running
along the middle of the West Bank. If Britain were surrounded by hostile
neighbours at such close proximity, some of which contained terror groups bent
on the destruction of the country, would we be doing any better? And would a
fearful British public be outraged at the Army’s brutality? Or relieved that it
was keeping us safe?
It is significant that a man who knows war, Colonel Richard Kemp – the
former commander of Britain’s armed forces in Afghanistan – testified to the UN
Human Rights Council that the Israeli military does “more to safeguard the
rights of civilians in a combat zone than any other army in the history of
warfare”. It is right that every instance of military abuse should be treated
gravely. But this does not justify a boycott.
From a historical point of view, Israel has been attacked repeatedly by
an enemy bent on its destruction (when the Arab world attempted to liquidate
the Jewish State in 1967, the settlements had not yet been built). The country
has suffered terror attack after terror attack, tragedy after tragedy. Clearly,
whatever the boycott activists may say, to draw a parallel with pre-1994 South
Africa is ludicrous.
Of course, Israel presents many areas of concern. In particular, the
situation on the West Bank is disturbing, as are the societal disadvantages
that confront minorities in Israel, particularly Israeli Arabs. The army has
been guilty of heavy-handedness many times. And it is sad to witness the
tit-for-tat violence the plagues the region, not to mention the heavy civilian
losses that are sustained by Palestinians in warfare.
Again, I could go on. But to boycott Israel alone reveals a deeply
partisan approach to the conflict, and a ridiculously naïve and even
hypocritical one.
By the standards of the pro-boycott activists, should the Palestinians
not also be boycotted? Their society is severely intolerant of homosexuals,
many of whom go to live in Israel rather than face oppression at home. Both on
the West Bank and in Gaza, the authorities regularly harass
and imprison journalists who criticise their leaders; last
year, 26-year-old Anas Said Awwad was sent to prison for one year for
"insulting" President Mahmoud Abbas by depicting him as a member of
the Real Madrid football team on Facebook.
Moreover, the Palestinian government has signed a reconciliation deal
with a terror organisation, and within weeks they may form a unity government.
And as I reported in the Telegraph last week,
the Palestinian leadership pays huge financial rewards to those convicted of
terror offences, and cold-blooded child killers are celebrated as heroes when
they are released.
If all of this does not merit a boycott, I don't know what does.
While we’re on the subject, shouldn’t the BWIP have called their group
“British Writers In Support of Palestine and Israel”? And if not, why not?
For these reasons I am proud to be travelling to Israel later this
month. As a journalist I value objectivity above all, and am not interested in
closing my ears to one side of any story, particularly a story as complex as
this. And as a novelist, my concern is with the human condition; attending a
festival with fellow writers and artists who are not afraid of challenging
ideas can only be a good thing.
And given that according to a YouGov poll, three-quarters of Britons
“see no reason why British performers should not travel to Israel” – and
fewer than one in five Britons believe that Israeli artists should be barred
from the UK – I travel in the knowledge that I have public opinion on my side.
