THE Palestinian newspaper Al-Hayat al-Jadidah on 2 June praised the decision of the UCU trade union to discuss in every one of its branches a boycott of the Israeli universities.
The article asked: ‘Which is more useful and better serves the Palestinian cause and even the Arab and Muslim causes at this stage?
‘Is it extremism or rationalism; haste or careful deliberation; flying in the world of speeches and rhetoric or walking on the ground of reality and facing its challenges; or lastly, is it shelling with the water-pipe missiles that mostly hit nothing but glass, or taking bold decisions that end the delusion before the violence, which always rebounds onto us and always claims scores of victims and destroys houses?
‘In this context, what is truly more useful? Is it, for instance, the kidnapping of the British journalist Alan Johnston by the so-called Army of Islam in Gaza or the academic boycott of Israel by British academicians?
‘As we know, that decision is not new, for it was taken two years ago. However, the congress of the Union of Universities and Institutes in Britain, which includes 120,000 members, last week adopted the boycott decision that had been originally adopted in 2005 by the Institution of University Professors in Britain.
‘The boycott decision was made and has now been renewed in protest against the Israeli academics’ connivance with and defence of the Israeli occupation of the Palestinian territories.
‘Of course, the decision is not all that simple. It is a high calibre decision that, in my view, equals the entire “Al-Qassam missile” arsenal, or more.
‘It is not because Israel strongly protested against the decision, but because it provides the beginnings of the “moral isolation” of Israel. It is what the Palestinian cause needs most during this stage in order to restore some of its esteem and moral sanctity, which was brought down by the street wars in Gaza.
‘Indeed, which is more useful to the Palestinian cause? Is it the decision by the British academicians or the kidnapping of British journalist Alan Johnston, for whose immediate release our calls – we the powerless – equal the call of the prime minister?
‘In this context it is necessary to wonder: If the prime minister and other officials are making the same calls as us, what should we be doing? If the official is demanding exactly what we are demanding, then why is he in a position of responsibility?
‘The official is the decision-maker and has the authority to implement the decision. The security organs are under his control. Alan Johnston was kidnapped by a group calling itself the Army of Islam and the whole of Gaza knows the group.
‘Therefore, why is Johnston still in the hands of this group? Will the prime minister’s call, his mere call alone, be helpful in releasing him?
‘Thousands of posters and leaflets and hundreds of articles have been demanding and continue to demand his release; but the “Army of Islam” still does not heed or read, or at least it appears not to, as its demands for opening the fortified borderlines have not yet been realised!
‘Lastly, why the use of this name – I mean the Army of Islam – which during the glorious ages conquered the east and west corners of the globe? Does it stoop this low nowadays that it cannot but open more predicaments for us? It has no more chivalry than to kidnap a powerless man… Is this how the Army of Islam should be, with its equivalent there in Nahr al-Barid, Fatah al-Islam, and their likes beyond in Baghdad, such as the Badr Forces and Al-Mahdi Army?
‘This is in addition to the rest of the militias that, all in the name of Islam, engage in self-fighting and stab only themselves.
‘Thank you to the British academicians who have reminded us of what correct action is and how useful it is when it is genuine, sincere, and not beyond reality and its facts.’
The UCU decision has caused consternation in Israel especially as a group of doctors have taken up the call and UNISON is to discuss and vote on a boycott motion at is summer annual conference in mid-June.
Israeli ministers last Sunday voiced concern over the development.
‘This is an extremely worrying issue,’ Trade and Industry Minister Eli Yishai said.
Welfare Minister Isaac Herzog said there was ‘an active Muslim minority joining forces with left-wing elements in the British public’.
Following the lecturers’ move, one of Britain’s largest trade unions Unison is due to vote on a resolution at its annual conference later this month calling for a boycott of Israel.
While the academics’ boycott is of mostly symbolic importance, trade sanctions could have a powerful and significant impact on economic ties between Britain and Israel, Israeli ministers warned.
Yishai said he would hold a special meeting to discuss the implication of such a boycott on Israeli industry and trade agreements, and Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni said that she had called for a ministerial meeting to weigh Israel’s response.
‘Even if we are dealing with marginal academic elements and ideas that repeat themselves, Israel must act decisively,’ she said.
In April, Britain’s National Union of Journalists voted in favour of a boycott of Israeli goods and demanded government and UN sanctions against Israel, a move blasted by the governments of both Britain and Israel.
Meanwhile, more than 100 British doctors have called for a boycott of the Israeli Medical Association.
The idea also draws support from many who are optimistic that the move would work inside Israel the way it had worked before with South Africa’s apartheid regime.
UNISON, the civil servants union, is due to discuss the boycott measure at its annual conference on June 19-22. If enacted, it could have serious economic consequences, as the 1.5 million-member union has considerable economic clout.
A group of 130 British doctors have called for a boycott of the Israel Medical Association and its expulsion from the World Medical Association.
In a letter to The Guardian newspaper in England last week the physicians, headed by Dr Derek Summerfield and Professor Colin Green claimed ‘Persistent violations of medical ethics have accompanied Israel’s occupation.’
Outlining how they believe the Israeli Defence Force has ‘systematically flouted the fourth Geneva convention guaranteeing a civilian population unfettered access to medical services and immunity for medical staff’, the letter blamed Israel for destroying ‘any coherence in the (Palestinian) primary health system’.
The doctors then claimed the IMA has ‘refused’ to protest about ‘war crimes’ something, the doctors said they believe it ‘has a duty’ to do.
The letter compared Israel to apartheid South Africa.
‘We are calling for a boycott of the Israeli Medical Association and its expulsion from the WMA. There is a precedent for this: the expulsion of the Medical Association of South Africa during the apartheid era,’ it read.
‘A boycott is an ethical and moral imperative when conventional channels do not function, for otherwise we are merely turning away,’ the doctors added.
Mary McGuire, a spokeswoman for Unison has confirmed that a resolution calling for a boycott had been placed on the agenda for the group’s annual national conference starting on June 19.
The proposal to be debated at the conference says, ‘Unison believes the appropriate response is to support the growing international moves towards a union-based campaign of boycott and sanctions against Israeli institutions, in line with the call from over 170 Palestinian civil society organisations including the Palestine General Federation of Trade Unions and individual unions and labour collectives.’
In a preamble, the motion ‘notes that, during 2006, Israel invaded Lebanon and Gaza, withheld tax revenues from the Palestine Authority and refused dialogue with the elected Authority following the democratic elections of January 2006, resealed the borders of Gaza, expanded illegal settlements in the West Bank, and continued the construction of the illegal Apartheid Wall.’
It accused the government of Prime Minister Tony Blair of adopting ‘a consistent stand in support of the Israeli government throughout the shameful events of 2006, even joining the US in failing to call for a cease-fire amidst worldwide condemnation of the Israeli invasion of Lebanon.’
The motion suggested that the union discuss the kinds of economic ties its members have with Israel and Israeli companies, and highlight the scope of a potential consumer boycott.
News Line supports a trade, cultural, and academic boycott of Israel as an essential support for the armed struggle of the Palestinian masses to liberate their homeland from the occupiers.
We are for the establishment of a secular socialist Palestinian state on all of the Palestinian territories occupied in 1948 and 1967, with Jerusalem as its capital, and with all refugees having the right to return, in which Arabs, Jews and Christians will live side by side.