Comments on: The left should take pride in ‘delegitimizing’ the occupation

By: Jack

Jack — Sun, 29 Jul 2012 15:32:21 +0000

Richard Witty,
Yes sanctions would work but the problem is sanctions will never be placed on them to begin with.

By: Richard Witty

Richard Witty — Sun, 29 Jul 2012 15:23:59 +0000

Jack,
Do you see any evidence that sanctions will in fact slow Israel’s annexation?

I see none, even if widespread, and they won’t get widespread.

I think that every element of the BDS campaign will firm up Israel’s and Israelis’ fears, invoking support for a fortress approach, and reelecting Netanyahu.

By: Jack

Jack — Sun, 29 Jul 2012 10:46:41 +0000

The sanctions are intended to change their behavior of course that would change their behavior and sanctions should have been put decades ago and are more than legitimate since the annexation have boomed the last 5 years.

By: Richard Witty

Richard Witty — Sun, 29 Jul 2012 10:13:17 +0000

I don’t think that you will accomplish any change that is truly desirable in any reasonable period of time through the effort of force.

I do think it is possible to change hearts and minds however.

I am not saying that Palestinians should accept subordinate, demeaning relations. I’m saying that they should seek and accept mutually respectful ones.

By: Richard Witty

Richard Witty — Sun, 29 Jul 2012 10:09:39 +0000

Its true that if Israel wanted to change their institutional relationships with Palestine and Palestinians, they would likely be able to find a way to.

The question to you, and others, still is what is the most effective way to make change. The way chosen, and the direction of change chosen.

The application of a punitive approach is too mixed in the glee of revenge rather than doing what is necessary to make the change.

“By any means necessary”, means BOTH a willingness to fight (if likely to be effective) AND a willingness to reconcile (as galling as that is to experience and to be told by an outsider).

By: Jack

Jack — Sun, 29 Jul 2012 07:25:55 +0000

Richard Witty,
1. One cant shield legitimate criticism or santtions based on that. Must group of people have suffered one way or another either through violence, sanctions etc that doesnt mean that their STATE isnt free to reign in whatever way they want.
2. All these are state institutions. Sanctions or boycottes arent imposed for their religious or ethnic background but on the state and due its actions.
Funny how all enemies of Israel is ok to sanction and even have embargos on but not Israel itself. Thats not a credible rhetoric.

By: Richard Witty

Richard Witty — Sun, 29 Jul 2012 01:36:37 +0000

Jack,
1. You are closing your eyes. The question is how the action is perceived, not what you mean to say.
2. A boycott directed against businesses, or academic or cultural interaction, is not directed at the state, but at people.

There are some conditions in which punitive actions are effective, and some where they are utterly inneffective, and make things worse, rather than better.

By: Jack

Jack — Sat, 28 Jul 2012 16:00:54 +0000

Richard Witty,
1. No because these sanctions are against jews but the actions of Israel.
2. Like any other sanction its meant as a penalty, to change a behvaior. Also the sanctions arent supposed to be on the people but on the regime ruling Israel.

By: Richard Witty

Richard Witty — Sat, 28 Jul 2012 11:35:59 +0000

You don’t get how Israelis and sympathetic Jews perceive the boycott as something akin to the long history of persecution, that literally “traditionally” has taken the form of a boycott of Jewish institutions?

And, if you are hoping to change Israeli attitudes and behaviors, how vain that effort is likely to be, how much it is more likely to create a fortress approach rather than a conciliatory.

You won’t even consider that.

If your goal is to improve Palestinians lives, how counter-productive that punitive approach is likely to be.

Likud might be more shell than living seed. But the Israeli community is of the conditionally willing, living, affected by how they are treated.

By: Jack

Jack — Fri, 27 Jul 2012 23:11:49 +0000

Richard Witty,
1. Irrelevant since the sanctions are very well tied to the actions Israel is commiting. One cant stand above the law like that.
2. ICJ reached consensus on wall, which territories that are palestinian and recognized the annexation. The court is the highest body on these topics so of course it has a significant effect. What UN security council thinks of it is irrelevant too since we know who would veto any advancement of the conclusions of the court.
-
UN have never said the blockade is legal. If you refer to the report made by the pro-israeli Uribe after Flotilla killings, I urge you to read the actual report and see what it says, especially in terms of authority to classify the blockade at all.
-
The goal is of course two states established along 1967 borders. Everything is ready. World is waiting for one of the parties to accept.