If we needed any more evidence that BDS represents the propaganda arm of a war movement (vs. it’s ridiculous self-characterization as a “peace movement,”) the last week’s escalating conflict along the Gaza/Israel border should put the true nature of BDS into proper context.
First, one must realize that the battles being waged today were absolutely, 100% inevitable given Hamas’ ability to rearm and its decision to carry on terror and missile attacks at all cost, regardless of what that might mean to the civilian population its hold captive in the Gaza Strip.
When the last major Israel operation in Gaza ended in 2009 with a cease fire, the usual promises were made by the UN and other international parties (as they were with regard to Lebanon three years earlier) that steps would be taken to ensure the missile buildups and/or missile firing that ensured the original conflict would be brought to heel. And, needless to say, nothing was done as Hamas (like Hezbollah in Lebanon) obtained more missiles with longer ranges, and insisted they would fire them off at the earliest opportunity (one of the few promises they actually kept).
All during this period, when arms were built up and when missile and terror attacks continued unabated (albeit at a low enough level to avoid a massive Israeli response), those “Friends of the Palestinian People” represented by the BDS “movement,” managed to hold their tongues.
Sure, when pressed into a corner, they could be counted on to issue some mealy-mouthed “of course terror attacks and missile fire are unjustified, BUT what do you expect given Israel’s Apartheid-y nature and war crimes!” Yet despite allegedly representing “Palestinian civil society,” these BDSers could never manage even the merest squeak to the warlords of Gaza that perhaps, just perhaps, these leader’s irresponsible behavior might lead to needless deaths among the Palestinians the boycotters endlessly claim to represent.
Abroad (including here in the US), silence in the face of a weapons build-up and terror planning and execution became the norm, except to laugh off Israeli “paranoia” over the fact that someone was firing hundreds of missiles into their country (an act of war under any possible definition of the term). BDSers gathered at U Penn and Harvard just this year, trotting out the usual self-serving history and emotive testimony, all while the Palestinians they constantly tell us they care so much about were being put in harm’s way by a Gaza leadership committed to battle (regardless of the cost).
We saw this same pattern in Lebanon until 2006 and Gaza in 2008: Israeli concerns about missile and terror attacks minimized and mocked, even as those attacks made war inevitable. Yet once gunfire was directed in two rather than one direction, suddenly these “peace movements” roared to life, marching and chanting in the streets to demand an immediate ceasefire (followed, of course, by war crimes investigations that would be as one-way as the aforementioned missile fire from Gaza).
Worse, you could almost see the gleam in the eyes of those BDS marchers who suddenly found themselves not sharing propaganda films in church basements with the same old aging fanatics, but in the streets with hundreds (sometimes thousands) of supporters. In fact, while you and I might find the whole notion a bit creepy, it’s striking me as increasingly clear that BDSers live for the moment when war breaks out (regardless of the human cost) since conflict swells their ranks and allows them to strut their self-righteousness in public, demanding an end to a war that their silence helped bring about.
As I’ve noted previously, a pattern is now in place whereby alleged “peace activists” will do nothing while war is being prepared for and actually waged (at least at a low level) by their political allies. But once two-way shooting starts, out they’ll be in the streets demanding firing cease before those that started the war suffer the consequences of their actions, thus ensuring the next round of fighting (like the one we’re seeing today). In fact, the pattern is so predictable that Hamas and Hezbollah war planners would be fools not to take it into account as they try to figure out just how many missiles they can fire without inviting retaliation (that will end in anti-Israel protests) or full-scale conflict (which will end in even bigger protests and demands for cease fires).
We now have enough data points to highlight that this supposed “peace movement” is really only interested in ensuring one side (not two) gets to do the shooting. And whatever you want to call this type of rank hypocrisy and propaganda advocacy on behalf of military belligerents, “peace activism” is not a phrase that comes to mind.