1

Academic & Cultural Boycott

Reader
About the Campaign p.1
http://www.pacbi.org/etemplate.php?id=868
Palestinian Call for Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel p.4
http://www.pacbi.org/etemplate.php?id=869
Palestinian Filmmakers, Artists and Cultural Workers Call for a Cultural p.5
Boycott of Israel
http://www.pacbi.org/etemplate.php?id=315
A Call from Palestine: Palestinian Students’ Campaign for the Academic p.12
Boycott of Israel (PSCABI)
http://www.pacbi.org/etemplate.php?id=1021
John Berger and 93 other authors, film-makers, musicians and performers p.13
call for a cultural boycott of Israel
http://www.pacbi.org/etemplate.php?id=415
PACBI Guidelines for the International Academic Boycott of Israel p.18
http://www.pacbi.org/etemplate.php?id=1108
PACBI Guidelines for the International Cultural Boycott of Israel p.23
http://www.pacbi.org/etemplate.php?id=1047
Implementing the Academic Boycott: Individuals vs. Institutions p.27
http://www.pacbi.org/etemplate.php?id=1125
Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) - Frequently Asked Questions p.29
http://www.pacbi.org/etemplate.php?id=867
Academic Boycott and the Israeli Left p.32
http://www.zcommunications.org/academic-boycott-and-the-israeli-left-by-omar-
barghouti
Enough. It's time for a boycott p.36
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/jan/10/naomi-klein-boycott-israel
The Academic Boycott of Israel–Objections and Defense p.38
http://www.logosjournal.com/issue_6.3/davidson.htm
 2
ABOUT THE CAMPAIGN
"The end of apartheid stands as one of the crowning accomplishments of the past century, but we
would not have succeeded without the help of international pressure-- in particular the
divestment movement of the 1980s. Over the past six months, a similar movement has taken
shape, this time aiming at an end to the Israeli occupation". Desmond Tutu
The Palestinian Campaign for the
Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel
was launched in Ramallah in April 2004
by a group of Palestinian academics and
intellectuals to join the growing
international boycott movement. The
Campaign built on the Palestinian call
for a comprehensive economic, cultural
and academic boycott of Israel issued in
A ugust 2002 and a statement made by
Palestinian academics and intellectuals
in the occupied territories and in the
Diaspora calling for a boycott of Israeli
academic institutions in October 2003.
In July 2004, the Campaign issued a
statement of principles, addressed to our
colleagues in the international
community urging them to
comprehensively and consistently
boycott all Israeli academic and cultural
institutions until Israel withdraws from
all the lands occupied in 1967, including
East Jerusalem; removes all its colonies
in those lands; agrees to United Nations
resolutions relevant to the restitution of
Palestinian refugees rights; and
dismantles its system of apartheid. This
statement was met with widespread
support, and has to date been endorsed
by nearly sixty Palestinian academic,
cultural and other civil society
federations, unions, and organizations,
including the Federation of Unions of
Palestinian Universities‘ Professors and
Employees and the Palestinian NGO
Network in the West Bank. The
campaign has also established an
advisory committee comprised of well-
known public figures and intellectuals.
The Palestinian Campaign is inspired by
the historic role played by people of
conscience in the international
community of scholars and intellectuals
who have shouldered the moral
responsibility to fight injustice, as
exemplified in their struggle to abolish
apartheid in South Africa through
diverse forms of boycott.
During the past two years various calls
for divestment, sanctions and economic
boycott of Israeli products as well as a
boycott of Israeli academic and cultural
institutions have been issued by groups
and individuals in Europe, the United
States, and elsewhere. These calls
recognize that Israeli academic
institutions (mostly state controlled)
and the vast majority of Israeli
intellectuals and academics have either
contributed directly to the Israeli
occupation or at the very least have
been complicit through their silence. In
April 2002 British academics issued a
call for a moratorium on European
research and academic collaboration
with Israeli institutions. In France, an
appeal to the European Union not to
renew its 1995 Association Agreement
with Israel was issued by the University
 3

of Paris-VI (Pierre-et-Marie-Curie) in
December 2002 and was endorsed by Advisory Board
several other French universities.  Abdel Jawad Saleh
Similar calls were published in Italy and
Australia, while in the United States,  George Giacaman
student and faculty groups at several  Ibrahim Dakkak
universities including New York
 Jaqueline Sfeir
University, The Massachusetts Institute
of Technology and Princeton launched  Jamil Hilal Samia Khoury
divestment from Israel campaigns. Most
recently the Church of Sweden has Founding Committee
called for a boycott of goods produced
by Israeli colonies in the West Bank and  Bashir Abdel Razek
Gaza Strip and the Presbyterian Church  In‘am Obeidi
in the United States has decided to
 Islah Jad
divest from Israel.
 Lisa Taraki
Boycotting Israeli academic and cultural  Omar Barghouti
institutions is an urgently needed form
of pressure against Israel that can bring  Riham Barghouti
about its compliance with international  Rowan Al-Faqih
law and the requirements for a just
 Zuhair Sabbagh
peace.

Posted on 21-12-2008 at: Steering Committee

http://www.pacbi.org/etemplate.php?i  Carmela Armanious
d=868
 Gabi Baramki
 Omar Barghouti
 Riham Barghouti
 Samia Botmeh
 Haidar Eid
 Rania Elias
 Islah Jad
 Linda Tabar
 Lisa Taraki
 4
Palestinian Call for
Academic and Cultural
Boycott of Israel
Whereas Israel‘s colonial oppression of
the Palestinian people, which is based
on Zionist ideology, comprises the
following:
 Denial of its responsibility for the
Nakba -- in particular the waves of
ethnic cleansing and dispossession
that created the Palestinian refugee
problem -- and therefore refusal to
accept the inalienable rights of the
refugees and displaced stipulated in
and protected by international law;
 Military occupation and colonization
of the West Bank (including East
Jerusalem) and Gaza since 1967, in
violation of international law and
UN resolutions;
 The entrenched system of racial
discrimination and segregation
against the Palestinian citizens of
Israel, which resembles the defunct
apartheid system in South Africa;
Since Israeli academic institutions
(mostly state controlled) and the vast
majority of Israeli intellectuals and
academics have either contributed
directly to maintaining, defending or
otherwise justifying the above forms of
oppression, or have been complicit in
them through their silence,
Given that all forms of international
intervention have until now failed to
force Israel to comply with international
law or to end its repression of the
Palestinians, which has manifested itself
in many forms, including siege,
indiscriminate killing, wanton
destruction and the racist colonial wall,
In view of the fact that people of
conscience in the international
community of scholars and intellectuals
have historically shouldered the moral
responsibility to fight injustice, as
exemplified in their struggle to abolish
apartheid in South Africa through
diverse forms of boycott,
Recognizing that the growing
international boycott movement against
Israel has expressed the need for a
Palestinian frame of reference outlining
guiding principles,
In the spirit of international solidarity,
moral consistency and resistance to
injustice and oppression,
We, Palestinian academics and
intellectuals, call upon our colleagues in
the international community to
comprehensively and consistently
boycott all Israeli academic and
cultural institutions as a contribution to
the struggle to end Israel‘s occupation,
colonization and system of apartheid,
by applying the following:
1. Refrain from participation in any
form of academic and cultural
cooperation, collaboration or joint
projects with Israeli institutions;
2. Advocate a comprehensive boycott
of Israeli institutions at the national
and international levels, including
suspension of all forms of funding
and subsidies to these institutions;
3. Promote divestment and
disinvestment from Israel by
international academic institutions;
 5
4. Work toward the condemnation of
Israeli policies by pressing for
resolutions to be adopted by
academic, professional and cultural
associations and organizations;
5. Support Palestinian academic and
cultural institutions directly without
requiring them to partner with
Israeli counterparts as an explicit or
implicit condition for such support.
Endorsed by:
Palestinian Federation of Unions of
University Professors and Employees;
Palestinian General Federation of Trade
Unions; Palestinian NGO Network, West
Bank; Teachers‘ Federation; Palestinian
Writers‘ Federation; Palestinian League of
Artists; Palestinian Journalists‘ Federation;
General Union of Palestinian Women;
Palestinian Lawyers‘ Association; and tens
of other Palestinian federations, associations,
and civil society organizations.
PACBI, P.O. Box 1701, Ramallah,
Palestine; info@BoycottIsrael.ps;
http://www.PACBI.org
Download statement (PDF)
Posted on 21-12-2008
Palestinian
Filmmakers, Artists and
Cultural Workers Call
for a Cultural Boycott
of Israel
Dear Filmmakers & Artists,
During the past few weeks we have
borne witness to the escalation of Israeli
aggression into open war on both
Palestine and Lebanon.
With Israel’s invasion of Gaza on June
27th, 2006, ministries and educational
institutions have been destroyed, as has
the plant that supplies nearly 50 percent
of Gaza's electricity. Bridges, roads,
dozens of homes, and hundreds of
dunams of agricultural land have also
been destroyed. Sixty-four elected
Palestinian legislators, cabinet ministers
and officials have been detained
without charge.
On July 12th, Israel brought its
campaign of collective punishment and
military violence to Lebanon, with
"Operation Just Reward". A complete
assault, via land, sea, and air, of the
Lebanese population and infrastructure
has led to total destruction. In just 3
weeks, almost 1 million Lebanese
civilians have been displaced and the
death toll has reached 900 Lebanese and
160 Palestinians, with a UN count
saying one-third of the dead are
children.
Additionally, in violation of
 6
international law, Israel continues to
occupy Gaza, the West Bank (including
East Jerusalem), and Syria’s Golan
Heights. In violation of the Fourth
Geneva Convention, Israel continues to
hold 9,600 Palestinian political prisoners
in Israeli jails and detention centers
without due process, among them 130
Palestinian women and 388 children,
many of them taken from their homes in
the middle of the night.
We, the undersigned Palestinian
filmmakers and artists, appeal to all
artists and filmmakers of good
conscience around the world to cancel
all exhibitions and other cultural events
that are scheduled to occur in Israel, to
mobilize immediately and not allow the
continuation of the Israeli offensive to
breed complacency. Like the boycott of
South African art institutions during
apartheid, cultural workers must speak
out against the current Israeli war
crimes and atrocities. We call upon the
International community to join us in
the boycott of Israeli film festivals,
Israeli public venues, and Israeli
institutions supported by the
government, and to end all cooperation
with these cultural and artistic
institutions that to date have refused to
take a stand against the Occupation, the
root cause for this colonial conflict.
We call upon you to take a stand in
order to appeal to the Israeli people to
give up their silence, to abandon their
apathy, and to face up to their
responsibility in the destruction and
killing their elected government is
wreaking. To the Lebanese and
Palestinians terrorized by this Army's
planes, bombs and missiles, this silence,
apathy and lack of action from Israelis,
are regarded as complicit in the ongoing
war crimes, as for those Israeli artists,
academics and intellectuals who
continue to serve in the Israeli army
they are directly implicated in these
crimes. We call upon you to give way to
action that would replace words spoken
too often and forgotten too quickly. We
call upon you to make your voices
heard in calling for an end to this
bloodshed and an end to this
oppression that has lasted too long.
To endorse or answer this call for a
cultural boycott of Israel please send an
email with your name, position and
country to
[email]pal.filmmakers@gmail.com[/em
ail]
Signatures (Alphabetical):
1.AbdelFattah Abu-Srour,Al-Rowwad
Cultural Center 2.Abdelsalam
Shehadeh,Filmmaker 3.Adila Laidi,Lecturer
4.Ahmed R. S. Qatamesh, Musician/Flutist
5.Ala' Abu Ghoush,Graphic Designer
6.Alexandra Handal,Artist 7.Ali
Nassar,Filmmaker 8.Amer Hlehel, Actor/
director 9.Amer Shomali,Artist 10.Anan
Brakat,Filmmaker, Arab Cinema School,
11.Annemarie Jacir,Filmmaker 12.Azza El-
Hassan,Filmmaker 13.Bahia
Munem,Filmmaker 14.Bashar Ibrahem,Film
critic 15.Benaz Batrawi,Filmmaker 16.Betty
Shamieh,Writer 17.Buthina Canaan
Khoury,Filmmaker 18.Carol
Michel,International Center of Bethlehem
19.Cherien Dabis,Filmmaker 20.Dahna
Abourahme,Filmmaker 21.Dima Abu
Ghoush,Filmmaker 22.Emily Jacir,Artist
23.Enas Muthaffar,Filmmaker 24.Fadi
Zmorrod,Artist 25.Faten Farhat,Khalil
Sakakini Cultural Center 26.Faten
Nastas,Artist 27.Firas
Abdelrahman,Filmmaker 28.George
 7
Azar,Photojournalist / Cinematographer
29.Ghada Kanafani, Poet 30.Ghada
Terawi,Filmmaker 31.Hadeel Karkar,Writer
32.Hafez Moeen Omar, Artist 33.Hala Al-
Yamani,Drama Teacher 34.Hanna
Atallah,Filmmaker 35.Hanna
Elias,Filmmaker 36.Hanna
Musleh,Filmmaker 37.Hany Abu-
Assad,Filmmaker 38.Haya Al-
Jareedy,Filmmaker 39.Hayan
Charara,Writer 40.Hazim Bitar,Filmmaker
41.Hussein Isbitani, Actor 42.Iman
Aoun,Ishtar Theatre 43.Iman
Hammouri,Popular Art Centre 44.In'am El-
Obeidi,Media Department, Birzeit
University., 45.Ismail Habbash,Filmmaker
46.Jamil Daraghmeh,Photographer 47.Jibril
Awad,Filmmaker 48.John Halaka,Artist
49.Juliano Mer Khamis,Actor & Director
50.Kamal Boullata,Artist 51.Karma Abu-
Sharif,Writer 52.Khadijeh.H.Abu-
Ali,Filmmaker 53.Khaled Hourani,Artist
54.Khaled Jubran,Musician 55.Khaled
Katamish,Dancer 56.Lana Zreik,Movement
Director and Actress 57.Larissa
Sansour,Artist 58.Leila Sansour,Filmmaker
59.Liana Badr,Filmmaker 60.Liana
Saleh,Filmmaker 61.Lina Bokhary,Artist
62.Lisa Suhair Majaj, Writer,
Palestine/Cyprus 63.Lois Nakhleh,Artist
64.Mahmoud Massad,Filmmaker 65.Mai
Masri,Filmmaker 66.Manal
Issa,A.M.Qattan Foundation 67.Marwan
Abado,Musician 68.Maysoun Rafeedie,
Dancer 69.Mazen Saade,Filmmaker &
Writer 70.Michel Khleifi,Filmmaker
71.Miguel Littin,Filmmaker 72.Moeen
Omar, Artist 73.Nabila Irshaid,Artist
74.Nada El-Yassir,Filmmaker 75.Nader
Jalal,Palestinian Institute for Cultural
Development (nawa) 76.Nahed
Awwad,Filmmaker 77.Najwa
Najjar,Filmmaker 78.Nida Sinnokrot,Artist
79.Nizar Hassan,Filmmaker 80.Noora
Baker,Dancer 81.Omar Barghouti,Dance
choreographer 82.Omar Qattan,Filmmaker
83.Osama Al-Zain,Filmmaker 84.Osama
Qashoo, Filmmaker 85.Radi
Shehadeh,Theatre director 86.Raed Helou,
Filmmaker 87.Raeda Ghazaleh, Theatre
director, Palestine/ UK 88.Rana
Bishara,Artist 89.Rania Elias-
Khoury,Yabous Productions 90.Rashid
Masharawi,Filmmaker 91.Rawda
Atallah,Arab Cultural Association-
Nazareth 92.Reem Fadda,Palestinian
Association of Contemporary Art 93.Rim
Banna,Singer/ Song writer 94.Riyad
Deis,Filmmaker 95.Rowan Al
Faqih,Filmmaker 96.Rula
Halawani,Artist/photographer 97.Rula
Khoury,Curator/ Art coordinator 98.Saed
Andoni,Filmmaker 99.Saleh Bakri,Actor
100.Salim Abu Jabal,Writer 101.Salwa
Mikdadi,Curator 102.Sama Alshaibi,Artist/
Professor, Palestine/USA, 103.Sameh
Zoabi,Filmmaker 104.Sami Bukhari,Artist
105.Samia A. Halaby,Artist 106.Samieh
Jabbarin,Film/Theatre director 107.Samirah
Alkassim, Film Program at AUC,
Palestine/USA 108.Shadi Zmorrod,The
First Palestinian Circus School 109.Sobhi
al-Zobaidi,Filmmaker 110.Suha
Barghouti,Popular Art Centre 111.Suheir
Hammad, Poet 112.Suleiman
Mansour,Artist 113.Suzy
Salamy,Filmmaker 114.Taghreed
Mishael,Filmmaker 115.Tarek
Bishara,Actor/Screenwriter 116.Tariq
Shadid, The Musical Intifadah 117.Ula
Tabari,Filmmaker 118.Vera Tamari,Artist
119.Vladimir Tamari,Artist 120.Wafa
Jamil,Filmmaker 121.Walid Abu
Bakr,Writer 122.Yahya Barakat,Filmmaker
123.Yazan Al-Khalili, Photographer 124.
Sharaf DarZaid, Dancer, Choreographer
International Supporters:
1.Abdel Halim Ghazaly , Egypt 2.Adrian
Grima, Writer, Malta 3.Adrian Mitchell,
Poet/ Playwright, UK 4.Adriana Auderset,
Switzerland 5.Ahmed Shoka, Psychiatrist &
Media Consultant, UK 6.Aicha Lemsine :
 8
Writer, Algeria 7.Ajay Bhardwaj,
Filmmaker, India 8.Akif Emre, Writer/
Filmmaker, Turkey 9.Alain Bottarelli,
Switzerland 10.Aleana Egan, Artist
11.Allan Siegel, Filmmaker/ Writer,
Budapest 12.Amberly Gorman, Artist, USA
13.Amjad Faur, Artist, USA 14.Ammiel
Alcalay, Writer/Translator, USA
15.Andrew N. Rubin, Writer, USA
16.Andy Rector, Filmmaker/Critic, USA
17.Angela O'Hara, Filmmaker, Canada
18.Anis M. Fakheruddin, Jordan
19.Anjalika Sagar, Artist, UK 20.Anna
Maria Aslanoglu, Dancer, Turkey
21.Annalisa Pelizza, Italy 22.Anne Tsoulis,
Writer, Australia 23.Anthony Alessandrini,
USA 24.Antoine Bustros, Composer,
Canada 25.Antonia Carver, Writer/ Editor,
UK/UAE 26.Architects & Planners for
Justice in Palestine, UK 27.Art Tibaldo,
Filmmaker (Visual Ethnographer),
Philippines 28.Artemis Anastasiadou,
Filmmaker, Greece 29.Artur Matuck, Brasil
30.Aseel Nasir Dyck, USA 31.Athir
Shayota, Artist, Iraq/USA 32.Ayben
Altunç, Filmmaker, Turkey 33.Aycin
Mazgit,Turkey 34.Bahriye Kabadayi,
Director/Asst. Dir., Turkey 35.Barbara
Langford, Writer, France 36.Barbara Nimri
Aziz, Writer/Radio producer, USA 37.Beth
Mahmoud-Howell, Artist/ Interior
Designer, USA 38.Bilal Zaiter,
Communication Consultant 39.Bilge Diren
Güneş, Photograph, Turkey 40.Bing l
Elmas, Filmmaker, Turkey 41.Birsen
Canbaz, Turkey 42.Boo Wallin, Musician,
UK 43.Brian Johnston, School of
Drama,Carnegie Mellon University, USA
44.Brian Tierney, Writer, USA 45.Brian
Wood, Writer 46.British Committee for
Justice in Palestine (BCJP), UK 47.Bruce
Macdonald, Writer, Canada 48.Bulent
Arinli, Filmmaker, Turkey 49.Caglar
Ozdemiroglu,Turkey 50.Carmen Emilia
Jacir, Chile 51.Carol Shyman, Filmmaker/
Festival organizer, France 52.Carolina
Rivas, Filmmaker, Mexico 53.Cengiz Kılçer,
Poet, Turkey 54.Chris Thomas, Director/
Producer, UK 55.Christine Fye,
Filmmaker/Writer/Artist, USA 56.Christine
Tackley, Writer, Canada 57.Christof
Lehmann Mpsych, Psychologist
58.Christopher Toussaint, Filmaker, Free
Spirit Productions, USA 59.Claire Fowler,
Filmmaker, Uk 60.Corine Dhondee
Filmmaker England 61.Critical Art
Ensemble, Artist Collective, USA 62.Csaba
Polony, Artist/ Editor/Publisher, USA
63.Cxema Pico,Web Designer,
Spain/Ireland 64.Cynthia Madansky,
Filmmaker, USA 65.Daoud Sarhandi,
Filmmaker, Mexico 66.Dare Dukes, Writer,
USA 67.David Farrelly, Poet, Mexico
68.David Vogt, Musician, Norway
69.Deborah Al-Najjar, Writer 70.Debra
Zimmerman, Women Make Movies, USA
71.Deirdre Scully, Costumer/ Stylist, USA
72.Denisse Andrade, Mediamaker, USA
73.Deniz Kana, Filmmaker, Turkey
74.Diana El Jeiroudi, Producer/ Director,
Syria 75.Dina Redman, Assistant
Professor/Artist, USA 76.Dominique
George, USA 77.Donna Wallach, USA
78.Douglas Minkler, Artist, USA 79.Dr
Vikas Bajpai, India 80.Dr. Giovanna
Benedetti, Writer, Panama 81.Dr. Harold
Knight, Music Director,USA 82.Dr.
P.K.Pokker, India 83.Dr.Herman De Ley,
Belgium 84.Ebru Seremetli, Asistant
Director, Turkey 85.Eleni Laperi, Artist,
Albania 86.Eli Hamo, Filmmaker, Israel
87.Elle Flanders, Filmmaker, Canada 88.Els
Roessingh, Cultural Tour Operator,
Netherlands 89.Eman Haddad, Palestine
90.Emel Celebi, Editor, Turkey 91.Emel
Koç, Writer, Turkey 92.Emma Manning,
Dance writer/ Editor, London UK, 93.Enis
Riza, Director, Turkey 94.Eric William
Ringsby, Filmmaker, USA 95.Erik
Hillestad, Music Producer, Norway 96.Esra
Ersen, Artist, Turkey 97.Esra
Kahraman,Turkey 98.Ettore Stratta,
Conductor/ Producer, Italy 99.Evren Aydın,
Web Designer, Turkey 100.Excentrik,
Musician/Poet 101.Fabiola Nabil Naguib,
Artist/ Writer, Canada 102.Fareea Dangor,
 9
South Africa 103.Filiz Ultav Cakir, Turkey
104.Firuz Kutal, Graphic designer/
Animator, Norway 105.Frederic Choffat,
Filmmaker, Switzerland 106.Fredwreck
Farid Nassar, Record Producer, USA
107.Gert Soer, Jordan 108.Ghalia Mohder,
USA 109.Ginger Parra, USA 110.Gita
Hashemi, Artist, Canada 111.Giulia
Grassilli, Human Rights Nights, Italy.
112.G khan Erkut, Filmmaker,Turkey
113.Gonzalo Pinto, Artist/ Photographer,
Chile 114.Gregory Berger, Filmmaker
115.Gustave Weltsek, Arts Educator,
Canada 116.Guzella Bayindir, Nazim
Hikmet Cultural House,Turkey 117.H.
Michael Wieben, artist, Portugal/U.S.A.
118.Hadi El Debek, Artist ,USA 119.Haifa
Bint-Kadi, Mosaic Artist, USA 120.Haifa
Zangana, Novelist/ Artist 121.Hakan Bulut,
Photographer, Turkey 122.Hamied Oqabi,
Filmmaker, Yemen 123.Hamra Abbas,
Artist, Pakistan 124.Hanan Thabet, Egypt/
Palestine/ USA 125.Hans Noll, Ph.D., USA
126.Hans Noll, USA 127.Harry Halbreich,
Musicologist, Belgium) 128.Hayam Noir,
Poet/ Artist/ Writer, United States
129.Hekim Coşkun, Turkey 130.Henry
Chalfant, Filmmaker, USA 131.Hilda
Meers, Writer, Scotland 132.Honey Al
Sayed, Radio Broadcaster 133.Huda Siksek,
Artist, Canada 134.Huseyin Kuzu,
Screenwriter, Turkey 135.Hyder Yusafzai,
Pakistan 136.Irene veenstra, Art Historian,
Netherlands 137.Iron Sheik, Hip Hop
Artist, USA 138.Isik Ezber, Publisher,
Turkey 139.Isis Saratial Misdary, Theatre
Director, Egypt/USA 140.Islam el Azzazi,
filmmaker, Egypt 141.Isra' Muzaffar,
Palestine 142.Jae Soo Lee, Filmmaker, Korea
143.Jamelie Hassan, Artist, Canada
144.James Scully, Poet/Writer, USA
145.Jana Traboulsi, Graphic Designer,
Lebanon 146.Janet Baus, filmmaker, USA
147.Janine Halbreich-Euvrard, Author/ film
critic,France 148.Jawad Metni, Filmmaker
149.Jayce Salloum, Artist, Canada 150.Jeff
Sacks, Writer/translator, USA 151.Jenifer
Dixon, Writer, USA 152.Jeremy Pikser,
Screenwriter, USA 153.Joe Namy, USA
154.John Chalcraft, Writer, UK 155.John
Halaka, Visual Artist, USA 156.John
Wight, Scotland 157.Johnny McAllister,
Filmmaker, Ireland 158.Jordan Flaherty,
Writer/ Filmmaker, USA 159.Jorge
Coronado, USA 160.Josh On, Internet
Artist, USA 161.Joslyn Barnes,
Writer/Producer, USA 162.Judy Keller,
USA 163.Julian Samuel, Film-maker,
Canada 164.Julian Samuel, Filmmaker,
Canada 165.Juliana Saad, Writer/
Translator, Brazil 166.Kais Al-Zubaidi,
Filmmaker, Syria 167.Karim Haddad ,
Composer, Lebanon 168.Kathleen Chalfant,
Actor, USA 169.Keith Hammond,
Philosopher, UK 170.Ken Loach,
Filmmaker, UK 171.Kevin Noble, Culture/
Conflict Group, USA 172.Khaled d.
Ramadan, Filmmaker/ Video Maker,
Lebanon/ Denmark 173.Khalo Matabane,
Filmmaker, South Africa 174.Koen
Augustijnen, Choreographer, Belgium
175.Koen Verbesselt, Belgium 176.Kolin
Kobayashi, Artist/ Videomaker/ Writer,
France 177.Kristen Ess, Writer and
Filmmaker 178.Kurt E. Heartsong, USA
179.Laura Marks, Writer, Canada
180.Leigh Brady, Ireland 181.Leonid
Alexeienko, Singer/ song writer, Ukraine
182.Liz Magnes, Independent musician
183.Lucia Sommer, Artist, USA 184.Luma
Abu Ayyash, USA 185.Maggie Foyer,
Dancer/ Writer, UK/ South Africa
186.Mahmoud A. El Lozy, Theatre Director,
Egypt 187.Mahmoud Hojeij, Filmmaker,
Lebanon 188.Mahnoor Yar Khan, Drama
Therapist, India 189.Mais Darwazah,
Graphic Designer/Filmmaker, Jordan
190.Manish Jain, filmmaker, India
191.Marco Paulo Rolla, Artist, Brasil
192.Marcos Hill, Art historian, Brasil
193.Marieke Bosman, UK 194.Marina
Crespin, Filmmaker,Turkey 195.Mary Ellen
Davis, Filmmaker, Canada 196.Mary Tuma,
Artist, USA 197.Mat Callahan, Musician/
Author, USA/ Switzerland 198.May Odeh,
Palestine 199.Maymanah Farhat, Art
 10
historian, Lebanon/USA 200.Maysoon
Pachachi, Filmmaker, UK 201.Mayss Al
Zou'bi. 202.Me Young, Filmmaker, South
Korea 203.Mehmet S nmez, Turkey
204.Melek Ozman, Filmmaker, Turkey
205.Melissa Herman, Filmmaker, UK
206.Merdad Antoine Hage. Filmmaker,
Canada. 207.Merdad Hage, Filmmaker,
Canada 208.Miacarla Stevens, South Africa
209.Michel Euvrard, Film critic, France)
210.Michel Moushabeck, Editor, Musician,
USA 211.Mike Johnson,
Musician/songwriter, USA 212.Milli
Martinelli, Italy 213.Mira Hashem,
Palestine 214.Mizuko Yakuwa, Artist, Japan
215.Mo'tasem Raiq Zayed, Palestine
216.Moataz Dajani, Artist, Palestine
217.Moe Seager, Writer, France/ USA
218.Mohamad Hashem, Beirut International
Film Festival, Lebanon 219.Mohamed Al-
Daradji, Director/Producer, Iraq/UK
220.Mona Abaza, Egypt 221.Mona Baker,
UK 222.Mona El-Bayoumi, Artist,
Egypt/USA 223.Mona Hallak, Lebanon
224.Muhammad-Khalil ibn Abdullah "K.
Real", Rapper/Actor, USA 225.Murat
Demirtas, Sculpture, Turkey 226.Mustafa
Aykara, Turkey 227.Mustafa Emin
Buyukcoskun, Filmmaker, Turkey
228.Mustafa Temiztas, Filmmaker, Turkey
229.Mustafa Yıldırım, Artist, Turkey
230.N.D.Jayaprakash, India. 231.Nabil
Shaban, Filmaker/ Actor/ Writer, United
Kingdom 232.Nada Shabout, Art historian,
USA 233.Nadia El Fani, Filmmaker,
Tunisia 234.Nadine Kanso-designer
235.Nadra Zarifeh, Date Palm Film
Festival, New Zealand 236.Naeem
Mohaiemen, Filmmaker/Artist,
Bangladesh/US 237.Nalan Sakizli,
Producer, Turkey 238.Nancy Evans,
Musician, UK 239.Natalie Jarudi, Lebanon
240.Nathan Austin, USA 241.Nawel
Skandrani, Choreographer, Tunisia
242.Nazly Dangor, South Africa 243.Neery
Melkonian, Critic/ Curator, USA 244.Nessa
Arif, Indonesia 245.Nial O' Sullivan,
Filmmaker, Ireland. 246.Niam Itani,
Screenwriter/ Filmmaker, Lebanon
247.Nicholas Rowe, Writer/ Choreographer,
Australia 248.Nicole Aragi, USA
249.Nihad Kresevljakovic,
Filmmaker/Writer, Bosnia 250.Nilgün
Yurdalan, Turkey 251.Nina Wester,
Director/Theatre writer, Norway/Sweden
252.Nitin Paranjape, filmmaker, India
253.Nu'man El-Bakri, United Kingdom
254.Nurdan Arca, Filmmaker, Turkey
255.Nurit Peled-Elhanan, Israel 256.Omer
Tuncer, Documentary Director-Producer,
Turkey 257.Oraib Toukan, Artist 258.Orwa
Hallak, Producer/ Director, UAE 259.Orwa
Nyrabia, Proaction Film, Syria 260.Oz
Shelach, Writer 261.Ozcan Yurdalan,
Turkey 262.‫ض‬zhan ‫ض‬nder, Filmmaker,
Turkey 263.P. J. Laska, Poet, USA
264.Pankaj Butalia, Filmmaker, India
265.Partho Sen-Gupta, Filmmaker,
France/India 266.Pat Philips, Concert
Producer, USA 267.Patricia Alessandrini,
Composer, France 268.Patricia Barry, USA
269.Paul Manning, Canada 270.Peter
Belmont, USA 271.Pierre Abi Saab,
Lebanon 272.Pierre Toupart, Artist,
Mauritania 273.Pieter Van Bogaert, Critic/
Curator, Belgium 274.Pilar Salamanca,
Writer, Spain 275.Prof. Bertell Ollman,
USA 276.Prof. Dr. Nasr Abu Zayd, The
Netherlands 277.Prof. Haim Bresheeth, UK
278.Prof. Said Abdelwahed, Palestine
279.Prof. Steve Kurtz, USA 280.R. Worrell,
Artist, USA 281.Rachella Mizrachi, Israel
282.Racia Adar, Assistant Director,Turkey
283.Raed Asfour, AlBalad Theater, Jordan
284.Rahul Varma, Playwright, Canada
285.Rajdeep Singh Gill, Curator/ Cultural
Theorist, Canada 286.Rajie Cook, Artist,
USA 287.Ralph D. Miller, Canada
288.Rami Mufti. 289.Rania Mattini
290.Raphaëlle Vierling, Artist, France
291.Rasha Salti, Curator/ Writer,
Palestine/Lebanon 292.Raymond Williams,
UK 293.Recep Yeter, Photographer, Turkey
294.Reem Saleh, Lebanon/ Qatar 295.Reena
Katz, Artisit, Canada 296.Renee Tajima-
Pe a, Filmmaker, USA 297.Ricardo Lopez,
 11
Actor, USA 298.Richard Fung, Video artist/
Academic, Canada 299.Richard Schaaf,
Writer/Publisher, USA 300.Roman Vater,
Translator, Israel 301.Ronan O'
Suilleabhain, Filmmaker, Ireland 302.Rose
Issa, Curator, UK 303.Rowland Selame,
Psychologist/ Filmmaker, USA 304.Roza El-
Hassan, Artist, Hungary 305.Rush Rehm,
actor/director, USA 306.Sahar Nasser,
Freelance Producer, Egypt 307.Sally Hibbin,
Producer, UK 308.Sama Abu Ayyash,
Annual Giving (Museums), USA
309.Samirah Alkassim, Filmmaker,
Egypt/Jordan 310.Seda Gürel, Assistant
Director,Turkey 311.Sehbal Senyurt,
Filmmaker, Turkey 312.Selda Bausta,
Turkey 313.Selda Salman, Executive
producer, Turkey 314.Selda Tuncer, Turkey
315.Selva Tachdjian, Artist, France,
316.Semra Sander, Producer, Turkey
317.Şenol Eskin, Turkey 318.Serene
Haddad, Photographer, UK 319.Serpil
Oztas, Turkey 320.Sevgi ‫ض‬zdemiroğlu,
Turkey 321.Sevil Serbes, Poet, Turkey/UK
322.Shammi Nanda, filmmaker, India
323.Sherene Seikaly, USA 324.Sherif El-
Azma, Filmmaker/ Video artist, Egypt
325.Sherine Salama,Filmmaker,
Palestine/Australia/ Egypt 326.Shilpa Jain,
filmmaker, India 327.Shirabe Yamada,
Palestine/Japan 328.Shmuel Yerushalmi,
Poet, Israel 329.Shuruq As'ad, Palestine
330.Sibel Ercan, Turkey 331.Sibylle
Mansour, Filmmaker, Germany 332.Simon
Coveaney, Filmmaker, Ireland 333.Sinan
Sakizli, Composer, Turkey 334.Sonja Krohn.
Artist, Norway 335.Sophie Fiennes,
Filmmaker, UK 336.Souhad Rafey, Curator,
USA 337.Soydan Kenes, Filmmaker, Nazim
Hikmet Cultural House, Turkey 338.Steff
Bossert, Director of Photography,
Switzerland 339.Stephan Milich, Germany
340.Sulaf Elsalfiti, Canada 341.Sumitra
Rajkumar, Filmmaker, India/ USA 342.Sura
Faraj, Publisher/Editor, USA 343.Susan
Abulhawa, Writer, USA 344.Susan Benn,
Performing Arts Labs Ltd, UK 345.Susan
Falls, USA 346.Susan Nathan, Author
347.Suzanne Klotz, Artist, US 348.Sylvat
Aziz, Canada 349.Tahsin ‫ف‬bilen, Director,
Turkey 350.Tami Gold, Filmmaker/ Artist,
USA 351.Tarcin Celebi, Turkey 352.Tariq
Dajani, Photographer, UK/Sweden
353.Terri Ginsberg, USA 354.Tex
Kerschen, USA 355.Thabit Tambwe, Poet,
Uganda 356.Tiger TV Collective, USA
357.Tima Al-Jamil, Lebanon 358.Tina
Bastajian, Filmmaker, Netherlands 359.Tina
Fischer, Artist, Turkey 360.Tina Gharavi,
Filmmaker, UK 361.Tülin Erarslan,
Filmmaker, Turkey 362.Tuncay Ylmaz,
Turkey 363.Uğur Karak cek, Turkey
364.Ulku Guney, Turkey 365.Umit Boran,
Filmmaker, Turkey 366.Umit Gulsen,
Turkey 367.Uri Even-Chen, Israel.
368.‫ ـ‬stün Bilgen Reinart, Turkey
369.Vandecan Myriam, Belgium
370.Varteni Mosditchian, Artist/Painter
371.Vasif Kortun, Curator, Turkey
372.Virginia Williams, Executive Producer,
USA 373.Volkan Kavas, Filmmaker, Turkey
374.Walter Bernstein, Writer/Director,
USA 375.Wayne Anthony, Filmmaker,
Ireland 376.Wayne Cyr, USA 377.William
Wells, Townhouse Gallery, Egypt 378.Yasin
Ali Türkeri, Filmmaker, Turkey 379.Yigit
Dogan, Turkey 380.Yücel ‫ ـ‬nlü, Filmmaker,
Turkey 381.Zaher El-Bizri,
Painter/Designer, Lebanon 382.Zehra
Güleray, Screenwriter, Turkey 383.Ziad
Muna, Palestine 384.Zivia Desai Keiper,
Uhuru Productions / Tri Continental Film
Festival, South Africa
Posted on 04-08-2006 at:
http://www.pacbi.org/etemplate.php?i
d=315
 12
A Call from Palestine:
Palestinian Students’
Campaign for the
Academic Boycott of
Israel (PSCABI)
"Gaza today has become the test of our
indispensable morality and common humanity"
Boycott Divestment and Sanctions (BDS)
National Committee
The Palestinian Students’ Campaign for
the Academic Boycott of Israel (PSCABI)
calls upon freedom-loving students all
over the world to stand in solidarity
with us by boycotting Israeli academic
institutions for their complicity in
perpetuating Israel‘s illegal military
occupation and apartheid system. We
note the historic action taken by
thousands of courageous students of
British and American universities in
occupying their campuses in a show of
solidarity with the brutally oppressed
Palestinian people in Gaza. We also
deeply appreciate the decision by
Hampshire College to divest from
companies profiting from the Israeli
occupation. Such pressure on Israel is
the most likely to contribute to ending
its denial of our rights, including the
right to education.
In this regard, we fully endorse the call
for boycott issued by the Palestinian
Campaign for the Academic and
Cultural Boycott of Israel, PACBI, in
2004 [1].
We emphasize our endorsement of the
BDS call issued by more than 170
Palestinian civil society organizations in
July 2005 [2].
We also support the Call from Gaza
issued by a group of civil society
organizations in the second week of the
Gaza Massacre (Gaza 2009) [3].
Our goal, as students, is to play a role in
promoting the global BDS movement
which has gained an unprecedented
momentum as a result of the latest
genocidal war launched by Israel
against the occupied and besieged Gaza
Strip. We address our fellow students to
take whatever step possible, however
small, to stand up for justice,
international law and the inalienable
rights of the indigenous people of
Palestine by applying effective and
sustainable pressure on Israel,
particularly in the form of BDS, to help
put an end to its colonial and racist
regime over the Palestinians.
We strongly urge our fellow university
students all over the world to:
(1) Support all the efforts aimed at
boycotting Israeli academic institutions;
(2) Pressure university administrations
to divest from Israel and from
companies directly or indirectly
supporting the Israeli occupation and
apartheid policies;
(3) Promote student union resolutions
condemning Israeli violations of
international law and human rights and
endorsing BDS in any form;
 13
(4) Support the Palestinian student
movement directly.
To break the medieval and barbaric
Israeli siege of Gaza, people of
conscience need to move with a sense of
urgency and purpose. Israel must be
compelled to pay a heavy price for its
war crimes and crimes against humanity
through the intensification of the
boycott against it and against
institutions and corporations complicit
in its crimes. As in the anti-apartheid
struggle in solidarity with the black
majority in South Africa, students
concerned about justice and sustainable
peace have a moral duty to support our
boycott efforts.
The Palestinian Students’ Campaign for
the Academic Boycott of Israel (PSCABI)
Endorsed by:
Progressive Student Union Bloc; Fateh
Youth Organization; the Progressive
Student Labor Front; Islamic Bloc;
Islamic League of Palestinian Students;
Student Unity Bloc; Students Affairs
(University of Palestine).
[1]
http://www.pacbi.org/etemplate.php?id=869
[2]
52/node=q?/net.bdsmovement.www//:httphttp://
www.bdsmovement.net/?q=node/52
[3]
http://www.odsg.org/co/index.php/compone
nt/content/article/1100-a-call-from-gaza.html
Posted on 29-05-2009 at:
http://www.pacbi.org/etemplate.php?i
d=1021
John Berger and 93
other authors, film-
makers, musicians and
performers call for a
cultural boycott of
Israel
PACBI is pleased to announce that in a
letter that appears in today’s Guardian,
the 94, including the renowned author
John Berger; UK musicians and song-
writers Brian Eno and Leon Rosselson;
filmmakers Sophie Fiennes, Elia
Suleiman and Haim Bresheeth;
documentary maker Jenny Morgan;
singer Reem Kelani; writers Arundhati
Roy, Ahdaf Soueif, and Eduardo
Galeano, call on their colleagues not to
visit, exhibit or perform in Israel.
The letter comes after the August 2006
statement issued by Palestinian
filmmakers, artists, writers, and other
cultural workers calling for a cultural
boycott of Israel. The statement can be
viewed at:
http://www.pacbi.org/boycott_news_
more.php?id=315_0_1_0_C
The Berger letter, signed by artists from
across Europe, North and South
America, as well as Palestinians and
Israelis, reads:
“There is a fragile ceasefire in Lebanon,
albeit daily violated by Israeli
overflights. Meanwhile the day to day
brutality of the Israeli army in Gaza and
the West Bank continues. Ten
Palestinians are killed for every Israeli
death; more than 200, many of them
children, have been killed since the
 14
summer. UN resolutions are flouted,
human rights violated as Palestinian
land is stolen, houses demolished and
crops destroyed. For archbishop
Desmond Tutu, as for the Jewish
(former ANC military commander
presently South African minister of
security), Ronnie Kasrils, the situation of
the Palestinians is worse than that of
black South Africans under apartheid.
Meantime Western governments refer to
Israel’s ‘legitimate right’ of self-defence,
and continue to supply weaponry.
The challenge of apartheid was fought
better. The non-violent international
response to apartheid was a campaign
of boycott, divestment, and, finally UN
imposed sanctions which enabled the
regime to change without terrible
bloodshed. Today Palestinians teachers,
writers, film-makers and non-
governmental organisations have called
for a comparable academic and cultural
boycott of Israel as offering another path
to a just peace. This call has been
endorsed internationally by university
teachers in many European countries, by
film-makers and architects, and by some
brave Israeli dissidents. It is now time
for others to join the campaign – as
Primo Levi asked: If not now, when?
We call on creative writers and artists to
support our Palestinian and Israeli
colleagues by endorsing the boycott call.
Read the Palestinian call
(www.pacbi.org).
Don’t visit, exhibit or perform in Israel!”
To endorse the letter and add your
name, contact
[email]info@bricup.org.uk[/email]
An introductory letter from John Berger
follows the list of signatories below.
Updated list of signatures as of 28
January 2007:
Aguirre, Carmen, (dramatist)
Ajalon, Jamika (artist)
Al Bayati, Hana (film-maker)
Alam, Shahid (essayist)
Alcalay, Ammiel, (poet)
Alkadhi, Rheim (artist)
Al-Qattan, Omar (film-maker)
Amiry, Suad (architect)
Appignanesi, Richard (writer and editor)
Aziz, Sylvat (artist)
Bednarski, Cezary (architect)
Beguinstain, Teresa (aesthetics)
Benner, Ron (artist)
Berger, John (writer and artist)
Beveridge, Karl (photographer)
Beverley, John (writer)
Biggs, Simon (artist)
Bini, Oscar Abudara (filmmaker)
Bove, Paul (editor and writer)
Brandt, Chris Hirschman (writer)
Bresheeth, Haim (film-maker)
Brittain, Victoria (writer)
Brown, Mark (theatre critic)
Budney, Jen (curator)
Cameron, Lindsley (author)
Carew, Keggie (artist)
Casana, Manuel Molins (dramatist)
Chanan, Michael (writer and film-maker)
Chirot, David-Baptiste (artist/writer)
Chrysakis,. Thanos (composer)
Cohen, Mitchel (poet and editor)
Collen, Lindsey (novelist)
Conde, Carole (photographer)
Cooper, Peter (theatre director, actor)
Courtney, Andrew (artist)
Cox, Molly Hankwitz (artist and writer)
Creativity commons collective
Crowthers, Malcolm (photographer)
Curthoys, Ned (writer)
D’Agostino, Ornella (choreographer)
Davis, Mary Ellen (film-maker)
Davis, Matt (musician)
 15
Davis, R.G. (theatre director)
Deane, Raymond (composer)
Deutsch, Stephen (composer)
Diaz Munoz, Roberto (writer)
Dibb, Mike (film maker)
Dickler, Howard (writer)
Di Prima, Diane (poet)
Diski, Jenny (novelist)
Donoghue, Ben (film maker)
Dutschke, Gretchen (author)
Engel, Kathy (poet)
Eno, Brian (musician)
Erfanian, Eshrat (artist)
Euvrard, Michel (film critic)
Felshin Nina (curator)
Fiennes, Sophie (film-maker)
Fisher, Jean (writer)
Fox, Steve (architect)
Frere, Jane (video artist)
Fried, Klaus (film maker)
Galeano, Eduardo (writer)
Galvin, Dallas (editor and writer)
Garcia, Adela (poet)
Ghaibah, Anas (TV director)
Ghazaleh, Raeda (theatre director)
Ghazoul, Ferial (writer)
Ghossein, Mirene (writer and editor)
Gill, Rajdeep Singh (curator)
Ginsberg, Terri (film theorist)
Gordon, Avery (writer)
Gover, Yerach (writer)
Graf, Michael (visual artist)
Greene, Susan (muralist)
Greyson, John (film-maker)
Guillen, Maria Munoz (dancer)
Halaby, Samia (artist)
Halama, Henry (artist)
Halbreich, Harry (musicologist)
Halbreich-Euvrard, Janine (author and film
critic)
Hamka, Nada (artist)
Hanley, Cliff (artist)
Hashemi, Gita (artist)
Hassan, Jamelie (artist)
Hencke, Elaine (fabric artist)
Heredia, Shai (curator)
Huleileh, Serene (dancer/choreographer)
Humm, Maggie (writer)
Hussien, Reham (translator)
Jacir, Annemarie (filmmaker and poet)
James, Rob (writer)
Jencks, Charles (architect and author)
Jenik, Adriene (media artist)
Jimeno, Dolores (writer)
Joly, Magdalene (dancer and musician)
Karabelia, Vassia (art historian)
Kauff, Tarak (writer)
Kaya, Mircan (musician)
Kelani, Reem (singer)
King, Nick (writer)
Knupp, Rainer (movement artist)
Kukovec, Dunja (art historian)
Kumar, Vinod (writer)
Laitinen, Matti (writer)
Lane, Joel (poet)
Lederhandler, Lazer (translator)
Levidow, Les (writer and musician)
Lipman, Beate (film maker)
Loshitzky, Yosefa (writer)
Lozano, Rian (curator)
Macrae, Mike (architect)
Makhoul, Sana (art historian)
Malinowitz, Harriet (writer)
Manrique Cantos, Maria (painter)
Marlat, Daphne (writer)
Marqusee, Mike (author)
Masri, Hala (theatre coordinator)
Massarat, Mariam (translator)
Matelli, Federica (curator)
Mayers, Natasha (visual artist)
McCaughey, Peter (artist)
Metcalfe, Rohelia Hamilton (Film-maker)
Mezzano. Luis (architect)
Mieville, China (author)
Miyoshi, Masao (writer)
Montagnino, Carlo (artist)
Montoya, Roberto (writer)
Morgan, Jenny (film-maker)
Muldoon, Claire (actor and writer)
Muldoon, Roland (actor and writer)
Muller, Nat (curator)
Munnigh, Fidel (writer and translator)
Muntadas, Antoni (artist)
Naguib, Fabiola Nabil (artist and writer)
Neufeldt, Brigitte (artist)
Noonan, Maire (artist)
 16
Nunez, Alejandra Perez (sound artist)
Ostrow, Saul (critic/curator)
Pace, Ian (pianist)
Pangbourne, Annabelle (composer)
Parker, Cornelia (artist)
Patterson, Ian (poet)
Payes, Adolfo (painter and sculptor)
Pennell, Miranda (film-maker)
Pietaro, John (musician)
Pratt, Minnie (poet)
Prince, Renate (architect)
Radhakrishnan, R (writer)
Reinart, Ustun (writer)
Rifkin, Adrian (writer)
Rodenbeck. Judith (writer)
Rosselson, Leon (song writer and author)
Roy, Arundhati (novelist)
Rozas, Ixiar (writer)
Rubin, Andrew (writer)
Sacks, Jeff (translator)
Salloum, Jayce (artist)
Salti, Rasha (writer)
Sampaio, Miriam (artist)
Samuel, Julian (novelist)
Sances, Jos (artist)
Saraste, Leena (photographer)
Sarlin, Paige (film-maker)
Schlesinger, Lisa (writer and dramatist)
Scord‫ ى‬a, Cinzia (performer0
Serra, Toni /Abu Ali (videomaker)
Shammas, Anton (novelist and film-maker)
Shibli, Ahlam (artist)
Shiri, Keith (curator)
Shyman, Carol (translator and film-maker)
Simons, Patrick (composer)
Skeates, Les (poet and essayist)
Smith, John (artist-film-maker)
Solt, John (poet)
Somes-Charlton, Chris (director)
Soueif, Ahdaf (novelist)
Staikou, Evi (artist)
Streamas, John (writer)
Suleiman, Elia (film maker)
Sureda, Joseph Ramis (dancer)
Szpakowski, Michael (composer)
Tachdjian, Selva (artist)
Tanbay, Zeynap) (dancer and
choreographer)
Tres (artist)
Tudela, Ana Navarrete (artist)
Twair, Pat (journalist)
Valldosera, Eulalia (artist)
Van Zwanenberg, Roger (publisher)
Varma, Rahul (playwrite)
Wadimoff, Nicolas (filmmaker)
Walkley, Ron (architect)
Waller, John (architect)
Walsh, Shannon (film-maker)
Ward, David (composer)
Wellman, David (writer)
Westenra, Charlie (theatre director)
Wiles, Rich (photographic artist)
Williams, Patrick (writer)
Younghusband, Gene (media theorist)
Youssef, Marcus (playwrite)
Yurur, Ahmet (composer)
Yurur, Carol Stevens (writer)
Zangana, Haifa (novelist)
From John Berger:
I would like to make a few personal
remarks about this world-wide appeal
to teachers, intellectuals and artists to
join the cultural boycott of the state of
Israel, as called for by over a hundred
Palestinian academics and artists, and -
very importantly - also by a number of
Israeli public figures, who outspokenly
oppose their country’s illegal
occupation of the Palestine territories of
the West Bank and Gaza. Their call is
attached, together with my After
Guernica drawing. I hope you will feel
able to add your signature, to the
attached letter, which we intend to
publish in national newspapers.
The boycott is an active protest against
two forms of exclusion which have
persisted, despite many other forms of
protestations, for over sixty years - for
almost three generations.
During this period the state of Israel has
 17
consistently excluded itself from any
international obligation to heed UN
resolutions or the judgement of any
international court. To date, it has defied
246 Security Council Resolutions!
As a direct consequence seven million
Palestinians have been excluded from
the right to live as they wish on land
internationally acknowledged to be
theirs; and now increasingly, with every
week that passes, they are being
excluded from their right to any future
at all as a nation.
As Nelson Mandela has pointed out,
boycott is not a principle, it is a tactic
depending upon circumstances. A tactic
which allows people, as distinct from their
elected but often craven governments, to
apply a certain pressure on those wielding
power in what they, the boycotters,
consider to be an unjust or immoral way.
(In white South Africa yesterday and in
Israel today, the immorality was, or is
being, coded into a form of racist
apartheid).
Boycott is not a principle. When it
becomes one, it itself risks to become
exclusive and racist. No boycott, in our
sense of the term, should be directed
against an individual, a people, or a
nation as such. A boycott is directed
against a policy and the institutions
which support that policy either actively
or tacitly. Its aim is not to reject, but to
bring about change.
How to apply a cultural boycott? A
boycott of goods is a simpler
proposition, but in this case it would
probably be less effective, and speed is
of the essence, because the situation is
deteriorating every month (which is
precisely why some of the most
powerful world political leaders, hoping
for the worst, keep silent.).
How to apply a boycott? For academics
it’s perhaps a little clearer - a question of
declining invitations from state
institutions and explaining why. For
invited actors, musicians, jugglers or
poets it can be more complicated. I’m
convinced, in any case, that its
application should not be systematised;
it has to come from a personal choice
based on a personal assessment.
For instance. An important mainstream
Israeli publisher today is asking to
publish three of my books. I intend to
apply the boycott with an explanation.
There exist, however, a few small,
marginal Israeli publishers who
expressly work to encourage exchanges
and bridges between Arabs and Israelis,
and if one of them should ask to publish
something of mine, I would
unhesitatingly agree and furthermore
waive aside any question of author’s
royalties. I don’t ask other writers
supporting the boycott to come
necessarily to exactly the same
conclusion. I simply offer an example.
What is important is that we make our
chosen protests together, and that we
speak out, thus breaking the silence of
connivance maintained by those who
claim to represent us, and thus
ourselves representing, briefly by our
common action, the incalculable
number of people who have been
appalled by recent events but lack the
opportunity of making their sense of
outrage effective.
John Berger
Posted on 15-12-2006 at:
http://www.pacbi.org/etemplate.php?i
d=415
 18
PACBI Guidelines for
the International
Academic Boycott of
Israel
Since its founding in 2004, PACBI has
advocated a boycott of Israeli academic
and cultural institutions, based on the
premise that these institutions are
complicit in the system of oppression
that has denied Palestinians their basic
rights guaranteed by international
law. This position is in line with the
authoritative call by the Palestinian
Council for Higher Education for "non-
cooperation in the scientific and
technical fields between Palestinian and
Israeli universities"[1]. Academic
institutions in particular are part of the
ideological and institutional scaffolding
of the Zionist colonial project in
Palestine, and as such are deeply
implicated in maintaining the structures
of domination over the Palestinian
people. Since its founding, the Israeli
academy has cast its lot with the
hegemonic political-military
establishment in Israel, and
notwithstanding the efforts of a handful
of principled academics, carries on
business-as-usual in support of the
status quo.
The beginnings of the academic boycott
of Israel can be traced to 2002, the year
in which Israel launched its destructive
assault upon Palestinian cities, towns,
refugee camps and villages, targeting
the institutions of Palestinian society
and wreaking havoc on communities,
residential neighborhoods, and urban
infrastructure. The April 2002 statement
by 120 European academics and
researchers urging the adoption of a
moratorium on EU and European
Science Foundation support for Israel
was followed by a number of pro-
boycott initiatives in the same year by
academics in the USA, France, Norway,
and Australia. Particularly noteworthy
have been the annual congresses of UK
academics’ unions, where boycott-
related resolutions have been debated
and passed since 2002. PACBI’s key
partner in the UK, BRICUP [2] has been
instrumental in the ongoing struggle to
popularize the academic boycott in the
union movement in the UK and beyond.
In October 2003, the first Palestinian
Call for Boycott was issued by a group
of Palestinian academics and
intellectuals in the diaspora and the
occupied Palestinian Territory.
Building on all previous boycott
initiatives, PACBI issued its Call for an
Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel
in Ramallah in 2004, providing the
Palestinian reference for a steadily
growing and sustainable institutional
academic boycott effort throughout the
world. The lethal Israeli assault on the
Gaza Strip in December 2008-January
2009 served as a catalyst for further
activism, and the period since then has
witnessed a tremendous growth of
initiatives in the spirit of BDS and
targeting Israeli academic
institutions. Such efforts have come
from Australia, Canada, Norway,
Sweden, Scotland, Lebanon, Spain and
the United States. Particularly
encouraging has been the founding of
the US Campaign for the Academic and
Cultural boycott of Israel (USACBI),
inspired by PACBI and basing itself
 19
upon the PACBI Call.
During five years of intensive work with
partners in several countries to promote
the academic boycott against Israel,
PACBI has examined many academic
projects and events, assessing the
applicability of the boycott criteria to
them and, accordingly, has issued open
letters, statements or advisory opinions
on them. Based on this experience and
in response to the burgeoning demand
for PACBI’s specific guidelines on
applying the academic boycott to
diverse projects, from conferences to
exchange programs and research efforts,
the Campaign lays out below
unambiguous, consistent and coherent
criteria and guidelines that specifically
address the nuances and particularities
of the academy.
These guidelines are mainly intended to
assist academics around the world in
adhering to the Palestinian call for
boycott, as a contribution towards
establishing a just peace in our
region. Similar guidelines for the
cultural boycott have been issued by
PACBI [3].
Academic Boycott Guidelines
Inspired by the anti-apartheid struggle
in South Africa as well as the long
tradition of civil resistance against
settler-colonialism in Palestine, the
PACBI Call [4] urges academics and
cultural workers “to comprehensively
and consistently boycott all Israeli
academic and cultural institutions as a
contribution to the struggle to end
Israel‘s occupation, colonization and
system of apartheid, by applying the
following:
1. Refrain from participation in any
form of academic and cultural
cooperation, collaboration or joint
projects with Israeli institutions;
2. Advocate a comprehensive boycott of
Israeli institutions at the national and
international levels, including
suspension of all forms of funding and
subsidies to these institutions;
3. Promote divestment and
disinvestment from Israel by
international academic institutions;
4. Work toward the condemnation of
Israeli policies by pressing for
resolutions to be adopted by academic,
professional and cultural associations
and organizations;
5. Support Palestinian academic and
cultural institutions directly without
requiring them to partner with Israeli
counterparts as an explicit or implicit
condition for such support.”
Before discussing the various categories
of academic activities that fall under the
boycott call, and as a general overriding
rule, it is important to stress that
virtually all Israeli academic
institutions, unless proven otherwise,
are complicit in maintaining the Israeli
occupation and denial of basic
Palestinian rights, whether through
their silence, actual involvement in
justifying, whitewashing or otherwise
deliberately diverting attention from
Israel’s violations of international law
and human rights, or indeed through
their direct collaboration with state
agencies in the design and commission
of these violations. Accordingly, these
institutions, all their activities, and all
the events they sponsor or support must
 20

be boycotted. Events and projects academics, academics’

involving individuals explicitly associations/unions and academic
representing these complicit institutions institutions around the world, where
should be boycotted, by the same possible and as relevant, to boycott
token. Mere institutional affiliation to and/or work towards the cancellation
the Israeli academy is therefore not a or annulment of events, activities,
sufficient condition for applying the agreements, or projects that promote
boycott. the normalization of Israel in the
global academy, whitewash Israel’s
While an individual’s academic freedom violations of international law and
should be fully and consistently Palestinians rights, or violate the
respected in this context, an individual boycott. Specifically, the Palestinian
academic boycott against Israel applies
academic, Israeli or not, cannot be
to the following events, activities, or
exempt from being subject to boycotts
situations:
that conscientious citizens around the
world (beyond the scope of the PACBI
1. Academic events (such as
boycott criteria) may call for in response
conferences, symposia, workshops,
to what is widely perceived as a
book and museum exhibits) convened
particularly offensive act or statement
or co-sponsored by Israeli
by the academic in question (such as
institutions. All academic events,
direct or indirect incitement to violence;
whether held in Israel or abroad, and
justification -- an indirect form of
convened or co-sponsored by Israeli
advocacy -- of war crimes and other
academic institutions or their
grave violations of international law;
departments and institutes, deserve to
racial slurs; actual participation in
be boycotted on institutional
human rights violations; etc.). At this
grounds. These boycottable activities
level, Israeli academics should not be
include panels and other activities
automatically exempted from due
sponsored or organized by Israeli
criticism or any lawful form of protest,
academic bodies or associations at
including boycott; they should be
international conferences outside
treated like all other offenders in the
Israel. Importantly, they also include
same category, not better or worse.
the convening in Israel of meetings of
international bodies and associations.
The following guidelines may not be
completely exhaustive and certainly do
2. Institutional cooperation agreements
not preempt, replace or void other,
with Israeli universities or research
common-sense rationales for boycott,
institutes. These agreements, concluded
particularly when a researcher, speaker,
between international and Israeli
or event is shown to be explicitly
universities, typically involve the
justifying, advocating or promoting war
exchange of faculty and students and,
crimes, racial discrimination, apartheid,
more importantly, the conduct of joint
suppression of fundamental human
research. Many of these schemes are
rights and serious violations of
sponsored and funded by the European
international law.
Union (in the case of Europe), and
independent and government
Based on the above, PACBI urges
foundations elsewhere. For example,
 21
the five-year EU Framework programs,
in which Israel has been the only non-
European participant, have been crucial
to the development of research at Israeli
universities. European academic
activists have been campaigning for the
suspension of the EU-Israel Association
Agreement since 2002; under this
Agreement, Israeli and European
universities exchange academic staff and
students and engage in other activities,
mainly through the Erasmus Mundus
and Tempus schemes [5]. It should be
noted that Israel is in violation of the
terms of this Agreement, particularly of
the second article [6].
3. Study abroad schemes in Israel for
international students. These programs
are usually housed at Israeli universities
and are part of the Israeli propaganda
effort, designed to give international
students a “positive experience” of
Israel. Publicity and recruitment for
these schemes are organized through
students’ affairs offices or academic
departments (such as Middle East and
international studies centers) at
universities abroad.
4. Addresses and talks at international
venues by official representatives of
Israeli academic institutions such as
presidents and rectors.
5. Special honors or recognition granted
to official representatives of Israeli
academic institutions (such as the
bestowal of honorary degrees and other
awards) or to Israeli academic or
research institutions. Such institutions
and their official representatives are
complicit and as such should be denied
this recognition.
6. Palestinian/Arab-Israeli collaborative
research projects or events, especially
those funded by the various EU and
international grant-giving bodies. It is
widely known that the easiest route to
securing a research grant for a
Palestinian academic is to apply with an
Israeli partner. This is a case of
politically motivated research par
excellence, and contributes to enhancing
the legitimacy of Israeli institutions as
centers of excellence instead of directly
and independently strengthening the
research capacity of Palestinian
institutions. The argument that “science
is above politics” is often used to justify
such collaborations. In PACBI’s view,
no normal collaboration between the
institutions of the oppressor and the
oppressed, or indeed between the
academics of the oppressor and
oppressed can be possible while the
structures of domination remain in
place. In fact, such projects do nothing
to challenge the status quo and
contribute to its endurance. As an
example, Palestinian/Arab-Israeli
research efforts in the field of water and
environment take as given the apartheid
reality; tackling Palestinian/Arab and
Israeli water and environmental
“problems” as commensurate, without
recognizing the apartheid reality, only
contributes to the continuation of that
reality.
As in the cultural field, events and
projects (such as those involving
educators, psychologists, or historians)
involving Palestinians and/or Arabs
and Israelis that promote “balance”
between the “two sides” in presenting
their respective narratives or “traumas,”
as if on par, or are otherwise based on
the false premise that the colonizers and
the colonized, the oppressors and the
oppressed, are equally responsible for
 22
the “conflict,” are intentionally
deceptive, intellectually dishonest and
morally reprehensible. Such events and
projects, often seeking to encourage
dialogue or “reconciliation between the
two sides” without addressing the
requirements of justice, promote the
normalization and perpetuation of
oppression and injustice. All such
events and projects that bring
Palestinians and/or Arabs and Israelis
together, unless based on unambiguous
recognition of Palestinian rights and
framed within the explicit context of
opposition to occupation and other
forms of Israeli oppression of the
Palestinians, are strong candidates for
boycott. Other factors that PACBI takes
into consideration in evaluating such
events and projects are the sources of
funding, the design of the project or
event, the objectives of the sponsoring
organization(s), the participants, and
similar relevant factors.
7. Research and development activities
in the framework of agreements or
contracts between the Israeli
government and other governments or
institutions. Researchers in such
projects are based at American,
European or other
universities. Examples include the
United States-Israel Binational Science
Foundation (BSF), an institution
established by the US and Israeli
governments in 1972 to sponsor research
by Israelis and Americans, and the
“Eureka Initiative,” a European inter-
governmental initiative set up in 1985
that includes Israel as the only non-
European member.
8. Research and development activities
on behalf of international corporations
involving contracts or other institutional
agreements with departments or centers
at Israeli universities.
9. Institutional membership of Israeli
associations in world bodies. While
challenging such membership is not
easy, targeted and selective campaigns
demanding the suspension of Israeli
membership in international forums
contribute towards pressuring the state
until it respects international law. Just
as South Africa’s membership was
suspended in world academic--among
other--bodies during apartheid, so must
Israel’s.
10. Publishing in or refereeing articles
for academic journals based at Israeli
universities. These journals include
those published by international
associations but housed at Israeli
universities. Efforts should be made to
re-locate the editorial offices of these
journals to universities outside Israel.
11. Advising on hiring or promotion
decisions at Israeli universities through
refereeing the work of candidates [7], or
refereeing research proposals for Israeli
funding institutions. Such services,
routinely provided by academics to
their profession, must be withheld from
complicit institutions.
PACBI
www.PACBI.org
PACBI@PACBI.org
Notes:
[1] The Palestinian Council for Higher
Education, composed of heads of
Palestinian universities and
representatives from the community,
has, since the 1990’s, adhered to its
 23
principled position of non-cooperation
with Israeli universities until Israel ends
its occupation; this position was
reiterated in a statement of thanks to the
UK academic union NATFHE in 2006:
http://www.mohe.gov.ps/ENG/news
/index.html#7
[2] www.BRICUP.org.uk
[3]
http://www.pacbi.org/etemplate.php?i
d=1045
[4]
http://www.pacbi.org/etemplate.php?i
d=869
[5] See
http://ec.europa.eu/education/externa
l-relation-programmes/doc70_en.htm
and
http://ec.europa.eu/education/externa
l-relation-programmes/doc72_en.htm
[6]
http://www.bdsmovement.net/?q=nod
e/179
[7] In 2002, more than 700 European
academics signed this declaration: "I
can no longer in good conscience
continue to cooperate with official
Israeli institutions, including
universities. I will attend no scientific
conferences in Israel, and I will not
participate as referee in hiring or
promotion decisions by Israeli
universities, or in the decisions of Israeli
funding agencies. I will continue to
collaborate with, and host, Israeli
scientific colleagues on an individual
basis." (http://www.guardian.co.uk/u
k/2002/jul/08/highereducation.israel )
Posted on 01-10-2009 at:
http://www.pacbi.org/etemplate.php?i
d=1108
PACBI Guidelines for
the International
Cultural Boycott of
Israel
Since April 2004, PACBI has called upon
intellectuals and academics worldwide
to “comprehensively and consistently
boycott all Israeli academic and cultural
institutions as a contribution to the
struggle to end Israel’s occupation,
colonization and system of apartheid.”
[1]
In 2006, a decisive majority of
Palestinian cultural workers, including
most filmmakers and artists, supported
by hundreds of international cultural
workers, appealed to all international
artists and filmmakers of good
conscience to join the institutional
cultural boycott against Israel. [2] In
response, the renowned British artist
and writer, John Berger, issued a
statement that was backed by dozens of
prominent international artists, writers
and filmmakers calling on their
colleagues everywhere to endorse the
Palestinian cultural boycott call. [3]
In the spirit of this cultural boycott and
consistent with its logic, on 8 May 2008,
in a half-page advertisement in the
International Herald Tribune under the
banner “No Reason to Celebrate,” tens
of leading international cultural figures
-- including Mahmoud Darwish,
Augusto Boal, Ken Loach, Andre Brink,
Ella Shohat, Judith Butler, Vincenzo
Consolo, Ilan Pappe, David Toscana and
 24
Aharon Shabtai -- signed a statement
responding to worldwide celebrations of
Israel’s “60th anniversary” saying [4]:
“There is no reason to celebrate! Israel
at 60 is a state that is still denying
Palestinian refugees their UN-
sanctioned rights, simply because they
are ‘non-Jews.’ It is still illegally
occupying Palestinian and other Arab
lands, in violation of numerous UN
resolutions. It is still persistently and
grossly breaching international law and
infringing fundamental human rights
with impunity afforded to it through
munificent US and European economic,
diplomatic and political support. It is
still treating its own Palestinian citizens
with institutionalized discrimination.”
The cultural boycott campaign against
apartheid South Africa has been a major
source of inspiration in formulating the
Palestinian boycott calls and their
criteria. In that context, the key
argument put forth by the South African
regime and its apologists around the
world against the anti-apartheid cultural
and sports boycott -- that boycotts
violate the freedom of expression and
cultural exchange -- was resolutely
refuted by the director of the United
Nations Centre Against Apartheid,
Enuga S. Reddy, who in 1984 wrote [5]:
“It is rather strange, to say the least, that
the South African regime which denies
all freedoms ... to the African majority ...
should become a defender of the
freedom of artists and sportsmen of the
world. We have a list of people who
have performed in South Africa because
of ignorance of the situation or the lure
of money or unconcern over
racism. They need to be persuaded to
stop entertaining apartheid, to stop
profiting from apartheid money and to
stop serving the propaganda purposes
of the apartheid regime.” Similarly, the
Palestinian boycott call targets cultural
institutions, projects and events that
continue to serve the purposes of the
Israeli colonial and apartheid regime.
During five years of intense work with
partners in several countries to promote
the cultural boycott against Israel,
PACBI has thoroughly scrutinized tens
of cultural projects and events, assessing
the applicability of the boycott criteria
to them and, accordingly, has issued
open letters, statements or advisory
opinions on them. The two most
important conclusions reached in this
respect were: (a) many of these events
and projects fall into an uncertain, grey
area that is challenging to appraise, and
(b) the boycott must target not only the
complicit institutions but also the
inherent and organic links between
them which reproduce the machinery of
colonial subjugation and
apartheid. Based on this experience and
in response to the burgeoning demand
for PACBI’s specific guidelines on
applying the cultural boycott to diverse
projects, from film festivals to art
exhibits to musical and dance
performances to conferences, the
Campaign lays out below
unambiguous, consistent and coherent
criteria and guidelines that specifically
address the nuances and particularities
of the field of culture.
These criteria are mainly intended to
help guide cultural workers and
organizers around the world in
adhering to the Palestinian call for
boycott, as a contribution towards
establishing a just peace in our region.
 25
Cultural Boycott Criteria
In all the following, “product” refers to
cultural products such as films and other art
forms; “event” refers to film festivals,
conferences, art exhibits, dance and musical
performances, tours by artists and writers,
among other activities.
Before discussing the various categories of
cultural products and events and as a general
overriding rule, virtually all Israeli cultural
institutions, unless proven otherwise, are
complicit in maintaining the Israeli
occupation and denial of basic Palestinian
rights, whether through their silence or
actual involvement in justifying,
whitewashing or otherwise deliberately
diverting attention from Israel’s violations of
international law and human
rights. Accordingly, these institutions, all
their products, and all the events they
sponsor or support must be boycotted.
Events and projects involving individuals
explicitly representing these complicit
institutions should be boycotted, by the same
token.
The following criteria may not be
completely exhaustive and certainly do not
preempt, replace or void other, common-
sense rationales for boycott, particularly
when a cultural product or event is shown to
be explicitly justifying, advocating or
promoting war crimes, racial discrimination,
apartheid, suppression of fundamental
human rights and serious violations of
international law.
Based on the above, the Palestinian
cultural boycott against Israel applies
in the following situations:
(1) Cultural product is commissioned
by an official Israeli body
All cultural products commissioned by an
official Israeli body (e.g., government
ministry, municipality, embassy, consulate,
state or other public film fund, etc.) deserve
to be boycotted on institutional grounds, as
they are commissioned and thus funded by
the Israeli state -- or any of its complicit
institutions -- specifically to help the state’s
propaganda or “rebranding” efforts aimed at
diluting, justifying, whitewashing or
otherwise diverting attention from the Israeli
occupation and other violations of
Palestinian rights and international
law. However, this level of explicit
complicity is difficult to ascertain quite
often, as information on such direct
commissioning may not be readily available
or may even be intentionally concealed.
(2) Product is funded by an official
Israeli body, but not commissioned (no
political strings)
The term “political strings” here specifically
refers to those conditions that obligate a
fund recipient to directly or indirectly serve
the Israeli government’s “rebranding” or
propaganda efforts. Products funded by
official Israeli bodies -- as defined in
category (1) above -- but not commissioned,
therefore not attached to any political
strings, are not per se subject to
boycott. Individual cultural products that
receive state funding as part of the
individual cultural worker’s entitlement as a
tax-paying citizen, without her/him being
bound to serve the state’s political and PR
interests, are not boycottable, according to
the PACBI criteria. Accepting such political
strings, on the other hand, would clearly
turn the cultural product or event into a form
of complicity, by contributing to Israel’s
efforts to whitewash or obscure its colonial
and apartheid reality, and would render it
boycottable, as a result.
While an individual’s freedom of
expression, particularly artistic expression,
should be fully and consistently respected in
this context, an individual artist, filmmaker,
writer, etc., Israeli or not, cannot be exempt
from being subject to boycotts that
conscientious citizens around the world
 26
(beyond the scope of the PACBI boycott
criteria) may call for in response to what is
widely perceived as a particularly offensive
act or statement by the cultural worker in
question (such as direct or indirect
incitement to violence; justification -- an
indirect form of advocacy -- of war crimes
and other grave violations of international
law; racial slurs; actual participation in
human rights violations; etc.). At this level,
Israeli cultural workers should not be
automatically exempted from due criticism
or any lawful form of protest, including
boycott; they should be treated like all other
offenders in the same category, not better or
worse.
(3) Event is partially or fully sponsored
or funded by an official Israeli body
The general principle is that an event or
project carried out under the
sponsorship/aegis of or in affiliation with an
official Israeli body constitutes complicity
and therefore is deserving of boycott. It is
also well documented now that Israeli
artists, writers and other cultural workers
applying for state funding to cover the cost
of their -- or their cultural products’ --
participation in international events must
accept to contribute to Israel’s official
propaganda efforts. To that end, the cultural
worker must sign a contract with the Israeli
Foreign Ministry binding her/him to
“undertake to act faithfully, responsibly and
tirelessly to provide the Ministry with the
highest professional services. The service
provider is aware that the purpose of
ordering services from him is to promote the
policy interests of the State of Israel via
culture and art, including contributing to
creating a positive image for Israel.” [6]
(4) Product is not funded or sponsored
by an official Israeli body
Unless violating any of the above criteria, in
the absence of official Israeli sponsorship,
the individual product of an Israeli cultural
worker per se is not boycottable, regardless
of its content or merit.
(5) Event or project promotes false
symmetry or “balance”
Cultural events and projects involving
Palestinians and/or Arabs and Israelis that
promote “balance” between the “two sides”
in presenting their respective narratives, as
if on par, or are otherwise based on the false
premise that the colonizers and the
colonized, the oppressors and the oppressed,
are equally responsible for the “conflict,”
are intentionally deceptive, intellectually
dishonest and morally reprehensible. Such
events and projects, often seeking to
encourage dialogue or “reconciliation
between the two sides” without addressing
the requirements of justice, promote the
normalization of oppression and
injustice. All such events and projects that
bring Palestinians and/or Arabs and Israelis
together, unless framed within the explicit
context of opposition to occupation and
other forms of Israeli oppression of the
Palestinians, are strong candidates for
boycott. Other factors that PACBI takes
into consideration in evaluating such events
and projects are the sources of funding, the
design of the program, the objectives of the
sponsoring organization(s), the participants,
and similar relevant factors.
References:
[1]
http://www.pacbi.org/etemplate.php?i
d=869
[2]
http://www.pacbi.org/etemplate.php?i
d=315
[3]
http://www.pacbi.org/etemplate.php?i
d=415
[4]
http://www.pngo.net/data/files/engli
 27

sh_statements/08/PNGO-THT-
HP5208(2).pdf Implementing the
[5]
http://www.anc.org.za/un/reddy/cult
Academic Boycott:
ural_boycott.html
[6]
Individuals vs.
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spage Institutions
s/1005287.html

Posted on 20-07-2009 at:

http://www.pacbi.org/etemplate.php?i
d=1047 PACBI column for the November 2009
Newsletter of BRICUP

We have shared with readers of the

BRICUP Newsletter the recently
publicized PACBI guidelines for the
academic and cultural boycott of Israel
[1]. We are very heartened by the
steady mail we have been receiving in
recent months from academics, artists,
and activists around the world who
contact us to ensure that their
implementation of the boycott in their
particular circumstances and contexts is
in harmony with our guidelines.

While implementing the cultural

boycott of Israel may sometimes
encounter grey areas due to the fact that
artistic activity is not limited within
institutional boundaries (and PACBI
calls for an institutional boycott), we
believe that the situation is a great deal
clearer when it comes to practicing the
academic boycott. We offer the
following advice in response to
questions from some academics about
attending conferences held at or
sponsored by Israeli academic
institutions. There has been an
inaccurate impression that since the
Palestinian boycott call is institutional,
only institutions are expected to observe
it. By this logic, individual academics, if
they are not representing their
universities or institutions, may
 28
participate in academic conferences in
Israel without breaking the boycott. For
the sake of clarity, we note that when we
advocate an institutional boycott, we
mean that the target of the boycott
should be all Israeli institutions; those
whom we urge to implement the
boycott, however, are institutions as
well as individual academics.
PACBI believes that we have not yet
reached the critical point where
international academic institutions and
bodies will boycott Israel and refrain
from cooperating with Israeli
institutions. Regardless of that, we
believe that the success of the academic
boycott hinges on the consistent and
principled practice of individual
academics faced with opportunities or
invitations to attend conferences
organized by Israeli academic
institutions. There is no doubt in our
mind that such opportunities and
invitations must be rejected.
We would like to reiterate that PACBI
has advocated a boycott of Israeli
academic and cultural institutions,
based on the premise that these
institutions are complicit in the system
of oppression that has denied
Palestinians their basic rights
guaranteed by international law. This
position is in line with the authoritative
call by the Palestinian Council for
Higher Education for "non-cooperation
in the scientific and technical fields
between Palestinian and Israeli
universities.” Israeli academic
institutions in particular are part of the
ideological and institutional scaffolding
of the Zionist colonial project in
Palestine, and as such are deeply
implicated in maintaining the structures
of domination over the Palestinian
people. Since its founding, the Israeli
academy has cast its lot with the
hegemonic political-military
establishment in Israel, and
notwithstanding the efforts of a handful
of principled academics, carries on
business-as-usual in support of the
status quo.
By attending conferences in Israel,
international academics—whether
intentionally or inadvertently--
effectively lend legitimacy to the Israeli
colonial project; they affirm that Israeli
universities are a normal member of the
international academy, and that no
special stigma attaches itself to the
Israeli academy. The message these
academics send is that Israeli academic
institutions can continue to enjoy
recognition, legitimacy, and approval
from academics the world over, not to
mention unfettered access to research
funds and other material benefits. As a
matter of fact, and judging by the
unprecedented outpouring of support
for BDS the world over, we believe that
the uncritical acceptance of the Israeli
academy as a neutral and untainted
institution is being challenged. More
and more principled academics are
realizing that they should withdraw
their “stamp of approval,” as it were,
and join the academic boycott.
We stress that as a general overriding
rule, virtually all Israeli academic
institutions, unless proven otherwise,
are complicit in maintaining Israeli
apartheid and colonial rule, whether
through their silence, actual
involvement in justifying, whitewashing
or otherwise deliberately diverting
attention from Israel’s violations of
international law and human rights, or
indeed through their direct
 29
collaboration with state agencies in the
design and commission of these
violations. Accordingly, these
institutions, all their activities, and all
the events they sponsor or support must
be boycotted.
We trust in the sense of justice of our
international colleagues to do what is
right: boycott the Israeli academy and all
its activities and projects!
[1] PACBI Guidelines for Applying the
International Academic Boycott of
Israel:
http://www.pacbi.org/etemplate.php?i
d=1107 ; Guidelines for Implementing
the International Cultural Boycott of
Israel:
http://www.pacbi.org/etemplate.php?i
d=1047
http://www.bricup.org.uk/documents
/archive/bricupnewsletter22.pdf
Posted on 08-11-2009 at:
http://www.pacbi.org/etemplate.php?i
d=1125
Boycott, Divestment,
and Sanctions (BDS)
Frequently Asked
Questions
What is the underlying principle of
calls for Boycott, Divestment and
Sanctions (BDS)?
It is no longer denied that Israel has
oppressed the Palestinian people for
decades in multiple forms: occupying,
colonizing, ethnically cleansing, racially
discriminating, in short, denying
Palestinians the fundamental rights for
freedom, equality and self-
determination. Despite abundant
condemnation of Israel’s policies by the
UN and all relevant international
conventions, the international
community of nations has failed to
bring about Israel’s compliance with
international law or its respect for basic
human rights. Israel’s crimes have
continued with utter impunity. The time
has come for action, not just words. BDS
are the most effective non-violent,
morally consistent means for achieving
justice and genuine peace in the region
through concerted international
pressure similar to that applied on
South African apartheid.
What is the Palestinian Campaign for
the Academic and Cultural Boycott of
Israel (PACBI)?
PACBI was launched in Ramallah in
April 2004 by a group of Palestinian
academics and intellectuals to join the
growing international boycott
 30
movement. In July 2004, the Campaign
issued a Call for Boycott addressed to
the international community, urging it
to comprehensively and consistently
boycott all Israeli academic and cultural
institutions until Israel withdraws from
all the lands occupied in 1967, including
East Jerusalem; removes all its colonies
in those lands; agrees to United Nations
resolutions relevant to the restitution of
Palestinian refugees’ rights; and
dismantles its system of apartheid. This
statement was met with widespread
support, and has to date been endorsed
by nearly sixty Palestinian academic,
cultural and other civil society
federations, unions, and organizations,
including the Federation of Unions of
Palestinian Universities' Professors and
Employees and the Palestinian NGO
Network (PNGO) in the West Bank.
What is the Call for Boycott,
Divestment and Sanctions (BDS)?
On July 9, 2005, one year after the
historic Advisory Opinion of the
International Court of Justice (ICJ),
which found Israel's Wall built on
occupied Palestinian territory to be
illegal, a clear majority of Palestinian
civil society called upon international
civil society organizations and 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, until Israel meets
its obligation to recognize the
Palestinian people's inalienable right to
self-determination and fully complies
with international law. BDS has been
endorsed by over 170 Palestinian
parties, organizations, trade unions and
movements representing the Palestinian
people in the 1967 and 1948 territories
and in the diaspora. On July 13, 2005 the
UN International Civil Society
Conference adopted the Palestinian Call
for BDS.
Does Academic Boycott Infringe on
Academic Freedom?
It may; but who’s Academic Freedom is
being referred to within this context?
That of Israeli academics. Are we to
regard only the academic freedom of
Israelis as worthy? Plus, the privileging
of academic freedom as a super-value
above all other freedoms is in principle
antithetical to the very foundation of
human rights. The fact that Palestinians
are denied basic rights as well as
academic freedom under Israel's
military occupation is ignored. The fact
that, with the exception of a tiny yet
crucial minority, Israeli academics are
largely supportive of their state’s
oppression or are acquiescently silent
about it is ignored. The fact that Israeli
academic institutions have been and
continue to be entirely complicit in the
continuing aggressions against
Palestinian society is ignored. The fact
that Israeli academic institutions are
themselves directly engaged in
violations of Palestinian human rights
and international law is ignored.
BDS is opposed by many Israelis who
support the Palestinian struggle. By
calling for BDS, aren’t we alienating
these Israeli supporters?
Although the views of Israeli supporters
regarding methods of struggle should
be taken into consideration, Palestinians
have the ultimate right to decide on the
best method for attaining freedom from
an illegal occupation and systematically
oppressive regime. Supporters of the
Palestinian struggle within the
 31
international community and within
Israel itself have to stop attempting to
dictate the terms of the struggle but
support the Palestinian right to resist an
illegal occupation, especially when the
form of resistance is non-violent, as is
the case with calls for BDS. BDS are
morally sound and effective means of
struggle that challenge the world to
force Israeli compliance with
international law; they therefore serve
the cause of ending oppression and
establishing a just and sustainable
peace. That should be the most urgent
consideration for morally consistent
individuals supporting genuine peace.
Won’t BDS also hurt those Israelis who
support the Palestinian struggle?
Israelis who oppose the occupation
should be doing so on moral grounds
and must be willing to accept that there
is a price to pay to end the colonial
oppression being perpetrated in their
names and perpetuated through the
complicity of most of their society.
Rather than focusing on the possibility
that some morally consistent, non-
Zionist members of the Israeli left may
be inadvertently affected by boycott, one
must emphasize the impact boycott
might have on the overall establishment
in Israel. The price that some
conscientious Israelis may pay as an
unavoidable byproduct of the boycott is
quite modest when compared to the
price Palestinians have to pay for the
lack of boycotts or any similarly
effective pressures on Israel.
Challenging the fanatic, militaristic
Israeli establishment may indeed
strengthen its grip on power in the short
run -- extreme populism and the rise of
fascist tendencies in Israel attest to that;
but in the longer run it will weaken that
establishment, just as in South Africa.
Repression under apartheid did not die
down in a smooth downwards spiral,
after all. This will serve not only the
Palestinians, but also, in the longer
term, the true left in Israel.
Aren’t BDS tactics unpopular in the
international community?
Recent breakthroughs in the positions of
the US Presbyterian church, the
Anglican church and some mainstream,
progressive Jewish-American
organizations -- not to mention the fast
spreading boycott movement in Europe
and calls for divestment in the United
States -- indicate that there is an
encouragingly growing acceptance in
the west of the need to effectively
pressure Israel to end injustice.
Those who do oppose boycott of Israel
were generally in favor of the
comprehensive, blanket boycotts (in all
fields, including academia) of the
apartheid regime in South Africa. To
oppose one and support the other
entails that either they are hypocritical
or else they have good reasons to
believe that such pressure measures
cannot be as effective in the Israeli case
as in its South African predecessor. We
have yet to read or hear one good
argument supporting this unfounded
belief. Treating Israel as a state outside
of history, unaccountable to
international law and morally
untouchable is simply wrong. It reflects
not only moral inconsistency but
political blindness as well, as it serves to
perpetuate Israel's rarely matched
oppression of the people of Palestine.
 32

Can BDS really be effective in ending

the Israeli occupation and oppression? Academic Boycott and
History shows us that boycotts and
the Israeli Left
sanctions can be effective. In December
By Omar Barghouti
1989, a recommendation by the
Thursday, April 14, 2005
European Parliament to freeze funds
allocated to scientific cooperation with
Israel until it reopened the Palestinian
universities prompted the Israeli
government to announce the gradual
Some of the most committed Israeli
reopening of colleges and vocational
opponents of their state's illegal military
training centers in the occupied
occupation of the Palestinian territories
territories in February 1990. In effect, on
have recently expressed serious
the rare occasions when Israel did at all
reservations about, if not strident
contemplate changing its racist
opposition to, the Palestinian call for
oppressive policies, it was mainly
boycott** of Israel's academic and
attributed to facing concerted pressures
cultural institutions. We think that their
by the international community.
concerns are worth addressing.
But of course, the most obvious example
Almost all of the publicized reservations
of the effectiveness of BDS campaigns is
we have seen are prefaced with moral
South Africa. After calling for boycott
support for the right of Palestinians to
and sanctions against Israel in 2002, the
resist the occupation -- non-violently,
South African Minister for Intelligence
most would write -- even by calling for
Services, Ronnie Kasrils, stated: “we in
boycotts to achieve that goal. A
South Africa know about racial
common theme in their antagonism to
oppression. We fought it and defeated it
the academic boycott, however, is the
because it was unjust… South Africa is
pragmatic consideration that such a
an example of what is possible”.
boycott may be "counterproductive" in
the struggle to end the occupation. They
Posted on 10-07-2005 at:
allow themselves to raise this objection
http://www.pacbi.org/etemplate.php?i
because they regard themselves as
d=867
partners of Palestinians in the anti-
occupation camp, not as outsiders
patronizing us. In some cases, this
premise is valid. Most of the time,
however, it is not. Israelis who arrogate
to themselves the exclusive right to
arbitrate every issue dealing with the
Palestinians ought to think twice about
their self-appointed role as sole licensers
of the form the anti-occupation struggle
should take.
 33
Israelis who are opposed to the
occupation should be doing so on moral
grounds, above everything else, and
should not dictate the agenda of the
struggle. This remains a struggle of
Palestinians and their supporters --
including conscientious Israelis -- led by
Palestinians against Israel's racist and
colonial policies. It is high time to
recognize this profound fact.
Another crucial issue that demands
consideration here is the fact that even
conscientious Israelis are objectively in a
situation of conflict of interest: boycotts,
even of the most sensitive and nuanced
types, will in all likelihood hurt their
interests. Does this morally rob them of
the right to opine or give Palestinians
advice about boycott, as their views will
always be tainted by self-interest? No,
but the fact that their interests are on the
line should not be ignored either in
judging the degree of fairness of their
opinions. A few principled academics,
like Ilan Pappe, have decisively
overcome this conflict of interest by
declaring their readiness to accept the
price that they may have to pay as a
result of implementing any meaningful
boycott against Israeli academic
institutions. Such admirable moral
clarity and consistency should set an
example to other Israeli academics.
Regardless of intentions and moral
considerations, we do think it is
important to lay out the most recurrent
and serious pragmatic/political
arguments raised by progressive
Israelis, and to respond to each of them
with due deliberation.
The "counterproductive-ness" claim --
by far the most potent of all assertions --
rests on the following arguments:
First Claim: Academic boycotts in general
hurt the one sector in the oppressor society
that is most likely to be sympathetic to the
struggle of the oppressed. Israel is no
exception, it is held.
Response: Even if this holds in other
places, in Israel it simply does not.
Israeli academics by and large serve in
the occupation army, and hardly ever
publicly denounce Israel's occupation,
its system of racial discrimination
against its own Palestinian citizens or its
obdurate denial of the internationally-
sanctioned rights of Palestinian
refugees. This constitutes collusion --
even if passive, at times -- with their
state's criminal oppression of the
Palestinian people. Moreover, Israeli
academics' organizations, such as
university senates or professional
associations, have been totally silent on
the conduct of those academics who
have contributed to the occupation
regime either through direct service as
advisors or as producers of "knowledge"
useful to the project of control,
oppression, and occupation. As far as
we know, no racist or complicit
academic has ever been publicly
censured by representative bodies or
associations of academics. Many of
those Israelis who object to the
academic boycott admit, quite freely,
the complicity of the academy as a
whole in the colonial project, both
historically and in the present.
Second Claim: Academic boycott by its
very nature contradicts academic
freedom.
Response: This claim needs to be
examined carefully. We think that the
freedom that Israeli academics appear
keen to preserve is the freedom to
 34
continue being scholars, i.e. to have an
uninterrupted flow of research funds, to
continue to get grants to be released
from teaching, to take sabbaticals, to
continue to be able to write, engage in
scholarly debate, and to do all the things
respectable academics are supposed to
do. But can they or should they be able
to enjoy these freedoms (which sound
more like privileges to us) without any
regard to what is going on outside the
walls of the academy, to the role of their
institutions in the perpetuation of
colonial rule? We are faced here again
with the problem of Israelis seeing the
world from their vantage point, and
assuming -- and demanding -- that
others do the same. Why does the world
owe it to Israel's academics to help them
perpetuate their privileged position?
Third Claim: Israeli academics opposed
to the occupation are themselves largely
antagonistic to boycott. Insisting on
boycott, therefore, runs the risk of losing
them. Palestinians cannot afford that,
particularly given their evident political
weakness.
Response: Although the views of our
Israeli supporters regarding methods of
struggle matter to us, they are not our
only, or even our most significant,
consideration. As argued above, we
hope that their opposition to the crimes
committed in their names is based on
more than pragmatic considerations,
and that they are capable of seeing
themselves in the wider context of the
struggle, thereby overcoming the
tendency to feel that they lie at the
center of the universe. The boycott is a
morally sound means of struggle that
challenges the world to force Israeli
compliance with international law; it
therefore serves Palestinian interests in
the struggle for emancipation, self-
determination and equality. That is our
most urgent consideration.
Fourth Claim: Conscientious Israelis
who are exempted from the call for
boycott will be isolated even further by
their Israeli colleagues if they accept
such a privilege. This will hurt their
standing and diminish their ability to
influence those colleagues' attitudes
towards the occupation.
Response: This is even less relevant than
the consideration raised in the third
claim! The above response amply
addresses it.
Fifth Claim: Although the Palestinian
call for boycott explicitly calls for
"institutional" not individual boycott, by
exempting "conscientious Israeli
academics" opposed to occupation and
oppression, it implies that the rest of
Israeli academic individuals are to be
boycotted. This apparent contradiction
sheds some doubt on the sincerity or
coherence of the Palestinian call.
Response: Although as a matter of
principle we refuse to be put in the seat
of the accused in this not-so-innocent
case of questioning our integrity, we
shall respond to this charge. One year
after the Palestinian call for boycott was
issued, PACBI's record of public
statements, press releases, published
articles and letters should put to rest
any doubts about our moral and
political consistency. Our Call explicitly
and unequivocally calls for institutional
boycott, period. The fact that we go out
of our way to "Exclude from the above
actions against Israeli institutions any
conscientious Israeli academics and
intellectuals opposed to their state's
colonial and racist policies" follows
 35

from our realization that there is always
a grey area where an academic may be
perceived as representing her/his
institution rather than her/himself. We
were cautious and nuanced enough to
address that eventuality. This does not
imply anything beyond what it says.
Our discourse has always avoided
double-talk and mixed messages, unlike
that of most of our detractors.
** The full text of PACBI's Call for
Boycott can be read at:
http://right2edu.birzeit.edu/news/arti
cle178
Posted at:
http://www.zcommunications.org/aca
demic-boycott-and-the-israeli-left-by-
omar-barghouti

One final and crucial point to make is

where were those critics of boycott
during the years of comprehensive,
blanket boycotts (in all fields, including
academia) of the apartheid regime in
South Africa? Did they object then to the
far more stringent criteria of the
boycott? If not, it is fair to conclude that
they must be either hypocritical or else
they have good reasons to believe that
such punitive measures cannot be as
effective in the Israeli apartheid case as
in its South African predecessor. We
have yet to read or hear one good
argument supporting this unfounded
belief. The burden of proof lies flatly on
their laps, not ours.

Treating Israel as a state outside of

history, unaccountable to international
law and morally untouchable has got to
come to an end. It reflects moral
inconsistency and political blindness;
furthermore, it serves to perpetuate
Israel's rarely matched oppression of the
people of Palestine, and, by extension, it
inhibits the struggle for genuine peace
based on justice and the universal
principle of equal humanity.

---------------------------------
* Founding members of the Palestinian
Campaign for the Academic and
Cultural Boycott of Israel (PACBI)
 36

Yet even in the face of these clear calls,

Enough. It's time for a many of us still can't go there. The
boycott reasons are complex, emotional and
understandable. But they simply aren't
good enough. Economic sanctions are
By Naomi Klein
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.
The best way to end the bloody
Punitive measures will alienate rather than
occupation is to target Israel with the
persuade Israelis.
kind of movement that ended apartheid
in South Africa
The world has tried what used to be
called "constructive engagement". It has
It's time. Long past time. The best
failed utterly. Since 2006 Israel has been
strategy to end the increasingly bloody
steadily escalating its criminality:
occupation is for Israel to become the
expanding settlements, launching an
target of the kind of global movement
outrageous war against Lebanon, and
that put an end to apartheid in South
imposing collective punishment on
Africa. In July 2005 a huge coalition of
Gaza through the brutal blockade.
Palestinian groups laid out plans to do
Despite this escalation, Israel has not
just that. They called on "people of
faced punitive measures - quite the
conscience all over the world to impose
opposite. The weapons and $3bn in
broad boycotts and implement
annual aid the US sends Israel are only
divestment initiatives against Israel
the beginning. Throughout this key
similar to those applied to South Africa
period, Israel has enjoyed a dramatic
in the apartheid era". The campaign
improvement in its diplomatic, cultural
Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions was
and trade relations with a variety of
born.
other allies. For instance, in 2007 Israel
became the first country outside Latin
Every day that Israel pounds Gaza
America to sign a free-trade deal with
brings more converts to the BDS cause -
the Mercosur bloc. In the first nine
even among Israeli Jews. In the midst of
months of 2008, Israeli exports to
the assault roughly 500 Israelis, dozens
Canada went up 45%. A new deal with
of them well-known artists and scholars,
the EU is set to double Israel's exports of
sent a letter to foreign ambassadors in
processed food. And in December
Israel. It calls for "the adoption of
European ministers "upgraded" the EU-
immediate restrictive measures and
Israel association agreement, a reward
sanctions" and draws a clear parallel
long sought by Jerusalem.
with the anti-apartheid struggle. "The
boycott on South Africa was effective,
It is in this context that Israeli leaders
but Israel is handled with kid gloves ...
started their latest war: confident they
This international backing must stop."
would face no meaningful costs. It is
remarkable that over seven days of
wartime trading, the Tel Aviv Stock
 37
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: in 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
 38

of our clients," he explains, "so it was

purely commercially defensive." The Academic Boycott
It was this kind of cold business
of Israel - Objections
calculation that led many companies to and Defense
pull out of South Africa two decades
ago. And it's precisely the kind of
calculation that is our most realistic by
hope of bringing justice, so long denied, Lawrence Davidson
to Palestine.

A version of this column was published

in the Nation (thenation.com)

naomiklein.org Introductory Comments and a General

Defense
Posted at:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commenti Boycotts are historically common and
sfree/2009/jan/10/naomi-klein- popular forms of protest. Unlike
boycott-israel sanctions, which are enforced by
governments and sometimes destroy
the lives of millions of ordinary people
(as in the case of the 12-years of
sanctions against Iraq, and the on-going
Western sanctions against Hamas and
the Gaza Strip), boycotts can be a
grassroots means of protest against the
policies of governments. They can be
undertaken by ordinary people to
defend fellow human beings who are
oppressed and designed in such a way
as to cause as little damage as possible
to the lives of innocent people. Boycotts
have historically been undertaken at
many levels: they have been carried out
against companies or industries (for
instance, the American California grape
boycott of the 1970s); and against states
(for instance the boycott of apartheid
South Africa). Thus, from an historical
point of view, there is plenty of
precedents for the tactic of boycott.
And, as in the case of South Africa,
public pressure through boycotts can
eventually encourage governments and
organizations such as the United
 39
Nations to take action against
particularly oppressive regime.
Nonetheless, the boycott against Israel,
and in particular that aspect of it
directed against academic institutions,
has drawn a great amount of criticism.
Much of this has come from people who
are partisans of Israel. But some of it has
its origins among those who have
genuine concerns that innocent Israelis
are being unnecessarily hurt, or that the
boycott is undermining valued
principles such as academic freedom
and the free flow of ideas. It is to this
latter group that the following
arguments are addressed in the hope of
taking up their concerns and, if not
putting them to rest, at least putting
them in a context that makes
understandable the historical trade-offs
inevitably involved in any struggle for
justice.
First of all, the academic boycott of
Israel is part of a broader boycott and
divestment effort which involves
economic, cultural and sports agendas.
The academic boycott specifically is
based on several premises. One is that,
to date, all but a very small number of
Israeli academics remain quiescent in
the face of the violent colonial war their
government wages against the
Palestinian people in the Occupied
Territories. As a group they have had
nothing to say about Israeli violations of
scores of United Nations resolutions and
the transgression of international law in
the form of the Fourth Geneva
Convention. This includes not only
human rights violations of a general
nature, but also, specifically, the
systematic destruction of Palestinian
education and academic freedoms. Nor,
as a group, have they come to the
defense of their few fellow Israeli
academics who have been spoken of as
traitors for publically criticizing Israeli
policies against the Palestinians.
A second, and related premise, though
one that is often unnoted, is the fact that
educational institutions are principal
agents for shaping the perceptions of
whole generations. If, in the midst of
extreme practices leading to oppression
such as we have been witnessing in the
Occupied Territories, these institutions
lend their active or passive support to
aggressive colonialist practices, then
others may legitimately criticize them
and, if the situation persists, boycott
them.
Third, I would point out that the
boycott against Israel is whole heartedly
supported by Palestinian civil society.
In 2003 and again in 2005 Palestinians
teachers and a wide range of other
professionals called for the boycott of
Israel, including Israeli academia.
Today over 60 Palestinian federations
and NGOs have signed on to this call. In
every case these groups, as well,
organizers of the boycott outside of
Palestine, view this tactic as the best
non-violent way by which non-Israelis
the world over can express their concern
for what is now the world’s longest post-
Second World War occupation and one
which presents us with very dangerous
ethnic and racial issues.
There has been a great hew and cry
against the violent tactics of resistence
to Israeli occupation evolved by the
Palestinians. Though the first Intifada
started with little more than rock
throwing it was condemned in the West
as a “dangerous escalation” of the
Middle East crisis. It also brought the
 40
Palestinians no relief. The Second
Intifada is certainly much more violent
in its nature and has included the
infamous tactic of suicide bombing. The
organizers of the boycott condemn this
tactic even while understanding that it is
a product of despair and desperation
that the occupation itself has created.
Many have asked themselves what
people outside of Israel and the
Occupied Territories can do to put non-
violent pressure on Israel to end the
occupation. The boycott is one of their
answers.
Consideration of General Objections
Objections to the Academic Boycott of
Israel have not been consistent. They
have tended to shift over time. For
instance, at the beginning of the boycott
(circa 2002) there was the demand that
academia, and particularly scientific
fields, be kept out of politics. While as
an ideal this may be an admirable, in
reality the bulk of higher education and
its academicians never escape politics.
As we found in the United States during
the Vietnam War, various government
agencies quickly recruited an array of
academic departments and individuals,
ranging from chemists to sociologists, to
support their war effort. The
intimidation and bribery directed at the
rest of academia to remain quiet (and
therefore passively supportive of
government policy) was effective until
the war itself became vastly unpopular.
Israeli educational institutions have
been similarly co-opted. Various
academic departments, professors and
administrators have developed for profit
and non-profit links with the military,
corporate, media and political
institutions that support and sustain
occupation.
Normally, states do not support
academic freedom or the free flow of
ideas in cases that impact government
policies, particularly when the
government has committed itself to
military action. Through various means
of bribery and pressure they attempt to
enforce only two alternatives,
quiescence or active support. In times of
stress, opposition comes to equal
disloyalty and threatens academic
funding and careers. The academy,
then, is not a neutral arena on matters
important to government. As Lisa
Taraki, who is a professor at Birzeit
University on the West Bank has
argued, the academy can easily become
“a haven for many scholars either in the
outright service of repressive states, or
for those who have rewritten history in
defense of colonial projects.”2
In the current context, there are
numerous examples of the direct
involvement of Israeli academia and
academic related professions in
promoting and sustaining the
oppressive measures of the Israeli
government. In general terms, almost
all Israeli academics find themselves
actively or passively supporting the
occupation by virtue of Israel’s policy of
universal Jewish conscription. (This is a
policy that does not democratize the
Israeli army, so much as it militarizes
Israeli civilian society). Thus, the
majority of Israeli academics are
military veterans and many will do
reserve duty in the Territories. If they
wish to resist serving as part of the
occupation forces they can do so by
joining the Refusnik organizations.
Very few choose to do so. More
 41
concretely, the Israeli government has
turned to academia for occupation
administrators (the first “civilian”
administrator of the West Bank was
Menahem Milson of Hebrew University)
and it has used academic demographers,
architects, communications experts,
medical experts and others to make and
carry out policy that sustains
occupation. Then there is the active
role taken by Bar-Ilan University in
validating courses given by colleges
now being established in illegal
settlements
The argument for isolating academia
from politics was later augmented with
the assertion that “in the end the best
way to resolve issues is to pursue
dialogue, not boycotts.” However, one of
the reasons the boycott has become necessary
is precisely because “dialogue” on the
Palestinian issue has been historically
stifled. For decades Zionists had a near
monopoly on the information flow in
the West concerning the Palestinian
situation. One can still see this in the fact
that the vast majority of coverage in the
press and on televison, particularly in
the United States, gives mostly the
Israeli side of the story. To the extent
that this is breaking down, those
offering the Palestinian point of view are
now consistently labeled anti-Semites
and supporters of terrorism. Indeed, the
Zionists in the United States go so far as
to threaten the careers of those who
vocally challenge them. Such a libelous
approach hardly qualifies the Zionist
leadership as defenders of academic
freedom. In truth, what they seek is to
maintain a monopoly on the information
flow about Israel and Palestine. This is
an environment that discourages
dialogue and makes necessary other,
more direct and effective tactics seeking
justice for the Palestinians.3
Moreover, ‘intellectual exchanges’ have
been going on between Israelis and the
rest of the world since 1948 and with
Zionists for longer than that. It has
made not a bit of difference to the
oppressive and colonialist policies of
successive Israeli governments. Given
this history, even if the Zionists were
now to engage in honest “dialogue,” it
is unlikely to achieve anything in the
future unless, simultaneously, other
sorts of pressure are applied.
As noted, one of the earliest tactics to
silence and discredit advocates of the
boycott has been use of the red herring
label of anti-Semitism. We are told that
the boycott of Israel, including the
academic boycott, is inherently anti-
Semitic ‘in effect if not in intent.’ This
argument is based on a dishonest
equating of anti-Zionism with anti-
Semitism and conveniently ignores the
mounting crescendo of Jewish voices
against Zionist and Israeli colonialist
practices.4 It also ignores the fact that
not only was the boycott call started by
Jewish scholars in the United Kingdom
(Professors Hilary and Steven Rose), but
also that many of the supporters of the
boycott are Jewish, a few are even
Israeli Jews. Indeed, as many non-
Zionist Jews have argued, it is not the
pursuit of legitimate means of protest
against violations of human rights by
Israel that feeds anti-Semitic discourse.
Rather it is the current Israeli practices
and the Zionist colonial project that
does so.
Finally, there was the short lived
argument that the issues involved in
the conflict between Israel and
Palestine are very complex, and a
boycott reduces them to overly
simplistic dueling camps of good and
evil. This assertion could not be
 42
sustained in the light of UN resolutions
and the widely documented Israeli
violations of international law by
Human Rights organizations. These
published findings suggest that the
confiscation of land, the destruction of
homes and businesses, the act of ethnic
cleansing, all relentlessly pursued over
the last 60 years, is not “complicated.”
Indeed, it is all horribly simple. And,
because more and more people have
come to understand this, the argument
based on complexity is now rarely
heard.
Let us now turn to serious issues
concerning the objectives, scope and
potential effectiveness of the boycott.
Consideration of Specific Objections
Argument 1: Futility. The academic
boycott is ineffective, it cannot
influence the policies of the Israeli
government, and will only harden
positions due to resentment over
outside pressure.
If the first part of this argument were
really true, the Zionist response to the
boycott effort would not be so
strenuous. The Israeli government
would not be starting up high powered
commissions to counter the boycott, in
the U.S. Zionist organizations and
spokespersons would not be extending
time, energy and money, to label the
academic boycott effort as the “hijacking
of academic freedom,” and rushing to
launch a number of anti-boycott
petitions. The near hysterical outcry
coming from Zionists indicates a high
level of insecurity and fear. Some
Israelis have already acknowledged the
potential of the boycott. Senior Israeli
economist Yoram Gabai was quoted in
the San Francisco Chronicle, 8 August
2002, as saying: "Faster than expected,
we will find ourselves in the time warp
of (white-dominated) Rhodesia in the
1970s and South Africa in the 1980s:
enforced isolation from without and an
isolationism from within....The
enormous price of isolation will drag us
into withdrawing from the [occupied]
territories, either in the context of a
peace treaty or without one as a
unilateral act.”5 This is not mere
speculation on his part. The power of
national isolation, including that of
academic isolation, was recently
attested to by Frederik de Klerk, the
former President of South Africa who
initiated the move away from apartheid
and toward democracy. “Suddenly the
doors of the universities and libraries
[of the world] were closed to our bright
students, which stimulated and
motivated advocates of change.”6
As Gabai’s prediction suggests, the
academic boycott does not work in a
vacuum. It is but one component in a
broader boycott program that seeks to
put pressure on all aspects of Israeli
society. Historically, such a broad
approach can be most effective when
directed toward democracies, a club to
which Israel claims membership. Here
individuals can be encouraged to
pressure their governments for changes
in behavior. But even so, it takes
sustained effort to alter public opinion.
In the case of Israel, this is because
internally generated perceptions, much
like white South Africa under apartheid,
are so inbred that the ability of Israeli
citizens to understand the consequences
of their national policies on the
Palestinians is limited. As the self-
defeating results of the last several
Israeli elections point out, a majority of
 43
Israelis are literally stuck in a self-
reinforcing and distorting information
environment where positions cannot get
any “harder.” As in the case of South
Africa, external pressure is the only non-
violent way to move the Israelis to a
realization that something is terribly
wrong with their outlook and behavior
and that there is a need to change both
leadership and direction.
Even if one is skeptical of the ability of
Israelis to break out of their perceptual
straitjacket, an international boycott
targeting all aspects of Israeli society has
strong and beneficial symbolic value.
Such a boycott raises international
consciousness over inhumane and
unjust behavior, lets ordinary citizens
the world over know that there is a way
they can get involved and do something
to promote human rights and justice,
and serves as a warning for other would
be oppressors that it is not only other
governments that they need to worry
about. In the end, economic and cultural
isolation has its own dynamic and, as
Gabai fears, can wear away at the
resolve of those Israeli elites that fancy
themselves players on an international
level.
Finally, the academic boycott has
obviously been quite effective in
generating heated discussion in many
venues (mainstream newspapers,
television, student publications, internet
discussion lists and blogs). In this way
the negative details of the Zionist
enterprise have inevitably forced
themselves onto the consciousness of
many people, within and outside
academia. Thus, even the Zionist efforts
to discredit those who support the
boycott, and de-legitimize the boycott as
a strategy of protest, have
unintentionally helped provide a superb
forum for debating the facts about
Palestine and the occupation. If the
boycott achieves nothing more than this
it will have achieved a great deal.
Argument 2: Misguided - The
academic boycott targets the wrong
people and hurts Palestinians as well
as Israelis. It harms collaborative
efforts between Israeli and Palestinian
universities.
The assertions that the academic boycott
hurts Palestinians and harms
collaborative efforts are dubious at best.
While in the past there have been minor
collaborations between Israeli and
Palestinian academic institutions in the
Occupied Territories, these have now all
but ceased. This is due to inevitable
estrangement and suspicion that has
come along with the continuing
colonization and military domination of
the Occupied Territories. Also, Israeli
policies forbid the travel of Israeli
citizens into the Occupied Territories
(except if they are going to and from
colonies illegal under international law)
and make it extremely onerous for
Palestinians in those regions to enter
Israel. If the Israelis claim that these
policies have been made necessary by
the Palestinian uprising, supporters of
the boycott answer that the uprising has
been made necessary and inevitable by
the Israeli occupation and its brutal
nature. Part of that brutal nature has been
the employment of tactics designed to
prevent Palestinian colleges and universities
from functioning in any normal manner.
These tactics include prolonged shut
downs, military raids and travel
restrictions that impede students and
faculty from reaching campuses.
 44
No organized protest or resistence to this
consistent and prolonged attack on
Palestinian academia has come from Israeli
academic groups, colleges, or universities.
As the late Tanya Reinhart, who served
for many years as a Professor of
Linguistics at Tel Aviv University, and
was one of the few Israeli academics to
publically stand against Israeli
occupation policies, has observed,
“Never in its history did the senate of
any Israeli university pass a resolution
protesting the frequent closure of
Palestinian universities, let alone voice
protest over the devastation sowed there
during the last uprising. It is not that a
motion in that direction failed to gather
a majority, there was no such motion
anywhere in Israeli academia.”7 Even
with the qualitative increase in the level
of violence used by the Israeli army in
the second intifada, Israeli academia
continues to do practically nothing to
pressure their government.8 There is
something markedly hypocritical in the fact
that many of those individuals and
organizations (Israeli or otherwise) which
have so vocally attacked the boycott, have
not raised their voices against the
destruction of Palestinian academia and
society in general.9
The claim that the boycott “targets the
wrong people” is a more complicated
one and deserves close consideration.
Almost all of the complaints registered
against the boycott of Israel, academic or
otherwise, put forth examples of
humane, well intentioned, Israeli
individuals (whose existence we certainly
acknowledge) who are allegedly being
punished unfairly by the boycott (see
also discussion of the category of
Academic Freedom below). It is to be
noted that the academic boycott’s main
targets are Israel’s educational
institutions and not individuals per se.
Nonetheless, there are scholars
attached to those institutions who now
find it more difficult to place
publishable material, particularly in
European journals, there are Israeli
doctors who now find it more difficult
to receive research assistance from
abroad, there are Israeli academics who
have been asked to leave the boards of
scholarly journals, etc. Taken as
individual cases, there is no doubt that
such situations result in frustration,
inconvenience, the disruption of
research agendas for a range of
individuals, some of whom may not be
active supporters of the occupation.
Unfortunately this is unavoidable and,
given the continuing complicity of
Israeli academia in general with the
occupation, necessary. Shahid Alam
has put forth this point accurately and
succinctly: “I believe it is reasonable and
moral to impose temporary and partial
limits on the academic freedom of a few
Israelis if this can help to restore the
fundamental rights of millions of
Palestinians.”10
When it comes to hurting the “wrong
people,” the most notable cases are
those relatively few heroic Israeli
academics who have put their careers
on the line to stand up against the
injustice of their country’s colonial
policies. For example, there is Ilan
Pappe. Pappe is a well published
instructor who, until recently, was
attached to Department of Political
Science at Haifa University. He is
strong and vocal supporter of justice for
the Palestinians and advocate for
political reform in Israel. Here is what
Professor Pappe says about the need for
a boycott of Israel: “It is a call from the
inside to the outside to exert economic
and cultural pressure on the Jewish
 45
state so as to bring home the message
that there is a price tag attached to the
continuation of the occupation.” The
academic boycott makes sense to Pappe
as “part of the overall campaign for
external pressure.” He continues,
“Within such a call, it makes no sense
for an activist like myself to call on
sanctions or pressure on business,
factories, cultural festivals, etc. while
demanding immunity for my own peers
and sphere of activity – academia.”11
Professor Pappe understands that he
may also be hurt by such a boycott, but
he recognizes that the sacrifice is
necessary given the horrible situation
we now find ourselves in.
In the end, the anti-boycott focus on
individuals just creates a red-herring
that deflects attention away from the
larger, and more important, issue. As
Pappe indicates, individual Israelis (and
their academic institutions) simply
cannot abstract themselves from that
larger issue. Israel is their country.
Olmert, Sharon, Natanyahu, Barak,
Begin, Shamir, etc. were and are their
Prime Ministers. The only Prime
Minister to take tentative steps in the
direction of a just peace, Yitzhak Rabin,
was assassinated. Clearly, the
Occupation is their collective sin. Those,
on the outside who support the boycott,
understand present day Israel for what
it really is – a society that has
institutionalized discriminatory policies,
created de facto first, second, and third
class citizenship categories and has, for
forty years now, maintained policies of
occupation and colonization that have
systematically destroyed Palestinian
society. As a consequence, Israeli
academic, cultural and sports
institutions (and their employees) will
now themselves become relatively more
isolated. If they find this uncomfortable,
there is always an escape route: pay
heed to Professors Pappe, Rinehart and
others who point to the horror Israel is
causing others and act to change the
situation.
Argument 3: Academic Freedom - The
boycott violates the principle of
academic freedom and as such is
unacceptable.
The boycott’s impingement on the
academic freedom of Israeli scholars has
been repeatedly condemned. It has
been called “contemptible,” “
hypocritical,” and “an unacceptable
breakdown in the norms of intellectual
freedom” (these terms have not been
applied by these same critics to the
destruction of Palestinian academic
freedom). For simplicity sake, let us
work from the statement of Dena S.
Davis, a law professor at Cleveland
State University, published in the
Chronicle of Higher Education on April 18,
2003. Davis writes that “Academic
boycotts undermine the basic premise of
intellectual life that ideas make a
difference, and the corollary that
intellectual exchanges across cultures
can open minds.”12 Unfortunately, there
is nothing necessary about the
assumption that the “difference” ideas
make results in a more humane world
or more humane outlooks. Thus, it is not
only positive ideas that can make a
difference. As noted above, Israeli
Zionists (be they academics or
politicians, cultural leaders,
businessmen, etc.), have been
interacting with the world outside of
Israel since 1948. This sharing of ideas
with the outside has made no positive
difference in the evolution of Zionist
oppression against both Palestinians
 46
inside and outside of Israel proper.
However, it may very well have made a
negative difference and prolonged and
deepened Israeli injustice in this regard.
Free communication on the part of
Zionists has allowed them to build solid
support within the American population
and its politicians based on racist
stereotyping of Arabs generally and
Palestinians in particular, as well as the
correspondingly gross over-idealization
of the Zionist movement and its results.
Thus, historically, unimpaired
‘intellectual life’ and ‘exchanges across
cultures’ have not only failed to lead to
the humanization of Zionism or its
policies but have led to the corruption of
the political establishment in
Washington, D.C.13
This makes problematic the claim that
academic freedom somehow operates in
a vacuum and, in and of itself, always
leads to the good, or the betterment of
the world. Nonetheless, supporters of the
boycott agree that its opposite, the
obstruction of the “free flow of ideas” ought
to be undertaken only in extreme
circumstances. Unfortunately, that is
exactly the situation successive Israeli
governments have brought about. Keeping
to the realm of academia, proof of the
severity of the situation (and the
hypocrisy of anti-boycott critics in their
failure to face up to it) can be found in
the condition of academic life in the
Occupied Territories.14 Here, Israel’s
illegal occupation has destroyed
intellectual life for the Palestinians. The
practice of “exchanging visits” and
“talking to each other,” such as it has
been over the last 40 years, on the part
of Israeli academics have not produced
the courage or insight to stand up and
protest this destruction. If Israeli
academics are truly interested in
academic freedom as a valuable
principle they should be claiming for
the Palestinians the same rights of
academic freedom they claim for
themselves. Their pointed failure to do
so makes them subject to the general
boycott of Israel that is now evolving as
a consequence of Israeli policies.
Not taking Israelis policies into
consideration is one of the more obvious
weak links in the hew and cry over the
boycott coming from a wide range of
well placed Israelis and Europeans,
ranging from politicians to university
presidents.15 Like the vast majority of
Israeli academics, none of them has
ever raised their voices over the
destruction of Palestinian academic
freedom at the hands of the Israeli
occupation. Only when it is Israeli
academics who are under threat of
boycott do these academic knights
mount their horses and take up their
shields. As Margaret Pappano of
Queens University in Ontario has
observed, “you cannot let decades of
gross injustices to one side pass and
then suddenly leap to the defense of the
other side without implicating yourself
in a political position.”16 Those who
now want to make an issue over
academic freedom for Israelis have got
to explain where they have been for the
past forty years of attacks on Palestinian
education in the Occupied Territories.
Argument 4: Inconsistency - The
boycott adherents unfairly single out
Israel while ignoring all other military
occupations in places such as Tibet,
Chechnya, etc.
How do those who claim that boycott
supporters are ‘picking’ on Israel know
that they also ignore the behavior of the
Chinese in Tibet, Russians in Chechnya,
 47
Americans in Iraq, and so on? Boycott
supporters are generally not one issue
people and many of us do support well
intentioned efforts to isolate other
oppressive regimes beyond that of
Israel. However, for a good number of
those who support this boycott the
struggle against Israeli occupation is a
high priority. There are a number of
reasons for this.
First, many of us, Jews, Muslims,
Christians, or non-denominational
Americans, Europeans, and others, feel a
special affinity for Israeli/Palestine. We
all have emotional, cultural, or religious
ties to the Holy Land, even the non-
religious among us. What the Zionists
refuse to acknowledge is that the place
their mythology makes special for them,
is also special to a lot of other folks
based on other interpretations of the
same myth and other forms of oral and
written tradition as well.
Second, one can argue that just because
other nations behave badly does not let
the Israelis off the hook. After all, the
Israelis now have the dubious
distinction of running the longest post-
WWII occupation in the world. There is no
reason why boycott supporters should
not start with the problem that has
persisted longest and then work
backwards.
Third, and most importantly, the Israeli-
Palestinian crisis can be seen as more
politically important for citizens of the
Western nations than other
contemporary crises and examples of
oppression. This is because Zionist
influence spreads far beyond Israel’s area of
dominion, and now negatively influences the
formulation of Middle East foreign policy in
the West. In other words, unlike the
Chinese, Russians, and other oppressive
regimes, the Israelis and their
supporters directly influence (in what
we feel is a corrupting way) the policy
makers of our own countries. Thus their
actions have import beyond the
Occupied Territories and potentially
affect the lives of ordinary citizens of
most Western nations. This particularly
obvious in the case of United States
where for the last sixty years the
American treasury has been utilized as a
bottomless well of “charity” for the
Zionist state. In the United States
Zionist lobbies are extremely powerful
with both political parties, Congress and
the media. George W. Bush’s his neo-
conservative advisers actually see Israel
and its illegal, aggressive behavior as a
model for their own policies.17
Argument 5: Giving Comfort to
Terrorists – The boycott of Israel
ignores the (alleged) facts that (A) the
Israeli army is in the Occupied
Territories as an act of self-defense
against suicide bombers and other
terrorists and (B) boycott efforts only
encourage and lend comfort to these
terrorists.
(A) It is highly questionable whether the
Israeli army is in the Occupied
Territories to protect Israel from
terrorists. Much more likely is the
proposition that the IDF is in the
Occupied Territories to protect Israel’s
colonial settlers who, in turn, are in the
Occupied Territories to possess
“Judea,” “Samaria.” To this end, the
IDF is also in the Occupied Territories to
prevent the creation of a viable
Palestinian state. It is these acts of
possession and prevention which
produce Palestinian resistence in all its
forms.
 48
It should be obvious to anyone not
ideologically blinded or misled by a self-
censoring Western press that forty years
of land confiscation, destruction of
crops, houses, and other Palestinian
property, the destruction of Palestinian
civil society to a point that now
approaches cultural genocide, the
construction of illegal colonies, and the
importation of 100,000s of illegal settlers
are not “acts of self-defense.” On the
other hand, one can reasonably define
resistence to these actions on the part of
the Palestinians (the major part of which
has been relatively non-violent but
unreported) as in fact acts of self-
defense. The international community
through the actions of the United
Nations, the International Criminal
Court and the testimony of respected
world leaders, has made it quite clear
that Israeli occupation constitutes an on-
going case of severe injustice. To cite but
one example, Archbishop Desmond
Tutu, a man who certainly knows
injustice when he sees it, recently
declared, “I have been very deeply
distressed in my visit to the Holy Land;
it reminded me so much of what
happened to us black people in South
Africa. I have seen the humiliation of the
Palestinians at checkpoints and
roadblocks, suffering like us when
young white police officers prevented us
from moving about.” He goes on to
condemn the general dispossession of
the Palestinians on both sides of the
Green Line.18 And then Jimmy Carter’s
latest book on the Middle East has
demonstrated that what stands in the
way of peace is Israeli apartheid.
(B) The charge that boycott efforts
encourage or lend comfort to terrorists is
entirely ad hoc. How do those who
make these claims know that they are
true? In fact, it is quite possible that, as
Shahid Alam has suggested, the boycott,
functioning as a manifestation of “world
conscience,” can “mitigate the
Palestinian’s deep despair”and
hopefully lead to a reduction of violence
of both the “colonizer and the
colonized.”19 In any case, it bears
repeating that the boycott represents a
non-violent alternative route to oppose
a regime which many people outside of
Israel see as itself terrorist.
Conclusion
Israeli goals in the occupied territories
have always aimed at possession and
absorption of these lands. Israeli
behavior, colonialist and oppressive,
follows from this fact. One can verify
this for oneself by going to any of the
human rights organizations that
document Israeli policy in the
territories, including Israeli
organizations, and simply trace the
actions of the occupier from 1967
onward. With the advent of the Sharon
government and its successors the scale
of destruction and brutality has risen to
new and shocking levels. As Ilan Pappe
has observed, under the leadership of
Israel’s most recent Prime Ministers the
occupation has become “a horror story
of abuse and callousness ....The trend is
for worse to come, with a sense of an
Israeli government that feels it has a
‘green light’ from the United States to
do whatever it wishes in the occupied
territories.”
These Israeli leaders have been put into
power by an overwhelming majority of
Israelis. For instance, in the election of
February 2001 Ariel Sharon received
62% of ballots cast. In the January 2003
election the Israeli public reconfirmed
 49
their allegiance to radical right wing
parties, by once more putting these
forces in command of the government.
After Sharon’s unexpected death the
Israeli citizenry chose as their leaders
the close associates of Sharon. What this
electoral history indicates is that the
majority of Israelis are either unwilling
or unable to understand the real origins
of their own insecurity and the nature of
the occupation.
It is under these circumstances that
outside pressure becomes the only
viable way of encouraging change in
Israel. Under normal circumstances one
would look to the government of the
United States, Israel’s ally and patron, to
apply the necessary pressure. However,
we all know that American leaders are
operating under the same delusions as
those of Israel as to the nature of and
reasons for the occupation. For instance,
the prospect of changing the perceptions
of the U.S. Congress on this issue is even
less likely than dislodging the
expansionists form power in Jerusalem.
This leaves us with the strategy of a
grassroots, international movement to
boycott Israel at all possible levels:
economic, cultural, and academic. Those
of us who support this effort are proud
of our stand and convinced of its just
nature and necessity. And, as this
detailed article attests, we are willing to
defend it against all who would
question its validity or the motives of its
participants.
Notes
2. Http://www.pjpo.org?letter_taraki.html
3. Taking just the year 2003 we find that
American Zionist groups have launched
their own targeted boycotts of the New
York Times, Chicago Tribune, San Francisco
Chronicle, and Los Angeles Times, when
they believed that those newspapers gave
too much attention to the Palestinians.
http://www.jewishpeacethread.com/http:
//www.jfjfp.org/http://www.jewsagainstt
heoccupation.org./
5. “Israelis Feel The Boycott Sting: Creeping
Sense of Isolation as Culture, Economy
takes hits”
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi_bin/article.cgi
?file=chronile/archive/2002/08/06/mn337
09.dtl
6. Ha’aretz supplement in English, 16 May
2003
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/sh
art.jhtml?itemno=293793
7. Z net, 4 February 2003
http://www.Zmag.org/content/print_artic
le.cfm?itemID=2961&sectionID=22
8. Making reference to the boycott, Tim
Shallice, professor at the Institute of
Cognitive Neuroscience, University
College, London observed, “Are
mainstream [academic and] science
organizations in Israel sponsoring fact-
finding commissions over Jenin? Are they
publishing detailed analyses of what has
been happening over the last 18 months in
the Occupied Territories? Are they making
clear the long-term dangers of colonist
policies? If the answer to these questions is
Yes, then I am wrong to sign [on].”
Http://www.pjpo.org/letter_Shallice.html
9. “No one has of course mention anything
about Palestinian freedom of inquiry and
the sanctity of the Palestinian academy in
this raging debate. What I have to say
about this is particularly relevant to Israeli
academics, since the vast majority of them
have been carrying on their business as
usual for the past 35 years oblivious to what
is happening to their Palestinian
counterparts, not to mention to the
Palestinian nation as a whole.” Lisa Taraki,
Lecturer at Birzeit University in the West
Bank.
Http://www.pjpo.org/letter_taraki.html
10. M. Shahid Alam, “The Academic
Boycott of Israel,”
 50

http://www.counterpunch.org/alam0731.h
tml
11. Ilan Pappe, “Arguments in Favor of the
Boycott,” http://www.solidarite-
palestine.org/rdp-int-030131-html
12. Chronicle of Higher Education, 18 April
2003, p. B13
13. It is to be noted that those few very
brave Israelis, both academic and non-
academic, who have taken a stand against
such policies have not done so because they
had access to foreign academics or
foreigners per se.
14. These conditions are well documented at
Birzeit University’s Right To Education
website,
ADVANCE \d
4http://right2edu.birzeit.edu
15. A partial list of university presidents
who have recently raised their voices
against the boycott includes Gilles Patry,
University in Ottawa; Amy Guttman,
University of Pennsylvania; John Casteen,
University of Virginia; Lee Bollinger,
Columbia University; Karen Hitchcock,
Queens University in Ontario; Chancellor
Robert Birgeneau, University of California
at Berkeley; Principle Heather Munroe-
Blum, McGill University in Montreal; and
David Skorton, Cornell University.
16. “The Ivory Tower Behind the Apartheid
Wall,” posted at
http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article7124
.shtml
17. This position is convincingly argued by
Melani McAlister in her book Epic
Encounters: Culture, Media, and U.S.
Interests in the Middle East 1945-2000
(University of California Press, 2001). See
also Michael Lind, “The Weird Men Behind
George Bush” (New Statesman, 7 April
2003)
18. The Guardian, 29 April 2003
19. Shahid Alam, ibid.
Posted at:
http://www.logosjournal.com/issue_6.3/d
avidson.htm