The irony about this National Mosque rally led by the right honorable Dr. M is it was at the same venue 10 years ago where Anwar conducted a massive anti Mahathir rally asking him to step down. If we all remember how malay power began to wane, it all started with the famous sacking. How times has change... Could this be a telltale of possible reunification by malaysia's two most brilliant malay politicians and reemergence of malay dominance? Ahh.. may be just a fickle of my damn imagination. Nobody even dare to admit that should these 2 join forces, malay will be instantly strengthen. Yes, remember what happen to the poor chap who got thrown out of the hall few months back because he propose anwar's re-entry..... But I know deep down a lot of people would agree with me.
Enough. It's time for a boycott The best way to end the bloody occupation is to target Israel with the kind of movement that ended apartheid in South Africa
It's time. Long past time. The best strategy to end the increasingly bloody occupation is for Israel to become the target of the kind of global movement that put an end to apartheid in South Africa. In July 2005 a huge coalition of Palestinian groups laid out plans to do just that. They called on "people of conscience all over the world to impose broad boycotts and implement divestment initiatives against Israel similar to those applied to South Africa in the apartheid era". The campaign Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions was born.
Every day that Israel pounds Gaza brings more converts to the BDS cause - even among Israeli Jews. In the midst of the assault roughly 500 Israelis, dozens of them well-known artists and scholars, sent a letter to foreign ambassadors in Israel. It calls for "the adoption of immediate restrictive measures and sanctions" and draws a clear parallel with the anti-apartheid struggle. "The boycott on South Africa was effective, but Israel is handled with kid gloves ... This international backing must stop."
Yet even in the face of these clear calls, many of us still can't go there. The reasons are complex, emotional and understandable. But they simply aren't good enough. Economic sanctions are the most effective tool in the non-violent arsenal: surrendering them verges on active complicity. Here are the top four objections to the BDS strategy, followed by counter-arguments.
"Punitive measures will alienate rather than persuade Israelis."
The world has tried what used to be called "constructive engagement". It has failed utterly. Since 2006 Israel has been steadily escalating its criminality: expanding settlements, launching an outrageous war against Lebanon, and imposing collective punishment on Gaza through the brutal blockade. Despite this escalation, Israel has not faced punitive measures - quite the opposite. The weapons and $3bn in annual aid the US sends Israel are only the beginning. Throughout this key period, Israel has enjoyed a dramatic improvement in its diplomatic, cultural and trade relations with a variety of other allies. For instance, in 2007 Israel became the first country outside Latin America to sign a free-trade deal with the Mercosur bloc. In the first nine months of 2008, Israeli exports to Canada went up 45%. A new deal with the EU is set to double Israel's exports of processed food. And in December European ministers "upgraded" the EU-Israel association agreement, a reward long sought by Jerusalem.
It is in this context that Israeli leaders started their latest war: confident they would face no meaningful costs. It is remarkable that over seven days of wartime trading, the Tel Aviv Stock Exchange's flagship index actually went up 10.7%. When carrots don't work, sticks are needed.
"Israel is not South Africa."
Of course it isn't. The relevance of the South African model is that it proves BDS tactics can be effective when weaker measures (protests, petitions, backroom lobbying) fail. And there are deeply distressing echoes of apartheid in the occupied territories: the colour-coded IDs and travel permits, the bulldozed homes and forced displacement, the settler-only roads. Ronnie Kasrils, a prominent South African politician, said the architecture of segregation he saw in the West Bank and Gaza was "infinitely worse than apartheid". That was in 2007, before Israel began its full-scale war against the open-air prison that is Gaza.
"Why single out Israel when the US, Britain and other western countries do the same things in Iraq and Afghanistan?"
Boycott is not a dogma; it is a tactic. The reason the strategy should be tried is practical: against a country so small and trade-dependent, it could actually work.
"Boycotts sever communication; we need more dialogue, not less."
This one I'll answer with a personal story. For eight years, my books have been published in Israel by a commercial house called Babel. But when I published The Shock Doctrine, I wanted to respect the boycott. On the advice of BDS activists, including the wonderful writer John Berger, I contacted a small publisher called Andalus. Andalus is an activist press, deeply involved in the anti-occupation movement and the only Israeli publisher devoted exclusively to translating Arabic writing into Hebrew. We drafted a contract that guarantees that all proceeds go to Andalus's work, and none to me. I am boycotting the Israeli economy but not Israelis.
Our modest publishing plan required dozens of phone calls, emails and instant messages, stretching between Tel Aviv, Ramallah, Paris, Toronto and Gaza City. My point is this: as soon as you start a boycott strategy, dialogue grows dramatically. The argument that boycotts will cut us off from one another is particularly specious given the array of cheap information technologies at our fingertips. We are drowning in ways to rant at each other across national boundaries. No boycott can stop us.
Just about now, many a proud Zionist is gearing up for major point-scoring: don't I know that many of these very hi-tech toys come from Israeli research parks, world leaders in infotech? True enough, but not all of them. Several days into Israel's Gaza assault, Richard Ramsey, managing director of a British telecom specialising in voice-over-internet services, sent an email to the Israeli tech firm MobileMax: "As a result of the Israeli government action in the last few days we will no longer be in a position to consider doing business with yourself or any other Israeli company."
Ramsey says his decision wasn't political; he just didn't want to lose customers. "We can't afford to lose any of our clients," he explains, "so it was purely commercially defensive."
It was this kind of cold business calculation that led many companies to pull out of South Africa two decades ago. And it's precisely the kind of calculation that is our most realistic hope of bringing justice, so long denied, to Palestine.
A version of this column was published in the Nation (thenation.com)
Yes, it is horrible to see what happen in Gaza. Lets us not be emotional . Putting religion as an issue is not right. May I ask TDM and his son are they that religious?
What we may have to do is to aid the suffering of civilian. Should we in general support Pelestine then we may be doing the wrong thing . Even among themselves they are fighting among themselves HAMAS and FATAH. Hamas has its own agenda which do not want peace all they need is to create trouble for their own people. In creating problems and using religion as an issue to hook for donations from all over is their agenda. They are happy with blind money and enjoyed with it and does not care for its people. Just look at Jordon and Mesir why can they have peace with Isreal because they are competence and capable hard working people they dont go and ask donations like parasite.
Get your facts right first. I'm laughing off reading what you wrote about Egypt and Jordan. In fact Jordan and Egypt (no offence to Jordanians and Egyptians who came across this comment) are amongst the most corrupt and inefficient Arab nations. You may want to have a look at UNDP annual report and check these two nations for their percapita GDP, adult literacy, Human Development Index, and whatever criteria people usually use - before you ever say they are "competent, capable and hardworking".
And you're telling us to emulate these two corrupt, inefficient pseudo-democratic nations.
Egypt signed Camp David peace agreement (1977) with Israel with Israel promosed hosts of aid. The real "aid" Israel gave Egypt were strains of agricultural parasites and viruses which destroyed much of Egypt's agricultural outputs during 1980s until early 1990s.
Despite being blessed with lush alluvial plains of the Nile Basin, Egyptians have been suffering food supply shortage since last couple of years. Didn't you read the news?
Maybe you watched too much CNN and BBC and the likes - which without fail, always paint super-beautiful pictures for US vassal states.
And please look into yourself in the mirror first before you ever try to measure the faith of others, asking if they are that religious or whatever.
A voice,
ReplyDeleteThe irony about this National Mosque rally led by the right honorable Dr. M is it was at the same venue 10 years ago where Anwar conducted a massive anti Mahathir rally asking him to step down. If we all remember how malay power began to wane, it all started with the famous sacking.
How times has change... Could this be a telltale of possible reunification by malaysia's two most brilliant malay politicians and reemergence of malay dominance?
Ahh.. may be just a fickle of my damn imagination. Nobody even dare to admit that should these 2 join forces, malay will be instantly strengthen.
Yes, remember what happen to the poor chap who got thrown out of the hall few months back because he propose anwar's re-entry.....
But I know deep down a lot of people would agree with me.
Salam all...
ReplyDeleteThe following is from Naomi Klein, a Guardian UK columnist.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/jan/10/naomi-klein-boycott-israel
http://www.naomiklein.org/articles/2009/01/israel-boycott-divest-sanction
Enough. It's time for a boycott
The best way to end the bloody occupation is to target Israel with the kind of movement that ended apartheid in South Africa
It's time. Long past time. The best strategy to end the increasingly bloody occupation is for Israel to become the target of the kind of global movement that put an end to apartheid in South Africa. In July 2005 a huge coalition of Palestinian groups laid out plans to do just that. They called on "people of conscience all over the world to impose broad boycotts and implement divestment initiatives against Israel similar to those applied to South Africa in the apartheid era". The campaign Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions was born.
Every day that Israel pounds Gaza brings more converts to the BDS cause - even among Israeli Jews. In the midst of the assault roughly 500 Israelis, dozens of them well-known artists and scholars, sent a letter to foreign ambassadors in Israel. It calls for "the adoption of immediate restrictive measures and sanctions" and draws a clear parallel with the anti-apartheid struggle. "The boycott on South Africa was effective, but Israel is handled with kid gloves ... This international backing must stop."
Yet even in the face of these clear calls, many of us still can't go there. The reasons are complex, emotional and understandable. But they simply aren't good enough. Economic sanctions are the most effective tool in the non-violent arsenal: surrendering them verges on active complicity. Here are the top four objections to the BDS strategy, followed by counter-arguments.
"Punitive measures will alienate rather than persuade Israelis."
The world has tried what used to be called "constructive engagement". It has failed utterly. Since 2006 Israel has been steadily escalating its criminality: expanding settlements, launching an outrageous war against Lebanon, and imposing collective punishment on Gaza through the brutal blockade. Despite this escalation, Israel has not faced punitive measures - quite the opposite. The weapons and $3bn in annual aid the US sends Israel are only the beginning. Throughout this key period, Israel has enjoyed a dramatic improvement in its diplomatic, cultural and trade relations with a variety of other allies. For instance, in 2007 Israel became the first country outside Latin America to sign a free-trade deal with the Mercosur bloc. In the first nine months of 2008, Israeli exports to Canada went up 45%. A new deal with the EU is set to double Israel's exports of processed food. And in December European ministers "upgraded" the EU-Israel association agreement, a reward long sought by Jerusalem.
It is in this context that Israeli leaders started their latest war: confident they would face no meaningful costs. It is remarkable that over seven days of wartime trading, the Tel Aviv Stock Exchange's flagship index actually went up 10.7%. When carrots don't work, sticks are needed.
"Israel is not South Africa."
Of course it isn't. The relevance of the South African model is that it proves BDS tactics can be effective when weaker measures (protests, petitions, backroom lobbying) fail. And there are deeply distressing echoes of apartheid in the occupied territories: the colour-coded IDs and travel permits, the bulldozed homes and forced displacement, the settler-only roads. Ronnie Kasrils, a prominent South African politician, said the architecture of segregation he saw in the West Bank and Gaza was "infinitely worse than apartheid". That was in 2007, before Israel began its full-scale war against the open-air prison that is Gaza.
"Why single out Israel when the US, Britain and other western countries do the same things in Iraq and Afghanistan?"
Boycott is not a dogma; it is a tactic. The reason the strategy should be tried is practical: against a country so small and trade-dependent, it could actually work.
"Boycotts sever communication; we need more dialogue, not less."
This one I'll answer with a personal story. For eight years, my books have been published in Israel by a commercial house called Babel. But when I published The Shock Doctrine, I wanted to respect the boycott. On the advice of BDS activists, including the wonderful writer John Berger, I contacted a small publisher called Andalus. Andalus is an activist press, deeply involved in the anti-occupation movement and the only Israeli publisher devoted exclusively to translating Arabic writing into Hebrew. We drafted a contract that guarantees that all proceeds go to Andalus's work, and none to me. I am boycotting the Israeli economy but not Israelis.
Our modest publishing plan required dozens of phone calls, emails and instant messages, stretching between Tel Aviv, Ramallah, Paris, Toronto and Gaza City. My point is this: as soon as you start a boycott strategy, dialogue grows dramatically. The argument that boycotts will cut us off from one another is particularly specious given the array of cheap information technologies at our fingertips. We are drowning in ways to rant at each other across national boundaries. No boycott can stop us.
Just about now, many a proud Zionist is gearing up for major point-scoring: don't I know that many of these very hi-tech toys come from Israeli research parks, world leaders in infotech? True enough, but not all of them. Several days into Israel's Gaza assault, Richard Ramsey, managing director of a British telecom specialising in voice-over-internet services, sent an email to the Israeli tech firm MobileMax: "As a result of the Israeli government action in the last few days we will no longer be in a position to consider doing business with yourself or any other Israeli company."
Ramsey says his decision wasn't political; he just didn't want to lose customers. "We can't afford to lose any of our clients," he explains, "so it was purely commercially defensive."
It was this kind of cold business calculation that led many companies to pull out of South Africa two decades ago. And it's precisely the kind of calculation that is our most realistic hope of bringing justice, so long denied, to Palestine.
A version of this column was published in the Nation (thenation.com)
naomiklein.org
Yes, it is horrible to see what happen in Gaza. Lets us not be emotional . Putting religion as an
ReplyDeleteissue is not right. May I ask TDM and his son are they that religious?
What we may have to do is to aid the suffering of civilian. Should we in general support Pelestine then we may be doing the wrong thing . Even among themselves they are fighting among themselves HAMAS and FATAH. Hamas has its own agenda which do not want peace all they need is to create trouble for their own people. In creating problems and using religion as an issue to hook for donations from all over is their agenda. They are happy with blind money and enjoyed with it and does not care for its people.
Just look at Jordon and Mesir why can they have peace with Isreal because they are competence and capable hard working people they dont go and ask donations like parasite.
Nasiruddin, Ahjamal
ReplyDeleteKeep your eye on the ball.
The ball is Gaza, the people of Gaza. Our concern is the people.
The key to the problem is Israel and the USA backing of Israel.
Lets not lose sight of that.
@ Ahjamal
ReplyDeleteGet your facts right first. I'm laughing off reading what you wrote about Egypt and Jordan. In fact Jordan and Egypt (no offence to Jordanians and Egyptians who came across this comment) are amongst the most corrupt and inefficient Arab nations. You may want to have a look at UNDP annual report and check these two nations for their percapita GDP, adult literacy, Human Development Index, and whatever criteria people usually use - before you ever say they are "competent, capable and hardworking".
And you're telling us to emulate these two corrupt, inefficient pseudo-democratic nations.
Egypt signed Camp David peace agreement (1977) with Israel with Israel promosed hosts of aid. The real "aid" Israel gave Egypt were strains of agricultural parasites and viruses which destroyed much of Egypt's agricultural outputs during 1980s until early 1990s.
Despite being blessed with lush alluvial plains of the Nile Basin, Egyptians have been suffering food supply shortage since last couple of years. Didn't you read the news?
Maybe you watched too much CNN and BBC and the likes - which without fail, always paint super-beautiful pictures for US vassal states.
And please look into yourself in the mirror first before you ever try to measure the faith of others, asking if they are that religious or whatever.