Boycott Of Israel Research Articles

The Academic Boycott of Israel: Juxtaposing Academic Freedom and Human Rights in International Relations

ABSTRACT This article juxtaposes the principle of academic freedom with the call for an academic boycott of Israel to advance Palestinian human rights. It examines the controversy surrounding a conference that took place at Stellenbosch University in South Africa in 2018, where an Israeli delegation was disinvited from presenting a research symposium following calls for an academic boycott. The article is an analysis of the media responses of academic leaders, activists, and social commentators in Israel and South Africa to the cancellation of the Israeli symposium at the conference. The argument advanced is that scholarship is influenced, facilitated and restrained by political systems, and that the academy is more accurately viewed as a political space where some wield power while others do not. The case is made that universities and academic conferences function as a consequence of historical and political forces and reflect the challenges with which states constantly engage.

Sports and boycott: Attitudes among Jewish Israelis

The controversy about the campaign to boycott Israel in general and Israeli sports in particular suffers from the absence of empirical data about the political character of the Israeli sports sphere, as well as the way Jewish Israelis see a possible boycott. Supporters of the boycott hope, among other things, that the campaign is registered among Israelis, and maybe even contribute to political change. Liberal opposition relies on the argument that sports is a beacon of inter-ethnic tolerance that should be cherished rather than targeted. Through a survey with a representative sample of internet users among the adult Jewish citizens of Israel (N = 600), this study provides the following related observations: (1) there is no evidence that Jewish Israeli sports fans are more likely to question the regime of Jewish supremacy than non-fans. (2) Among Jewish Israelis there is a small, but non-negligible minority who justifies the boycott of Israeli sports, and this minority is even larger among people who attend the soccer stadium and/or are politically active. (3) A significant majority of Jewish Israelis (69%) are concerned about a possible boycott of Israel in general, but this majority is less clear among men who are sports fans. The findings question the liberal expectation that Israeli sports serve as a model for inclusive citizenship and at the same time they indicate the potential of sports to amplify existing political tendencies among fans. These observations should be considered in future debates about sanctions and boycotts.

The unspoken purpose of the academic boycott

ABSTRACT The academic boycott of Israel, ostensibly targeting Israeli academe, is actually meant to isolate and stigmatise Jewish academics in America. It serves the aim of pushing Jewish academics out of shrinking disciplines, where Jews are believed to be ‘over-represented.’ That is how diehard supporters of the Palestinians find academic allies who have no professional interest in Palestine, in fields like American studies or English literature.

Role of the Arab League in Structuring the Arab Regional Space

Abstract: The article analyzes the reasons that prompted the Arab states to consolidate their efforts and create the League of Arab States. Attention is focused on the deep differences that existed between the states that came forward with the idea of strengthening Arab unity and determined the nature of this regional organization and the features of its charter, which provided its members with the opportunity to preserve their political system, sovereignty and the specifics of foreign policy.The heterogeneous nature of LAS had an impact on its the goals and objectives. The focus of this organization was to protect pan-Arab interests and support all Arab states in achieving political independence.The aggravation of the situation in Palestine after the Second World War became a central item on the agenda of all the Arab League meetings. This organization indicated its position on the Palestinian issue in the preparatory period for its official proclamation. The article discusses the activities of the Arab League, aimed at introducing a complete boycott of Israel, which, amid expansion of the Arab League, other Arab states also joined. The Arab-Israeli conflict, due to the targeted efforts of the Arab League, consolidated the Arab geopolitical community and contributed to the formation of a national Arab identity. The LAS in its documents built a common Arab narrative, having two underpinnings: the recognition of the Palestinian Arab people as a victim of the Western powers and Zionists, as well as foreign policy of Israel.The article traces the relationship between the activities of the Arab League and the changes that have occurred in the regional and international environment. The gradual transition of the Arab League to the search for a political settlement of the Arab-Israeli conflict was influenced by the emergence of a new balance of power in the Middle East region, as well as the gradual transformations of a new system of international relations.The further demarcation of the Arab countries that occurred after the mass protests in 2011 influenced the activities of the Arab League, which tried to maintain Arab unity by using the traditional tool – the unresolved Arab-Israeli conflict. The LAS member-states should have taken a pan-Arab stance on the settlement of the Arab-Israeli conflict in order to preserve national identity. The refusal of all Arab League members to accept the American settlement plan, proposed by D. Trump administration in early 2020, was a confirmation that this regional organization retains its position as a defender of Arab unity and pan-Arab interests.

Iran’s Fight against International Terrorism

Abstract: The article analyzes the reasons that prompted the Arab states to consolidate their efforts and create the League of Arab States. Attention is focused on the deep differences that existed between the states that came forward with the idea of strengthening Arab unity and determined the nature of this regional organization and the features of its charter, which provided its members with the opportunity to preserve their political system, sovereignty and the specifics of foreign policy.The heterogeneous nature of LAS had an impact on its the goals and objectives. The focus of this organization was to protect pan-Arab interests and support all Arab states in achieving political independence.The aggravation of the situation in Palestine after the Second World War became a central item on the agenda of all the Arab League meetings. This organization indicated its position on the Palestinian issue in the preparatory period for its official proclamation. The article discusses the activities of the Arab League, aimed at introducing a complete boycott of Israel, which, amid expansion of the Arab League, other Arab states also joined. The Arab-Israeli conflict, due to the targeted efforts of the Arab League, consolidated the Arab geopolitical community and contributed to the formation of a national Arab identity. The LAS in its documents built a common Arab narrative, having two underpinnings: the recognition of the Palestinian Arab people as a victim of the Western powers and Zionists, as well as foreign policy of Israel.The article traces the relationship between the activities of the Arab League and the changes that have occurred in the regional and international environment. The gradual transition of the Arab League to the search for a political settleme maintain Arab unity by using the traditional tool – the unresolved Arab-Israeli conflict. The LAS member-states should have taken a pan-Arab stance on the settlement of the Arab-Israeli conflict in order to preserve national identity. The refusal of all Arab League members to accept the American settlement plan, proposed by D. Trump administration in early 2020, was a confirmation that this regional organization retains its position as a defender of Arab unity and pan-Arab interests.

How the Conflict Between Anti-Boycott Legislation and the Expressive Rights of Business Endangers Civil Rights and Anti-Discrimination Laws

This article addresses the conflict between the expressive rights of businesses and enforcement of civil rights laws in the context of the many state laws that prohibit the awarding of public contracts to companies that engage in a boycott of Israel. Such laws (known as anti-BDS laws) have been challenged in the Federal courts in recent years, with the support of civil rights organizations, on the grounds that they violate the First Amendment right to boycott. This article examines the impact that these challenges could have on anti-discrimination laws, such as the Civil Rights Act of 1964. It argues that there is no meaningful distinction between these anti-boycott laws, and other anti-discrimination laws, since a boycott, like discrimination, is simply a refusal to deal with someone. We outline the Supreme Court’s increasing willingness in recent years to favor the religious and expressive rights of organizations and businesses over the enforcement of civil rights laws and conclude that challenges to anti-BDS laws, viewed within this trend, could threaten the validity of traditional anti-discrimination laws. By prioritizing the expressive rights of businesses, opposition to anti-BDS laws could threaten important anti-discrimination norms.

Interview with Omar Shakir

In late November 2019, the Israeli Supreme Court upheld the Ministry of Interior's order to deport Human Rights Watch (HRW) director for Israel and Palestine, Omar Shakir. The court based its decision on a 2017 amendment to Israel's 1952 Entry into Israel Law enabling the government to refuse entry to foreigners who allegedly advocate for the boycott of Israel. The same law was invoked to deny entry to U.S. congresswomen Rashida Tlaib and Ilhan Omar in the summer of 2019. The campaign against Shakir began almost immediately after he was hired by HRW in 2016, and the court's decision marked the culmination of a multi-year battle against the deportation order. In this interview, JPS Editorial Committee member, Rutgers University professor, and author Noura Erakat discusses the details of his case with Shakir in an exchange that also examines the implications of the case for human rights advocacy, in general, and for Palestinians, in particular. The interview was edited for length and clarity.

Chicken dance (off): competing cultural diplomacy in the 2019 Eurovision Song Contest

ABSTRACT Cultural diplomacy is often described as one tool in a nation’s diplomatic toolbox. But the term ‘cultural diplomacy’ encompasses many different activities. Which of these are pursued, why, and with what consequences, are important, yet often ignored questions. Using the 2018 and 2019 Eurovision Song Contests as a case study, this article explores Israel’s attempts to instrumentalize the privately-run music competition for cultural diplomacy purposes. By exalting cultural icons and connecting them publicly to their home country officials attempt to transfer the positive associations foreigners have with the cultural act to the nation as a whole. However, I posit that this cultural policy instrument is used reactively rather than strategically, and that it ignores potential negative consequences, for example a legitimization and publication of opposing forces, in this case the Palestinian cultural boycott of Israel.

Permission to Narrate a Pandemic in Palestine

Permission to Narrate a Pandemic in Palestine

Israel and Zionism in the Eyes of Palestinian Christian Theologians

Christian activism in the Arab–Israeli conflict and theological reflections on the Middle East have evolved around Palestinian liberation theology as a theological–political doctrine that scrutinizes Zionism, the existence of Israel and its policies, developing a biblical hermeneutics that reverses the biblical narrative, in order to portray Israel as a wicked regime that operates in the name of a fallacious primitive god and that uses false interpretations of the scriptures. This article analyzes the theological political–theological views applied to the Arab–Israeli conflict developed by Geries Khoury, Naim Ateek, and Mitri Raheb—three influential authors and activists in different Christians denominations. Besides opposing Zionism and providing arguments for the boycott of Israel, such conceptualizations go far beyond the conflict, providing theological grounds for the denial of Jewish statehood echoing old anti-Jewish accusations.

Doing activism like a state: Progressive municipal government, Israel/Palestine and BDS

Activism is typically placed in opposition to state practice. Yet, state bodies often participate in campaigns and movements for change, drawing on different powers and capacities, including the ability to withhold goods, land and contracts. This article explores subnational state activism – what it means and the activist framework it offers – through a study of UK local government’s episodic participation in the pro-Palestinian movement for divestment and boycott of Israel. Municipal participation in this movement demonstrates certain tensions and challenges for subnational state activism, in conditions of conflict, where critics denounce local government for over-reaching and acting improperly. This article focuses on two key aspects: the relationship of municipal activism to de-subordination and the troubling of state hierarchy; and the place of responsibility, care and democratic embeddedness within municipal state practice. Together, these strands contribute to wider debates about progressive statehood and paradigms of institutional activism.

“The American Studies Association and the U.S. Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel,” December 18, 2013

“The American Studies Association and the U.S. Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel,” December 18, 2013

The League of Arab States Trade Boycott of Israel a Passé: Time for Renewed Debate

The Arab League should evaluate whether the motivation of national security is a reasonable excuse to restrict free trade with Israel in 2018 and furthermore – assuming arguendo a good faith bona fide threat exists – whether the boycott even constitutes an effective tool to advance national security. Israel and Arab countries have their legal arguments that they can use to justify the Arab League boycott or to invalidate it. The use of the national security exception in international economic law must be evaluated on the bottom-line question of effectiveness. The boycott has proven ineffective and is now increasingly counter-productive due to transformative regional and global developments. Free trade and efficient markets combined with the ability of talented individuals to work without discrimination and restriction are the hallmarks of vibrant economies and stability – true national security. While the establishment of the boycott–over seventy years ago – may at one time have served a perceived national security goal, there is no longer such a need. Continuing the boycott undermines the WTO’s commitment to free trade and prosperity which ultimately harms all parties and their national security and harms the greater global interest in international stability for all parties.

‘BDS – it’s complicated’: Israeli, Jewish, and others’ views on the boycott of Israel

ABSTRACTThis study explored attitudes of 501 Israelis – Jews and non-Jews – and Jews and others from western countries concerning Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) and the Palestinian Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel (PACBI), which aim to change Israeli policy towards the Palestinians. We studied the relationships between views on BDS/PACBI, understandings of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and anti-Semitism, in the different groups. Our internet questionnaire led to snowball sampling, resulting in a highly-educated sample. Israeli-Jews were more inclined to participate than others. Few Palestinians from the Occupied Territories responded; hence we could not compare this group to the others. Overall, more respondents opposed the boycott than those who favoured it. Jewish-Israelis showed the lowest agreement with BDS while non-Jews from western countries exhibited the highest. Jewish-Israeli responses were similar to responses from western Jews and non-Jewish Israelis tended to respond like western non-Jews. Jewish respondents saw BDS as less non-violent than the other groups, while non-Jews disagreed more with the statement that BDS is anti-Semitic than the Jewish respondents. In conclusion, since views towards the boycott were found to be nuanced, researchers and activists need to be aware of these complexities when engaging in human rights work in the Israeli-Palestinian context.

Does political conflict hurt trade? Evidence from consumer boycotts

I estimate the impact of international conflict on bilateral trade relations using several incidents of politically motivated boycotts: The boycott of Danish goods by Muslim countries following the Muhammad Comic Crisis in 2005/2006, the Chinese boycott of Japanese goods in response to the Senkaku/Diaoyu Island conflict in 2012, the boycott of French products in the US over the Iraq War in 2003, and Turkey's boycott of Israel over the Gaza conflict in 2014. The results from difference-in-differences regressions and the synthetic control group method show that boycotts can have strong negative effects on bilateral trade in both goods and services. I estimate an average one-year trade disruption of 18.8% in the case of Denmark, 2.7% for Japan, and 1.7% for French imports, where in the latter two cases this effect is only short term. For all boycott instances, this is only a minor share of overall exports of the boycotted country over the same period. For the Iraq and Gaza conflicts, there is a reciprocal negative effect on the boycotted countries' imports from the boycotter. Product-level results are in line with intuition: Boycotts are most effective for consumer goods, especially highly-branded signature export goods such as Japanese cars, while having at most a temporary effect on intermediates and capital goods. An event study on Japanese stock market returns suggests that the Chinese boycott depressed stock values of explicitly boycotted Japanese firms only temporarily.

The BDS Movement: That Which We Call a Foreign Boycott, by Any Other Name, Is Still Illegal

In recent years a movement advocating a program of boycotts, divestitures and sanctions against Israel has developed an increasingly visible position on the world stage. This movement, known as the BDS Movement, originated in the Arab League's boycott of Israel and has grown into a multi-faceted entity. On the one hand, it continues the Arab League's boycott of Israel; on the other hand, it is aligned with radical Islamist groups, including Hamas, and coordinates with such groups as part of an international campaign to attack Israel militarily and commercially. BDS Movement has begun to attract supporters in the United States, consisting of individuals, unions and business organizations. These supporters have been led to believe that their support of the BDS Movement is within the bounds of United States' law.This paper explores specific United States' laws, including the Export Administration Act's anti-boycott provisions, anti-trust laws, racketeering laws and anti-terrorism statutes, to show that there are a number of federal laws that apply to, and prohibit participation in, the BDS Movement's activities. This paper concludes that American individuals and organizations that participate in or support the BDS Movement may be subject to both government prosecution and private party litigation, exposing participants to monetary and criminal penalties. To the extent individuals or business organizations have experienced financial harm from the BDS Movement's activities, such damages may be compensable under applicable United States' laws.Furthermore, this paper argues that because the federal government's role in regulating foreign affairs and commerce is undermined by the BDS Movement's operations in the United States, and United States' policy towards foreign relations is at odds with the BDS Movement's objectives, the United States Department of Justice is warranted in commencing prosecution against the BDS Movement and its supporters under, inter alia, the Export Administration Act, anti-terrorism laws and RICO.The portion of this paper demonstrating that First Amendment protections are not applicable to BDS Movement boycotts has been expanded and developed into a separate paper, The Inapplicabiilty of First Amendment Protections to BDS Movement Boycotts, available at http://ssrn.com/abstract=2676307.

Cultural boycott: the Ouroboros syndrome

Inevitably, the Gaza conflict led to louder calls for a cultural boycott of Israel. Here, Israeli writer, artist and curator Avi Pitchon offers a more novel - and passionate - critique of cultural ...

Academic Boycott of Israel

Academic Boycott of Israel

APA Responds to Academic Boycott of Israel

APA Responds to Academic Boycott of Israel

The Fallacy of Academic Freedom and the Academic Boycott of Israel

The Fallacy of Academic Freedom and the Academic Boycott of Israel