INSS-BICOM Professional Workshop

The following paper has been produced following expert workshops hosted by INSS and

BICOM in Tel Aviv on June 11th, 2015. The workshops drew on experiences from the UK as a

case study, but the aim was to draw out principles that are generalizable across Western

The BDS campaign against Israel is a global movement that was popularized in 2005

following a Palestinian Civil Society Call for Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) against

Israel. This call is a concerted attempt to impose a pariah status on Israel, ex-communicating

and out-casting it from the international community. The movement, which comprises of

over 170 Palestinian organizations, defines its campaign as nonviolent. It urges Israel to end

the occupation of all Arab lands; recognize the rights of Arab citizens of Israel to full equality;

and promote the rights of Palestinian refugees to return to their homes as stipulated in UN

In the UK, BDS activities include vocal demonstrations and protests in campuses, shops

selling Israeli goods, etc. In addition, BDS activists, who are usually highly active political

individuals, also use democratic structures of membership and representative bodies to pass

boycott or divestment policy motions, e.g. in political parties, trade unions, co-ops student

unions, NGOs and sometimes faith groups.

Despite the ongoing BDS campaign, Israel's overall trade with Western states has not been

impacted and boycott resolutions advanced by students groups have not been officially

adopted by universities. It is difficult however to measure the extent to which there is quiet

divestment – such as companies and investors that are thinking twice about doing business

in Israel for fear of attracting public condemnation, or artists and conference organizers who

are hesitant to host Israelis or perform in Israel.

Moreover, BDS and the ensuing delegitimization of Israel pose a strategic threat to Israel in

the long run because of their impact on the middle-ground. Through concerted and

methodological campaigns Israel is equated with apartheid, genocide, ethnic cleansing and

everything evil, which liberal, human-rights conscious individuals believe they should stand

against. One of the most troubling elements of the phenomenon is that criticism over Israeli

policies transforms into a questioning of Israel's very right to exist, unlike in the case of

criticism directed at other states (such as China, Iran, Sudan etc.)

The anti-Israel sentiments of public opinion might have only a limited impact on the official

establishment for the time being, but this gap is not sustainable over time. In the South

African case which the BDS struggle is modeled after, both President Reagan and PM

2) Factors which contribute to Israel's deteriorating international legitimacy

The substantial framework

 The conflict is not framed as a political conflict between two parties with conflicting

claims, but as a conflict of justice and of basic human rights. The Palestinians are

presented to have just demands for the fulfilment of their fundamental right of selfdetermination

which Israel does not respect. With this framing international

expectations are made only towards Israel.

 Israel's legitimation is based on the partition of the land into an Israeli and a

Palestinian state. If Israel does not acknowledge the threshold issue of the two

states for two peoples then its own right to exist is undermined.

 The right of the Jews in Israel is seen as conditional: the Jewish people are here as a

compensation for their suffering but that right ceases to exist when the Jewish

people inflict suffering upon another people.

 Israel lacks credibility as for its commitment to reach a peaceful resolution of the

conflict, through the implementation of the two-state solution.

 There is a need to have a non-violent option of opposing the Israeli occupation and

BDS actions serve this function.

 Israel appears to flout its obligations under international law as exemplified by its

disregard for UN resolutions (mainly of the UNHRC and UNGA); International Court

of Justice opinions (the "Separation Wall advisory opinion"), and reports by official

UN rapporteurs and NGOs. Israel's lack of cooperation with UN representatives and

bodies commissioned to draft these reports also serves as substantiation for these

 Israel as a ‘Jewish State’ is severely misunderstood internationally and creates

doubts regarding Israel's democratic values, especially with regard to the status of

 Antisemitism plays an implicit role in the anti-Israel campaign. In some cases

Antisemitism is translated or manifested as anti-Zionism.

 Israel faces disproportionate media coverage, both in quantitative terms (e.g. the

number of journalists covering Israel, stories filed, length), and in qualitative terms,

i.e. every Israeli problem, perceived or real, is magnified out of proportion. Much

media coverage of Israel is prejudicial, as indicated by three prongs: singling out,

implying double standards and almost always finding the target (i.e. Israel) guilty.

 Images of conflict which pour out of Gaza are powerful in shaping the perception of

a mighty Israel vs. a weak Palestine (images of Israel as David and Arabs as Goliath

 Information Technology (IT) and social media play a central role in amplifying

3)  Irresponsible rhetoric from Israeli position-holders, even if aimed at local audiences,

 While the Palestinian narrative is clear and evocative (i.e. Palestinian dispossession,

‘settlements’ and ‘occupation’ have been injected into mainstream discourse), there

is no clear and coherent Israeli narrative.

 There has been an intellectual framing of Zionism as racism, apartheid, and

ethnocracy, whereas counter arguments lack depth and succumb to presenting

bullet points instead of serious arguments. This ‘bullet pointing’ and shortening

should come in the context of a coherent intellectual framework

 Only by being unimpeachable on commitment to two states and democracy can

Israel buy leverage and political space to attack the other side as being nondemocratic

 Absence of negotiations with the Palestinians makes a counter response to BDS

 Labelling anti-Israeli statements and actions as anti-Semitism weakens Israeli

 It is necessary to distinguish between relevant and legitimate criticism – from which

The credibility of the claim that the State of Israel is liberal, democratic, and committed to a

negotiated two-state solution, is integral to the ability of Israel and its supporters to

promote Israel’s legitimacy as the nation state of the Jewish people and to marginalise the

BDS activists, by exposing their ambivalence to a two-state solution and their weak

democratic credentials. Actions which undermine this claim, whether by statements,

legislation or actual actions on the ground are fuel for BDS activists, and undercut Israel’s

1. Israel should establish an official government counter-BDS centre under one

ministry headed by a senior figure. This government structure will be responsible for

ongoing monitoring and evaluating of the threat, and for fleshing out a long term

strategy to deal with BDS on both strategic and tactical levels incorporating tools

such as public diplomacy. Such a government centre will also be a place of guidance

for ministers and other position holders on how to respond to BDS development,

playing a role in sensitizing politicians to messages they communicate both to local

2. Government research and consultation should be conducted to engage the network

of pro-Israel activists and groups around the world regarding how the Government

of Israel can best utilize their capabilities and support on the one hand, and assist

3. A civil society non-government centre monitoring relevant developments in BDS and

tracking counter efforts should be established. This centre will disseminate best

practices and other relevant information regarding BDS-related developments to

organizations working on countering BDS worldwide, with a view to promote

4. BDS is a civil society initiative and it should thus be countered on the ground by

Israeli and global civil society efforts. The first circle of defence against BDS is the

Jewish (and other pro-Israeli) communities across the globe. Such communities

should be proactively engaged by Israel. Particular efforts need to be channelled to

cultivating the younger generation which feels a growing apathy towards Israel and

is less willing to be at the forefront of BDS counter-efforts. Simultaneously

supportive non-Jewish groups abroad should be encouraged, based on the rationale

that claims in support of Israel made by this constituency resonate most.

5. Critics of Israeli policy, who are supportive of the right of Israel to exist, should be

harnessed to join the fight against the delegitimizers of Israel who oppose the right

of Israel to exist. This should be done by conducting a dialogue between such critics

and Israeli policy makers, as well as NGOs supporting Israel, in which different

6. Establishing projects of public diplomacy and ‘soft power’ should be considered. For

example, creating an Israeli equivalent based on the model of the British Council.

(The British Council is a UK publicly funded charity with offices in 100 countries

7. The establishment of a neutral, non-Jewish body should be promoted on campuses

with the aim of hampering BDS aggressive campaigns by monitoring student conduct

and debates; ensuring academic freedom; eliminating a threatening environment for

all students; promoting freedom of speech and a dignified, civil discourse as well as

8. Efforts should be made to identify BDS plans to conduct activities in trade unions

and other organizations, as well as BDS action-plans on campuses. Based on the

knowledge of such intentions, there should be a counter plan to insert pro-Israel

(not necessarily Jewish) activists and activities that will focus on preventing anti-

Israel resolutions (based on substantial arguments regarding prejudice or

9. Counter-BDS activities should be based on the determination of the best approach

to the given case, made in conjunction with the local counter-BDS activists, and not

10. The funding of BDS should be investigated (particularly by the Israeli establishment)

in order to expose connections to hostile forces or official foreign government

funding, with the end goal of reducing BDS financial resources.

11. Israel needs to unmask what BDS proponents really think, emphasizing that they are

not democrats, and do not endorse the two-state solution, thereby splitting the

12. It is useful to emphasize that supporting BDS runs counter to the aim of reaching a

peaceful resolution of the conflict, since it weakens the moderates and strengthens

13. Israel needs academic counter-research to address international developments in

terms of understanding the Israeli narrative and especially the complexity of the

Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Such an intellectual infrastructure should counter the

anti-Zionist intellectual work which the de-legitimization campaign bases itself upon.

As such, the intellectual counter-BDS effort should be easily accessible to the public

at-large. An example of this would be a project for the study of contemporary

antizionism, webcasts, conferences, a book series and academic courses. Such an

academic infrastructure will contribute towards constructing an intellectual firewall

between legitimate criticism of Israel and de-legitimization; and to building a

political firewall between fringe and mainstream through normalising criticism of

14. Prejudice towards Israel needs to be exposed and there should be a clear demand to

deal with it as with any other case of discrimination or prejudice (without focusing

15. Israel government communications must be framed and conveyed, in terms of style,

messaging, language, emphasis, etc., taking into account the target audience. When

targeting moderate minds in the centre ground it is important to convey, in both

tone and substance, the meta-message that Israel is a mature and responsible

liberal democracy. Aggressive militaristic messages or insinuations that Jews or

16. Israel needs to frame its positions in a way that explains the compatibility of its

position with international law and human rights, making the case that both Arabs

17. Individual relationships are crucial for shaping perceptions about Israel. The most

effective counter efforts have proven to be one-on-one exchange programs which

bring foreign academics, journalists, students, politicians, and so forth to Israel. In

addition sending supporters of Israel to participate in conferences abroad, making

the case for Israel across international platforms, is useful too.