Calls to boycott Israel weaken peace efforts - IUSY

by question - none Tue Mar 06, 2007 17:12

IUSY - is that the Labour youth international? I know its not Socialist Youths.

by Ortega Tue Mar 06, 2007 17:26

Yeah its the international union of socialist youth of which the Irish Labour Youth is a member of.

by Clarifier Tue Mar 06, 2007 18:06

The article represents the views of the author, not IUSY. In non Leninist Internationals, people are allowed to have differences of opinion.

by Darren Cogavin - SP & SY (pc) Tue Mar 06, 2007 18:28

"The article represents the views of the author, not IUSY. In non Leninist Internationals, people are allowed to have differences of opinion."

A little diversion from the point, eh?

Assuming from the not-so-subtle undertones of your post that you are a member of the Labour Party or Labour Youth, why don't exercise your right to hold "differences of opinion" and tell us where you stand on Yoav Sivan's patronising attack on the IPSC?

And for the record, at least "Leninist Internationals" - with the exception of the Alliance for Workers' Liberty -don't have to contend with pro-Zionist sections in their internationals. For the most part they stand irrevocably opposed to Zionist state terror and the withdrawal of Israel from the occupied territories.

by Clarifier Tue Mar 06, 2007 18:33

I oppose his attack on the IPSC and I support sanctions.

The point here is that someone is attempting to wilfully misrepresent the views of the IUSY. The author of the piece never claimed that he spoke on behalf of IUSY.

But he is entitled to his views. I dont think they make him an enemy of humanity.

by Conor McGowan - ISN (Personal Capacity) Wed Mar 07, 2007 11:48

Let's clarify a few things:

1) This has absolutely nothing to do with Leninist internationals.
2) "Comrade" Sivan is not only a member of the IUSY, not only signs himself as such, but is a member of it's executive committee.
3) Before setting up a reality distortion field around your own arguments, and having a go at those who raise legitimate political concerns - try and deal with the point at hand.
4) Nobody has been called an "enemy of humanity" on this thread, so why the real defense of a phantom attack?

I am not a Leninist, nor am I a member of a Leninist International. Comrade Cogsy and myself have many's a political disagreement. That doesn't stop us having political discussions, disagreements and so on. However, it has been my experience that whenever I raise political differences with Labour Youth members, unlike comrade Cogsy, they withdraw or else start attacking people on the left.

As for democracy, how many motions were down during the last Labour Party conference? Labour, an electoral party with a parliamentary elite is no more democratic than it is socialist - so it's time the "clarifier" (we all know who you are) stopped the usual guff.

Pluralism is a good thing. If pluralism means supporting or emphasising one progressive group over another, differing on a practical approach or theoretical point.

But supporting a reactionary, murderous, institutionally racist state isn't pluralism. It's placing your politics on the right. Simple as.

[The same as being in an international with Tony Blair as he sends off his suqaddies to make havok in Afghanistan, Iraq, and beyond]

To be honest, I was shocked that Yoav Sivans article got published in yesterdays times. The arguments are sloppy and weak.

But that's not all that Yoav has picked up off his international comrades on the presidium of the IUSY. Instead of dealing with the substantive rights and wrongs of the boycott, he dismisses it as "trendy" and happily moves on to call the ISPC naive while himself bemoaning the "Israeli incompetence in influencing the course of events in the region".

Admitting that diamond companies contribute to the Israeli war machine, he goes on to announce that Israeli academics play a progressive role in the region. Would these be the same academics that Mordechai Vanunu reported to while "the international community" helped develop Israels A-Bomb, a bomb that looks set to be strapped to the top of a missile and sent off to Iran anytime soon.

Then again, like the listeners to the various "speak your brains" radio phone shows, Yoav tells us that these concerns are nothing more than political correctness gone mad.

Me gone loco!

by Disingenuous Wed Mar 07, 2007 12:52

Nobody ever suggested that boycotts are a precision tool and for sure they will affect left-wingers as well as the Israeli military-industrial complex. This being said the boycott against South Africa and resulted in a net gain to all of the population even though it meant that there was hardship for the poor in that country. The sad fact is that foreign trade allows Israel to pretend that what they are doing is normal and to replenish their coffers and armoury after the disasterous war aginst the Lebanese people last year.

Every day there is no boycott against Israel means the US and Israels friends abroad are free to prop up the settlers and continue to repress the Palestinians, such as the latest stunt to get wealthy American Jews to buy houses on occupied land in the West-Bank.

http://bp0.blogger.com/_Tkg0cK4kf2Q/RdubvEEfeMI/AAAAAAA...n.jpg

"The convenient transaction, laid out in the flier to above, would allow prospective buyers to "ensure Israel's survival" (and our destruction) without ever setting foot there, and subsequently having their newly purchased illegal property rented out to illegal settlers at the expense of Palestinians in surrounding villages and towns."

http://a-mother-from-gaza.blogspot.com/

Boycott Israel ... you'll do all peace-loving Israelis a favour and help bring peace to the Middle-East.

by Disingenuous Wed Mar 07, 2007 12:58

"Two months ago I was invited by Trocaire in Ireland to lecture in some places, about the situation for women in conflict areas, and the UN Security Council Resolution 1325, which relates to womens safety and security.

With the Trocaire invitation letter, and through efforts by (Hemocade) Defence of Individuals Rights in Israel, I was promised a travel permit, via Eritz checkpoint, North of Gaza.

Permit was not approved by the Israelis so I unpacked my suitcase. Sondos was let down but not surprised because in Gaza we always expect the worst and we are always forced to accept the abnormalities as the normal pattern of life under occupation."

by MichaelY - iawm and ipsc Wed Mar 07, 2007 13:26

While this thread is focussing correctly on the need to deepen and extend our actions around the boycott of Israeli products, including diamonds, and full support for the cultural boyocott of p r o - Z i o n i s t i n t e l l e c t u a l s, I thought it would be interesting to reflect on a couple of pieces of news concerning the views of German and Irish bishops on the Zionist State ...not, surely, ideal examples of 'trendy and 'politically correct' opinion leaders:

1. German Bishops equate Israel's actions to Holocaust

Hours after their historic visit to Jerusalem holocaust museum, a group of German bishops tour Palestinian Authority, say Israel behaving like Nazis:

"This morning we saw pictures of the Warsaw ghetto at Yad Vashem and this evening we are going to the Ramallah ghetto." Several hours earlier, you probably would not have heard German Bishop Gregor Maria Franz Hanke choose such an analogy.

But then on Sunday morning he was still in Israel and the rhetoric was considerably different than the one elected by the German Bishops' Conference once they crossed over in to the Palestinian Authority on Sunday evening.

The visit of 27 members of the German Bishops' Conference to Israel included a historic first- time visit to the Yad Vashem Holocaust memorial museum in Jerusalem as well as guided tours of sites holy to Christianity and meetings with Christian congregations in Israel and in the Palestinian Authority.

During their time in Israel the bishops uniformly made moderate and balanced statements, but once in the PA they provided German reporters accompanying them with a plethora of harsh proclamations against Israel.

While crossing one of the checkpoints into East Jerusalem the Archbishop of Cologne, Cardinal Joachim Meisner, told reporters: "This is something that is done to animals, not people." Meisner, a resident of eastern Germany, said that the fence reminded him of the Berlin Wall and that in his lifetime he did not believe he would see such a thing again. As the Berlin Wall was brought down so will this wall be brought down, he said, adding that the fence served no purpose.

The delegation's visit to Ramallah took place several hours after their visit to Yad Vashem and several of the bishops chose to equate the situation in the Palestinian Authority with the Holocaust.

"Cages in the image of ghettos," said the Bishop of Augsburg of the territories. Augsburg was once under the spiritual leadership of Pope Benedict XVI, who was Archbishop of the Munich-Freising Archdiocese and his brother Monsignor Georg Ratzinger still resides there.

"Israel has, of course, the right to exist, but this right cannot be realized in such a brutal manner," said Bishop Hanke, who later stated that he intends to amend this year's Easter message to German churches so as to include the delegation's political impressions from their visit to the territories and a demand to change the situation.

For more info please go to http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3373013,00.html

2. Now, in case the usual trolls come up and start ranting about the Bishops above being German (what would you expect from a German etc) and suffering from post-guilt traumas etc., here is also a piece of news, from the irish Times, re:Irish bishops:

Minister for Foreign Affairs Dermot Ahern has refused a request from a Catholic Church delegation, including two bishops, for a review of the EU-Israel association agreement (This a an important element of the IPSC political strategy):

"The Government has taken the view that it is essential to maintain engagement with Israel," Mr Ahern said after a meeting with the delegation. "Let's be clear that any proposal for suspension would
require unanimity in the [ European] Council, which will not happen."

The meeting was attended by the Bishop of Clonfert and chairman of Trócaire, Dr John Kirby; Bishop Ray Field, chairman of the Irish Commission for Justice and Social Affairs (ICJSA) and an auxiliary
bishop of Dublin; and Fr Eoin Cassidy, chair of the ICJSA's international subcommittee. All three had recently been members of an international Catholic Church delegation to the Holy Land.

At a press conference in Dublin beforehand they launched a position paper, Palestine/Israel, Principles for a Just Peace.

Bishop Field said that "at the very least the Irish Government has a duty to work at EU level to ensure that the existing close commercial and cultural relations with Israel are carried out in a manner that
gives priority to promoting the legitimate rights of the Palestinians".

He said restriction of movement in the Occupied Territories was "in clear breach of Article 12 of the international covenant on civil and political rights" and described Gaza as "little more than a large
prison". Fr Cassidy agreed with former US president Jimmy Carter's description of the situation of the Palestinians as "more oppressive than what black people lived under in South Africa during apartheid".

He said Israel's separation wall ensured "10 per cent of the West Bank, encompassing the most fertile land, will remain in Israeli hands" and reduced Palestine "to a patchwork of municipal cantons or a collection of bantustans and thus destroying any hopes for a viable state".

Sanctions imposed by Israel "threaten to unleash what can only be described as a humanitarian disaster", he said.

There was an "understandable reluctance to be seen to be criticising the Jews", but "if for no other reason than it dishonours those who have died as innocent victims in the Holocaust, one cannot remain silent in the face of the manifest injustice that is visited primarily but not exclusively upon the Palestinian people".

by Enda - Labour Youth Wed Mar 07, 2007 16:08

As a member of labour youth and the international union of socialist youth, I understand more than anyone who has posted her so far, the political feelings of IUSY towards the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. In fact I attended the very same conference as Yoav. I recall a slightly different conference than the trendy conference good old ‘comrade’ Yoav talks about.

Yoav is well aware of Labour Youth position on the boycott of Israeli and it was outlined in no uncertain terms to both himself his comrades in Mertz and the Zionist Israeli Labour Youth. We made it quite clear the reasons behind our support for the boycott and I certainly never mentioned that we believed in the boycott because it was trendy. Disingenuous like this by Yoav are a childish spiteful attack on labour youth. In fact at the IUSY world council in Cork a few weeks back there was a lengthy debate surround this and along with our comrades in Fatah youth who by the way are also member of IUSY pushed the agenda of the debate, clearly in support of a boycott.

It is clear as someone who has attended a world council of IUSY rather that a randomer making flippant comments on this site that the vast majority of associated youth groups of IUSY are extremely sympathetic towards the Palestinian cause, and support a peaceful two state solution in the mid east. Further to this many of the affiliated youth groups do support the boycott of Israeli goods much to the annoyance of the members of Mertz and Israeli Labour Youth.

Yoav article represents his personal view which he is entitled to. I can say for a fact that he is not representing IUSY as policy on this has not been created due to that fact that the Israeli Labour Party and Fatah Youth have not reached a suitable amicable compromise.

Once again ‘comrade’ McGowan out does himself with his shrieking attacks on the lack of socialism in the labour party, but what the comrade fails to realise is the we have to many socialist parties and not enough socialists.

by D84 Wed Mar 07, 2007 16:29

The IPSC, and groups like them,are not promoting hate. They are not trying to turn people here against the people of Israel(Which has a very diverse and active left, let us not forget!) rather their efforts are focused on opposing the state of Israel, it's government and figures of authority.

I would hesitate to buy goods from states like Israel, Iran or any state whos actions I personally disagree strongly with. When 70% of the things on our shelves came from China, or ther US/UK, it really is hard-but surely a boycott of Israeli goods is a great place to start?

by Conor McGowan - Writing in a personal capacity Wed Mar 07, 2007 17:35

First of all, I don't need to be a member of LY or the IUSY to make a comment on a newspaper article by an exec member of the IUSY. I haven't made any "flippant" comments or any "shrieking" ones either. I simply wish to point out that:

1) You shouldn't attack Leninists when they have nothing to do with this.
2) In any case, LY members have no right to complain about democracy in the SP or SinnFein (last left-tribune) or any other groups until they have their own house in order. At the last Labour conference, there was a grand total of 0 motions from the floor. I am not screaming, nor am I shrieking, just pointing out a disturbing fact for a party that claims to be democratic.

That yourself and Yoav attended the same conference & came away with such radically different interpretations of it should be a cause for concern. The Irish Times is free to print what it wishes, and Yoav is free to comment as he pleases. When he writes as a member of the Presidium of the IUSY, it brings into question the politics of your organisation, and you have a duty to clarify the issues raised, rather than going on a sectarian little rant against Leninists or people who often helped you in your political campaigns.

You're right, there are plenty of Socialist groups out there. Maybe you should join one of them.

Or, maybe not.

by Thinker Wed Mar 07, 2007 17:36

Love the quote from Tony Benn. He really knows a socialist party when he sees one.
I think Dermot Lacey is on the record on this site as saying that Labour is not a socialist party. Social Democratic maybe but socialist definetely not. That said Labour Youth seem a different lot. Credit where its due.

by Yoav Wed Mar 07, 2007 23:33

My article represents MY OWN views and impressions from a visit to Ireland (not just and perhaps not even primarily the conference in Cork). It was not intended as an attack on the Labour or YL.
A boycott on Israel had never been debated in Cork - only a boycott on Israeli goods produced in settlements. And even on that point the differences, if any, between Young Meretz and Fatah Youth are negligible. Failing to understand the major difference between a boycott on Israeli goods (which means calling not to do business with ME) and a boycott on goods from Israeli settlements is harmful. There are other ways of being sympathetic to the Palestinian cause and supporting a two state solution than advancing a boycott. A process of dialogue between individuals and organisations can help sort those ways out and help each party express its concerns.

I also regret that boycott campaigns against Israel are not discussed with Israeli activists first - even if we disagree - and are not even brought to our attention when resolutions adopted.
Yoav Sivan
www.yoavsivan.org

by Caroline - IPSC Wed Mar 07, 2007 23:44

Yoav's article in only the most recent in a number of anti-boycott pieces printed in the Irish Times. I've heard that the Israeli Embassy is now seeking to recruit an Irish PRO person ... obviously the IPSC is doing something right if they're going to these efforts to counter our activism.

If you want to join us get in touch at: [email protected]

by Conor - ISN - Personal Capacity Thu Mar 08, 2007 10:47

Yoav;

How did you happen upon this thread? Did your Irish comrades ask you to make a comment, or did you just happen upon it during a regular troll across global indymedia sites (I'm guessing it's too early for a google alert, but I may be wrong). Also, how did you decide upon submitting an article to the Irish Times in the first place, what were your motivations for doing so, and did you receive any support from the Israeli embassy in Dublin (or any arm of that repugnant, murderous state, for that matter)?

If you read back on the thread, you will see that nobody is suggesting that your article was based on IUSY position, and everyone accepts that it is your own personal view. However, the printed article mentioned that you are a member of the presidium of the IUSY, and in the article you mentioned your recent visit to Ireland. Thus, it is impossible to separate your important position in the IUSY and your pro-zionist stance. For example, if a leading member of the USFI made a personal statement in support of imperialist aggression and occupation, others on the left would want to hear the response of the USFI membership.

Your position is only a slight on Labour Youth, because they claim to hold socialist politics, and thus unlike yourself, couldn't possibly show public support for an institutionally racist state like Israel, no more than they could have given support to South Africa in the apartheid era.

At no point in your Irish Times or Indymedia commentary have you claimed that the boycott campaign is unsuccessful, or has any reason to fail in it's stated aims (i.e. not sending any money to fuel the IDF). The ISPC can take some encouragement from this.

It's now obvious that your touching naivety doesn't begin or end with the Irish Times commentary. I can assure you that there are plenty of people who are "sympathetic to the Palestinian cause" who don't have a 2 state solution in mind. "Dialogue" can only happen between equal partners - not between a nuclear state and a group of people it has systematically exploited for decades. If you honestly think that the might of the Israeli state will fairly negotiate with, rather than coerce the Palestinians, you are very much mistaken. It is not because we are "trendy" or "politically correct" that we see such "negotiations" for what they are, it is because the historical record of the racist state you support is plain, and we don't expect it to sit down as an oppressor with the people it has oppressed to do any fair deals with them.

Political and cultural discussions can only happen on a level playing field. The ISPC campaign is an attempt to take some of the imbalance back for the people of Palestine. To challenge the massively inequitable balance of power that is tilted against ordinary Palestinians is courageous, and they deserve support for doing so. Maybe if more people joined in that struggle, we would eventually see a day when your fantasy of everybody being equal in the middle east actually existed.

I'll leave your last sentence for discussion on the LY boards. I'll ask a question of the LY membership myself: Will LY have a proper public debate with Yoav, and confront his premise that all is equal between the state with the backing of US imperialism and those it has systematically oppressed for decades - or will they take to his cosy fantasy of better understanding by the "international community" leading to a simple negotiation between the equal partners in Israel and Palestine, thus accepting it's false premise?

--Conor.

by Disingenuous Thu Mar 08, 2007 13:11

The only of getting Israel to the negotiating table with the Palestinians is to boycott Israel. People like Yoav if they are seriously interested in equal rights for Palestinians and Israeli Muslims will have to put up with it in the name of the greater good, just like most white South Africans on the left supported the boycott of the Apartheid regieme.

by Fearg Tue Mar 13, 2007 19:25

Israel is state established on stolen Arab land.
Not only Gaza, the Golan Height and the West Bank but the entire state of "Israel" be should be returned.
The modern Jews are not native to the Middle East and their presence is not justified based on biblical claims.
The UN facilitate the forceful dismantling of this rogue state and organise the evacuation of the Jewish population to Europe, America and Russia and elsewhere they came from after WW2.

by Dearg Wed Mar 14, 2007 10:58

Or Iraq, or Egypt eh Fearg? Don't really know what you're talking about do you?

by Wanni Wed Mar 14, 2007 11:58

Co-option of the wishes of the diaspora* by a hawk group within the white house
to secure a border in a huge area of influence- 'Isreal' is a geo-political concept
or construction created by a post-war deal between nations.

As are the other hot-spots (coming soon to a place near you) ex Soviet and now
EU satellite expanded areas.
(kosovo, Bosnia)_

It is a simplistic assessment to base a US/K power hegamony
based on market forces and colonisation , as well as border security on the Present
State of Israel- it indicates a refusal to examine the roots of globalised western culture
and the greed inherent in Empire.

In terms of the Christian -led white hegamony led by Blair- have you ever
wondered why they are all fighting over Turkey?
Why the white christian pope who incites moslems had himself photographed
in Turkey?

Have you seen the headlines of this morning's Guardian?

Do you not wonder why the US and EU are so despised by more developed
religious systems- it is grounded in abuse/colonisation/and destruction of environment.

The State of Israel is not the bogey- it is those that wd manipulate the lives
of people both Israeli/Palestinian to further their commercial market interests.

Is anyone looking at the Syrian Question?

Fearg= read politics before making simplistic statements

= Turkey.
=Kosovo.
=Yemen
=Syria

All moslem enclaves- all under threat by a religious capitalist war.

Is it going to happen in your name?? - there are more than enough anti-semites
in the world. the Arab and Israelis were brothers in faith- they can live together
but their destinies are tied up in destructive western supremacy.

by Fred Johnston Wed Mar 14, 2007 13:48 sylfredcar at iolfree dot ie

Let's get this straight - Israel operates a continuous cultural boycott against Palestinians and we're supposed to go voluntarily blind and deaf and dumb and forget it's happening. Not one Irish women journalist remarked that Palestinian speaker Nadia Harb had been refused a visa by the Israelis to travel to Ireland to speak at the International Women's Day celebrations last week. No doubt this will be remedied by poets Eavan Boland and Paula Meehan and others at their belated Women's Day poetry reading this week at the Unitarian Church on St Stephen's Green, Dublin, when they issue statements criticising Israel cultural boycotting! They will, won't they?
Thought not.
But let's not forget the men-poets. Theo Dorgan, Aosdána member, member of the Board of the Arts Council, Chair of both the Irish and English Language Literature Bursary committees at the Arts Council - he thought nothing of going to a West Jerusalem poetry festival last November, courtesy of the Israeli government, and is now, seemingly, concerned that the trip's become general knowledge! (Shoot the messenger! How very Fianna Fáil of him!) Will he stand up and condemn Israeli cultural boycotting?
Doubt it.
So when Irish artists call for a cultural boycott of Israel, or Irish academics call for an academic one, they are well within their rights to do so; nay, they are merely fulfilling their humanitarian duty. They are displaying a bravery they know to be lacking among many of their colleagues. They know that double-speak and a marvellous Irish ability to double-reason when the moment calls for it will prevail and be allowed to prevail. The media will do what they are told or the 'phone call from the Israeli Embassy will not be long in coming. They will be accused of lacking 'balance.' Worst comes to the worst, the label of 'anti-Semitism' (so defiled and up-for-grabs now that even Lord Levy, Tony Blair's mate, is using it to get back at media attacks on him lately) can be tossed into the fray.
A cultural boycott would show that Irish artists, at least some of them, know a violation of human rights when they see one and will not be blinkered by propaganda.