Marching Together For Israel
Tue, 04/08/2014
Special To The Jewish Week
Photo Galleria: 

The American Jewish community overwhelmingly supports Israel and strongly opposes efforts to demonize and delegitimize the nation-state of the Jewish people by singling it out for boycotts, divestment or sanctions (BDS). Although there are divisions within the Jewish community about Israeli policies — particularly with regard to the peace process and settlements — once a year we try to put aside these differences by marching together in the Celebrate Israel parade, marking its 50th anniversary this June and expected to attract over 40,000 marchers, representing over 200 schools, synagogues and organizations.

For years, this parade has stood as a symbol of unity over the core issues: namely, Israel’s right to exist as the democratic nation-state of the Jewish people, Israel’s right to defend itself against existential threats and terrorism, Israel’s efforts to live in peace and security with its Arab and Muslim neighbors. 

The organizers of the parade have always insisted that it is a unity event rather than a political one. It has imposed several broad criteria for inclusion, including identification with Israel as a Jewish and democratic state and the requirement that exclusively celebratory messaging be displayed by groups marching up the avenue. Until recently these criteria have been widely accepted by participants in the parade and those who support it.

This year there have been efforts to exclude from the march several groups that support the targeted boycott of products from the West Bank. Though I strongly oppose any form of boycott against any Israeli products, I also oppose the exclusion from the parade of those who disagree with me and most American Jews on this issue. 

First, why do I, as a strong supporter of the two-state solution, oppose targeted boycotts? I do so because any boycott that singles out Israel is bigoted in effect if not in intent. Many of those who advocate such boycotts eagerly buy products from China, Russia, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and other countries whose human rights records are far worse than anything Israel is even accused of doing. One cannot single out Israel and claim to be fair. I’m reminded of the story of President A. Laurence Lowell of Harvard University who justified imposing a tiny quota on Jewish applicants because, in his words, “Jews cheat.” When a distinguished alumnus, Judge Learned Hand, wrote him saying, “You can’t single out Jews. Christians cheat too,” Lowell responded, “You’re changing the subject. We’re talking about Jews now.”

Well, you can’t just talk about Jews, and neither can you just talk about the nation-state of the Jewish people. Nor can you talk only about West Bank settlements. For a boycott to be fair, it must be directed against the worst first and against all offenders.

Moreover, the Palestinian Authority is at least equally responsible for the continuation of settlements on the West Bank. Its leaders turned down offers to end most of these settlements in 2000-’01 and 2007. And there would have been no settlements had Jordan, with the support of many Palestinians, not attacked Israel in 1967. So I regard any effort to single out Israel for any form of boycott to be immoral, bigoted and not conducive to a negotiated peace. 

Why then do I oppose excluding people who support what I regard as immoral and bigoted? Because I want unity within the pro-Israel community. When I make the case for Israel on college campuses and around the world, I make what I call the “80 percent case for Israel.” By this I mean that I focus on issues on which there is widespread agreement and consensus. I fully understand that there is considerable disagreement and divisiveness over the other 20 percent, but unity over the 80 percent is crucial. I believe that most of those who in a misguided way support targeted divestment love Israel and agree with the 80 percent — well, maybe only 70 percent.

On one day of the year we must put aside our differences, march together and show the world that we all support Israel’s right to thrive as the democratic nation-state of the Jewish people. So on June 1 I look forward to marching with those with whom I disagree. On the following day we can renew our disagreements about the 20-30 percent.

Alan Dershowitz is a lawyer, professor and author, most recently, of “Taking the Stand: My Life in the Law.”
 

Comment Guidelines

The Jewish Week feels comments create a valuable conversation and wants to feature your thoughts on our website. To make everyone feel welcome, we won't publish comments that are profane, irrelevant, promotional or make personal attacks.

Comments

Mr. Dershowitz,
In your own words ..." So I regard any effort to single out Israel for any form of boycott to be immoral, bigoted and not conducive to a negotiated peace”. Yet this one day (CIP), you want to throw out your principles, and further obscure any moral clarity you articulate so well ... just so we can all get along? Professor, when it comes to fellow Jews slandering Israel by promoting BDS, rather than lowering the bar as you seem willing to do, I believe Jews have an obligation to engage in behavior that meets a HIGHER standard of conduct when it comes to criticizing Israel.
By allowing groups such as NIF (who financially support groups promoting BDS) to participate in CIP, you are implicitly (if not explicitly) ENDORSING and legitimizing the anti-Israel BDS movement. In short, you are enabling and collaborating with those individuals and groups who are enemies of Israel and the Jewish people. Sorry... no one-day free pass for engaging in Lashon Hara against the Jewish people! I feel sorry for any Jew who is willing to align with a practice (boycotting) that links them to what the Nazi's did in Germany. There are certainly other actions that Jews can take to voice their political (and moral) discontent without engaging in the boycott movement.

Note that the New Israel Fund's website states "[t]he NIF opposes the global (or general) BDS movement, views its use of these tactics as counterproductive, and is concerned that segments of this movement seek to undermine the existence of the state of Israel."

NIF must be judged by its actions that are exposed in "Financing the Flames," by Edwin Black, not by its statements. The book provides loads of refernces. Inclusion of BDS supporters for the sake of inclusion is wrong-headed. Just because they claim to be Jews or Israel supporters is not a reason for inclusion. They also must be judged by their actions. By Prof. Dershowitz's logic, Kapos should also be welcome because they claim that they enforcing camp rules to protect rule-breaking Jews from Nazi retribution..

Would Yigal Amir supporters be included in this consensus? How about Baruch Goldstein supporters?

While I have much respect for Prof. Alan Dershowitz and do believe he cares greatly for our nation's homeland, he is totally wrong on this issue. BDS doesn't single out products made in Judea and Samaria alone - it singles out Israel. It is, at it's core, a movement founded by anti-Semites which seek the destruction of all of Israel. And any organization which supports BDS has no place in the parade nor acceptance in any event supporting Israel. Sadly, he's also totally wrong on his support for a two-state solution which is policy that has failed for the past 90 years and has no chance of ever succeeding.

Agree with you,Scott

Add comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
By submitting this form, you accept the Mollom privacy policy.