+972 Magazine's Stories of the Week

Directly In Your Inbox

Analysis News
Visit our Hebrew site, "Local Call" , in partnership with Just Vision.

The boycott campaign enters the Israeli election

A new Livni ad warns the public that Netanyahu and Lieberman will bring an ‘international boycott’ on Israel.

The condemnations Israel has suffered following the government’s decision to set in motion the development plans for the area known as E1 didn’t affect Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s standing in the polls, but they certainly registered with some Israelis. One of the greatest fears of the old Israeli elite – that the occupation will result in international isolation, sanctions and boycott – seems to have taken a major step into materializing.

This fear is evident in a new billboard campaign Tzipi Livni’s new party, Hatnua, launched this week. One of the ads even features something that seems like a reference to the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions campaign.

The Hebrew writing says: “Bibi and Lieberman – international boycott; Tzipi Livni – diplomatic solution. Food for thought from Hatnua”

By the way, I don’t buy Livni’s message – at least the part about solutions. All indications are that Livni’s positions are even more hawkish than Olmert’s (this was the case in Annapolis), and it seems as if she is simply taking advantage of the room created by Labor’s leader Shelly Yachimovich’s refusal to discuss the Palestinian issue in her campaign. I agree that a growing number of Israelis are concerned by the international pressure and even the boycott movement – despite the minor effect it currently has on Israelis’ lives – and might therefore be inclined to reengage with the Palestinian issue. However, Netanyahu’s supporters and allies seem less troubled by such issues. For now.

Before you go...

A lot of work goes into creating articles like the one you just read. And while we don’t do this for the money, even our model of non-profit, independent journalism has bills to pay.

+972 Magazine is owned by our bloggers and journalists, who are driven by passion and dedication to the causes we cover. But we still need to pay for editing, photography, translation, web design and servers, legal services, and more.

As an independent journalism outlet we aren’t beholden to any outside interests. In order to safeguard that independence voice, we are proud to count you, our readers, as our most important supporters. If each of our readers becomes a supporter of our work, +972 Magazine will remain a strong, independent, and sustainable force helping drive the discourse on Israel/Palestine in the right direction.

Support independent journalism in Israel/Palestine Donate to +972 Magazine today
View article: AAA
Share article
Print article

    * Required


    1. XYZ

      This type of campaign may very well
      backfire. Polls show only about 25% of the Jewish population of Israel believes an agreement with the Palestinians is achievable in the foreseeable future. Tzippi, who has flip-flopped many tines in the past and has betrayed supporters more than once may not be viewed as having any credibility in promising a peace agreement

      Reply to Comment
    2. Piotr Berman

      Even if XYX is correct, Tzippi does not need the entire 25% to do well. If she gets 15% she will be a princess, and if what she says is true (beyond her control, but possible), Netanyahu may be forced to ditch the extreme right at some point, and she will be not only a princess, but a prophet to boot.

      Reply to Comment
      • Kolumn9

        Why would Bibi be forced to ditch the extreme right? If he wants to stay in power they are his safest allies. This is true regardless of any external events.

        Reply to Comment
        • Piotr Berman

          According to some conspiracy theories making rounds in places like JP, EU countries including UK prepare sanctions on Israel on the issue of settlements and are secretly egged on by Obama Administration.

          EU is quite bureaucratic, which in part means that different “processes” are quite independent from each other, but up to a point. Most advantageously for Israel, human right processes operate totally independently from trade. But once the issue of settlements becomes also a trade issue then heavy machinery is in place and the sheer momentum of the process can be against Israel.
          Netanyahu showed some deftness bt evading confrontation with EU on NGO issue, but concessions on settlements may lead to a rebellion of the extreme right.

          Reply to Comment
          • Kolumn9

            All that might be accurate, but the underlying issue is that within the Israeli context regardless of what happens in the EU, Netanyahu’s position as prime minister is more stable in an alliance with the religious and the right-wing parties than with any alternative coalition. This is something that Bibi knows from previous experience. Bending to international pressure (like he did with the Wye agreement) and relying on left-wing support is a sure fire recipe for winding up in the political wilderness, while allying with the religious and the right-wing lets him have a stable government.

            Reply to Comment
    3. rsgengland

      Both the wars that really gave impetus to the anti-Israel BDS alliance, were started by Olmert, with Livni as Foreign Minister.
      Whether her election would make much difference to the current situation is a moot point.
      The Palestinian position could not be clearer after the events and speaches in Gaza this past weekend.
      And the anti-Israel groupings in the West and Israel act as if they concur with the aims and intentions of Hamas

      Reply to Comment
    4. ginger

      Existential threats to Apartheid are good thing…

      Israel’s favorite game is to pretend every Palestinian right is – including Right of Return UN 194 – is an existential threat to Israel.

      It’s not – it’s only an existential threat to Apartheid Israel as we currently know it

      Palestinians have every right in world to fully and aggressively assert their rights under the Geneva Conventions, ALL International Law, and UN Resolutions which Israeli is currently violating – including at the ICC

      Reply to Comment
      • Kolumn9

        Oh look, another person that thinks the Palestinians have the right to destroy Israel. Here is a hint, if at the end of your demands there is no state called Israel, then it is an existential threat to Israel regardless of the clothing you put on it.

        Here is another one. Israel will continue to ignore calls made by the automatic majority at the UN for her destruction and will continue to violate any and all UN resolutions that demand that she commit suicide. Nothing less can be expected from the leadership of a state regardless of whatever dreamworld exists in your mind and in the minds of those that think the UN overrides the sovereign interests of states, with the most basic being survival.

        Reply to Comment
        • Y-Man

          She is in favor of “destroying” Israel just like people on the right side of history were in favor of “destroying” Rhodesia and Apartheid South Africa.

          Reply to Comment
          • Kolumn9

            That’s fine, but she should be entirely explicit in her desire to destroy Israel instead of pretending otherwise.

            Reply to Comment
          • Johnboy

            I belive you’ll find that the phrase that she used was “apartheid Israel”, not “Israel”.

            Apartheid South Africa is no more – done away with, in large part due to the international boycott of that regime – yet South Africa is still there.

            Reply to Comment
          • Kolumn9

            She is trying to argue that there is no existential risk to Israel inherent in Palestinian demands. She made this explicit. Let’s play a little game. How long would a state called Israel survive if the majority of its citizens were Arabs that have grown up full of hatred for everything Israeli or Jewish? So, keep your obfuscations and make your demands plain. If you wish Israel to be destroyed just say so. This crap about demanding Palestinian ‘rights’ while feigning ignorance that their ultimate consequence is the destruction of Israel is fooling noone.

            Reply to Comment
      • rsgengland

        There was a population swop as over a million JEWS WERE ETHNICALLY CLEANSED from the Middle East/North Africa by a wave of ANTISEMITISM that swept the Arab/Muslim lands before and after 1948.
        The Mufti of Jerusalem and Mandatory Palestines Muslims spent the Second World War as the guest of Hilter, planning to emulate Hitlers methods against the Jews when he had gained control of the area. Thankfully he failed .

        Reply to Comment
    5. In Israel’s early days, one man alone, Sharett, sought diplomatic accommodation with arabs while all others (or so my reading suggests) — Ben-Gurion, Dayan, Sharon, Begin, Shamir prized attack, and more attack, and would not negotiate.

      They even had Unit 101 attack and massacre the village of Qibia and lied about it to everyone, even to Israelis (although it appears that Israelis knew it was an official army attack). This was lip-service to seeking a reputation for not attacking, but everyone knew.

      I do not expect ANY Israeli to pull back from the occupation, or from the settlements, until forced to by quite definite acts by the no-actions-but-mere-words-only international crowd.

      Reply to Comment
    6. Ante Pavelic

      comment was deleted, user banned.

      Reply to Comment
      • XYZ

        Note to moderators-
        This person who calls himself Pavelic has been banned in the past for using names of other Nazis and antisemites.

        Reply to Comment
        • Y-Man

          dude, the moderators can see the posts of “Ante Pavelic” just fine. You are just reminding everyone that you are an omnipresent hasbara troll who lives on this message board and knows the past commenting history of everyone.

          Reply to Comment
    7. klang

      I think the point of the “ante Pavelic” postings is that the poster was making the point that a nazi like Ante Pavelic would have approved of some of the columns in 972 mag. In this way, he/she succeeded admirably
      1) The moderators at some point thought that “Ante Pavelic” had valid points to the discussion
      2) The moderator and readers proved themselves to be ignorant of history to the point that it took someone googling the name to find out who Ante Pavelic was

      Reply to Comment