Ben & Jerry’s joins long list of failed Israel ‘boycotts’ – ANALYSIS

It remains to be seen whether this is a corporate virtue sign or if anything actually changes. Will people have to smuggle ice cream across the Green Line? What about the treasured flavors for pint-loving Palestinians? None of this is obvious, and with people being asked to continue supporting the local company that makes the product, the only real impact so far has been scrambling on social media. Is this decision a victory for a movement that seeks to boycott Israel – and what has that movement achieved over the past decades?

The desire to boycott Israel has existed since the country’s creation in 1948. This has manifested itself in many ways, most notably the refusal of many countries to recognize the Jewish state. He has done many things over the years, such as trying to criminalize trade with Israel or even using oil production as a weapon to threaten America after the 1973 war, for Israel. Complaining about Western support.

It appeared to be effective in some ways during the Cold War. The so-called “non-aligned” movement was often hostile to Israel, which lost friends in places in Africa and Iran as a friend after the 1979 Islamic Revolution.

However, for the most part, that serious attempt to boycott Israel and even to blockade and influence Western Chancery failed after the end of the Cold War.
In 2016, Israel and Russia completed 25 years of the restoration of ties, and in 2017, Israel and India celebrated 25 years of ties. The new normalization relates to the Gulf, called the Abrahamic Agreement, and new relations with Morocco and Sudan show that Israel is not isolated.

But that doesn’t mean all is well. United Nations World Conference Against Racism (WCAR), an important international event that took place in Durban, South Africa in 2001, showed how much hatred is towards Israel. It was hijacked by several countries, mostly from the Islamic world, and used against the Jewish state. We have seen this kind of extremism from time to time, such as the anti-Semitic rant by former Malaysian leader Mahathir Mohamad, and also extremism that comes from Turkey. However, evidence suggests that Turkey-Israeli trade continues despite the rhetoric.

Then, what is left of the “boycott” movement is mostly a few privileged activists in the West, who are responsible for things like “boycott”Boycott, disinvestment and sanctionsOr called BDS. Over the years, there have been a number of high-profile campaigns by these groups to advance efforts toward their boycott goals, but it is unclear whether any of these efforts have been successful. The United Nations released a list of 112 companies with “ties” to Israeli settlements in 2020 – and the European Union, for example, has sought to label goods produced on the Green Line, which is the number of Israeli settlements. goods produced in. But few goods are produced there, as the little secret of Israel’s role in the West Bank is that its economy is not very large. Back in 2004, the BDS movement targeted Soda Stream to operate a plant in Misor Adumim. But most of these boycott campaigns, including some limited disinvestment, have been deemed a failure.

There may even be an elephant in the room. “the more [term] becomes part of the mainstream, the more difficult it will be for companies and investment review agencies to physically separate what is happening in Israel with its activities in the occupied territory,” says Michael Link, for Human The UN Special Rapporteur on the State of Rights in the Palestinian Territories recently told Reuters. Indeed, large human rights groups have recently been claiming that all areas under Israeli control are “apartheid”, not just Israel in the West Bank. This is, apparently, an attempt to harmonize with the extremist Palestinian rhetoric of “river to sea”. It also coincides with “one-state”-pro-activists in the West, of which a handful people are involved.

Given the fact that the targets of many extremist activists do not conform to international law and logic, the real consequences of the boycott have been underestimated. That’s because supporters of these boycotts don’t really just want to isolate Israeli settlements—they aim to eradicate Israel, along with “one-state” activists and “river-to-sea” campaigners. Considering this much – and thinking that they will achieve some sort of “South Africa model” in relation to Israel – they seem to be missing out on the overall conflict. Similarly, the pro-Israel voices that make Comments suggest this is not appropriate That an ice cream company will not sell in the West Bank but will sell in Syria tends to miss the message. War-torn Syria is almost a failed state. Comparison is pointless. Syria is isolated and under sanctions. The argument that it portrays as unfair that Israel is not treated like Iran, Syria and North Korea is when one asks whether pro-Israel activists would prefer that companies decide to woo Israel with these regimes. Do it. How will this help Israel? That’s precisely because the Jewish state is one of the most successful countries in the world, a global partner for trade and investment that produces world-changing technology, and some people wonder if they can support the Israeli government in some way. pressure to move forward on peace with the Palestinians. Why boycott? The boycott does not work against Iran, North Korea and the Syrian regime because, for the most part, they have already been boycotted. Iran has to refurbish older Boeing 747s, C-130s and F-14s because, since the 1970s, it often cannot buy new aircraft from the West. Meanwhile, Israel is flying the latest F-35s. If someone wants to ask whether the “outcast” achieved anything, just look at those realities.