The role of Egypt is impacted by the antipathy to the Muslim Brotherhood since Morsi was overthrown; this makes Egypt anti-Hamas,  But it depends on how structural you wish to get in this as the cleavages in the region must be also laid at the hands of neo-colonial interventions and de-stabilisation which has led to fractures between peoples which outsiders then say “tut tut, look how sectarian they are (!) and not suited to democracy.  I also would imagine that military-industrial and espionage cooperation between USA and Israel are worth examining.  It is much more complicated than first appears and seems to be getting murkier by the day…

Just my thoughts…

Freya

 

From: A forum for critical and radical geographers [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Hillary Shaw
Sent: Thursday, 31 July 2014 11:18 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: boycott israel motion

 

Unless I've missed something - one v important point absent from this debate here. Do Israeli academics support or oppose the Gaza offensive?  Polls from Israel show something like 80% - 90% in favour of the offensive, so 10% - 20% don't support it even within Israel - some of these of course will be Israeli Arabs. But in the UK the academic community seems significantly more anti-offensive than the population as a whole, so what atout the Israeli academic community?

Any comments here from Israeli academics, if we have any on crit-geog, would be interesting.

Another relevant (but totally separate) point - what is the role of Egypt in this crisis. Gaza has a crossing into Egypt, but since the deposing of Morsi by the military the Egyptian regime has become significantly less sympathetic to Muslim / Palestinian issues, and this crossing is closed, and Egypt too is trying to block tunnel border crossings.. Although Gaza is not of course Egypt's fault in any way, could they offer at least temporary humanitarian assistance, e.g. by allowing refugees into Siniai on a temporary basis?  Or would this be seen as 'letting Israel off the hook' by facilitating a depopulation / ethnic cleansing' of Gaza so it become terra nullius, maybe then ripe for settler occupation?

 

Dr Hillary J. Shaw
Director and Senior Research Consultant
Shaw Food Solutions
Newport
Shropshire
TF10 8NB
www.fooddeserts.org

 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Aparna Kolar <[log in to unmask]>
To: CRIT-GEOG-FORUM <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Wed, 30 Jul 2014 21:54
Subject: Re: boycott israel motion

So..how do these debates that appear to now collect around whether boycott israel movements are 'WEIRD' or not, help us find spaces and initiate actions that look at/critically address, and help to transform and/or engage with the entanglements and relationalities of the conflict at, within, across and much beyond the territories of Israel-Palestinian regions?

 

kolar

 

On Tuesday, July 29, 2014 11:35 PM, Adam Elliott-Cooper <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

 

I'd like to second the agreement with the response to boycotting Israel being "weird". 

Adam Elliott-Cooper
School of Geography and the Environment
University of Oxford

From: A forum for critical and radical geographers [[log in to unmask]] on behalf of Thomas Kokkinos-Kennedy [[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 29 July 2014 21:57
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: boycott israel motion

love the closing sentence, and agree.  thanks for articulating that fracture in the WEIRD ontic.  

 

thomas

 

On 29 July 2014 14:39, Andrea Pavoni <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

Just a note on the fact that boycotting only Israel and not other rights-violating countries is WEIRD.

 

1: Israel is not simply violating the human rights of its own citizens, something that pretty much every state to some extent does (there are no pure souls out there). Israel is involved in a long-term colonisation of another population. This is quite different. 

 

2: as regards Gaza, Israel is involved, most explicitly from 2007, in a de facto siege, controlling, filtering and blocking the flow of any kind of supply to and from a place which in theory should not be under its jurisdiction. This is, again, a rather peculiar fact [very instructive is Weizman short excerpt on the subject http://www.versobooks.com/blogs/1177-most-were-willing-to-inflict-pain-beyond-the-threshold-marked-as-life-endangering-when-ordered-to-do-so-an-extract-from-the-least-of-all-possible-evils-by-eyal-weizman]

 

3: at the moment, Israel is not simply doing the above two (which would be already more than enough to trigger reaction), Israel is also shelling a 'foreign' population, with the added (and, again, quite unique) fact that such a population, being under siege, cannot move away from the bombing. 'Internal displacement', another interesting unicum. This is a bit more serious, deadly and topical violation than, say, having a terrible prison record. 

 

4: differently from various other instances, Israel is doing all the three above with the direct or indirect support or, at best, the lack of any explicit criticism, of the majority of Western (and not only) countries. This is another interesting peculiarity. 

 

Join all these four points, and you'll easily see why boycotting Israel (regardless of the very interesting debate about the actual efficiency of this strategy) has a rather different meaning, and is rather more timely, than extending the boycott to every state in the world guilty of human rights violations. There are ethical, legal and political issues that are not equalled anywhere in the world. So, please, let's avoid flattening these topical differences into the usual critique of the Western 'neo-colonial pretence to impose its values to the world'. Not only this is just another instance of Western narcisism but, more to the point, it doesn't have anything to do with the situation at stake. 

 

thanks. 

 

 

On 28 July 2014 15:46, Aparna Kolar <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

Dear all, 

 

thanks for the debates and discussions.

yes dependency is clearly present as much as there are power asymmetries...and the politics of framing is central rather than peripheral to the conflict.

I still think that the issues on the ground in israel and palestine cannot be seen in isolation to international relations and therefore any strategic movement and its effectiveness has to hold our own governments accountable as much as the state of israel. one look at the document of E.U-Israel relationships under the European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP) reveals this entanglement of the conflict to the heartlands of europe. (http://eeas.europa.eu/enp/pdf/pdf/action_plans/israel_enp_ap_final_en.pdf)..(note the point on 'close cooperation with border police' on page 14)

regards,

Kolar

 

 

Kolar Aparna

Researcher,

Nijmegen Center for Border Research,

Radboud University,

Nijmegen

The Netherlands

 

On Monday, July 28, 2014 4:18 PM, Tristan Sturm <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

 

I agree with Ruth's response to Sander's comment. Not only is Israel's economy dependent on Palestinian labour (Palestinians building illegal settlements, working in mining quarries, agriculture, etc. in both the West Bank and Gaza pre-evacuation of Gush Katif) and resources especially from the West Bank (water, mining, land), I also have a problem with the statement that Israel does not provide a "minimum level of care." Although I wouldn't call it "care," providing health care, water and sewage infrastructure, and especially education (especially pre-Oslo) are attempts to normalize the occupation in Palestine and for the world as they were in South Africa; these efforts are not altruistic, they are strategic. Neve Gordon's book, "Israel's Occupation" (UP California 2008) provides a careful Foucauldian history of Israel's normalization actions. I will agree that this "care" has been largely left to Fatah, Hamas, UNRWA, and various non-profits in the last two decades. 

 

This isn't to say there are not fundamental differences between South Africa and Israel/Palestine. There are, and it is difficult to say one is "worse" than the other, both have grave atrocities. We might also ask how helpful it is as geographers to use the same historical term, Apartheid, to describe the occupation of Palestine. Using Apartheid does highlight the severity of the situation for those of us familiar with South Africa's history, but using the term can also blind us to the very different histories and present in Palestine. Like using the term Balkinization to refer to any fracture of states, Holocaust for attempts at ethnic cleansing, or using the term Nazi's to describe violent actions by a group or party, or appeasers for not taking action, such imprecise analogies and borrowing of historical terms and transposing them onto different geographies can deceive more than they can reveal, point us to prescriptions and actions that are not appropriate for the different histories (that said I very much support BDS). As John Agnew put it recently, using such analogies can "make familiar the unfamiliar," and thus provide a model for identifying evildoers and victims. 

 

This is not to say that analogies are without merit; indeed they may be necessary for human communication and explanation, but it is nevertheless necessary to point out the limitations of such geographic analogies. Either way, we can recognize the use of analogies are always inherent generalizations.

 

Thanks for reading. 


Tristan Sturm, PhD
Assistant Professor
Department of Geography
Director of Critical Border Studies
York University
Contact info:   tristansturm.org

Int Advisory Board: Arab World Geographer

 

On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 7:50 AM, RuthP <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

Dear list members,

I find this discussion extremely important and I would like to refer those of you who’d like to learn more about the call for BDS, its effectiveness and the myriad ways in which Israeli economy is dependent and indeed exploits BOTH Palestinian resources and work force to the research conducted by ‘Who Profits from the Occupation’ (an Israeli research center working to expos the commercial involvement of Israeli and international companies in the continued Israeli control over Palestinian and Syrian land). I believe you will find the data rigorous and informative - http://www.whoprofits.org/

Additional information sources:

http://www.btselem.org/ which provides statistics and reports.

http://www.breakingthesilence.org.il/ which provide testimonies of Israeli soldiers.  

 

Ruth

Ruth Preser PhD | ICI Berlin Institute for Cultural Inquiry | +49 30 473 7291 - 17 | +49 173 825 4029 |  [log in to unmask] | [log in to unmask]

 

From: A forum for critical and radical geographers [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Sander Van Lanen
Sent: 28 July, 2014 13:13


To: mailto:[log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: boycott israel motion

 

Hi All,

Felt the need to ask a little and important question on the topic of a boycott of Israeli products/academic boycott, and it is about is effectiveness. I have never heard convincing arguments for its effectiveness, most of the time people shout South Africa immediately, thereby ignoring important differences between Israel and SA which have an impact on a BDS strategy, I shall name a few:

- South Africa was dependent on its black population as its work force, so there was always at least a very minimum level of care, where Israel is in no way dependent on the Palestinian population, with their presence posed as a problem. The situation in the Palestinian territories is therefore worse than South African Apartheid.

- When the BDS campaign in South Africa started, business was already leaving the country, and there were already states sanctioning the regime, two things that are not present in the current day Israeli case.

- Some argue that Cuban forces helped drive South African forces out of Angola, thereby sending a message that the South African dream of controlling the region became harder to maintain, while also providing aid workers for black Africa. A savior like this is currently not present for the Palestinians.

These differences make it impossible to transfer strategies from one campaign to the other, without re-analysing the current situation and thinking about the effectiveness of tactics. Furthermore, I completely agree with the point raised earlier that if there is a boycott for Israeli products because of their violation of human rights, it is weird that a boycott is not used towards other countries that violate these.

 

On 27 July 2014 10:59, Kasia Narkowicz <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

In addition to the letter at the start of this thread from academics in Canada, a few days ago the Lancet published an open letter from the medical community (see below). I was wondering whether there were any concrete actions within the geographical community such as letters or academic boycotts outside of Canada (for example in the UK) in protest of Israel's military killings of civilians in Gaza?

 

 

Thank you

 

Kasia Narkowicz

PhD Candidate

University of Sheffield

Sheffield, UK

Twitter: @kasianarkowicz 

 

On 26 July 2014 23:55, Freya Higgins Desbiolles <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

Thanks for these comments.  It is true that we need to be attentive to a WEIRD paradigm.  But what Israel is doing is not in a category with internal suppressions and civil war human rights violations.  It is an illegal occupation of another people’s land and now widespread attacks on civilian populations.  This is why the call for boycott of Israel (together with divestment and sanctions) is louder than other calls.  The comparison is made with Apartheid South Africa.  In this sphere, we are seeing both governmental, NGO and consumer action as possibilities.

With thanks

Freya

Freya Higgins-Desbiolles

Senior Lecturer in Tourism

University of South Australia

 

From: A forum for critical and radical geographers [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Hillary Shaw
Sent: Saturday, 26 July 2014 8:15 PM
To: mailto:[log in to unmask]


Subject: Re: boycott israel motion

 

The list of human-rights-violating countries must surely have N Korea near the top. Then we have restricted political rights in e.g. the central Asian 'Stans, and China is far from perfect here either. Dig a bit deeper and Japan has a rather dodgy police and legal system, and its prisons can be quite horrendous - Google 'Japanese prisons'. Then there's Russia's attitude towards homosexuality, if being homosexual is a 'human right'. The legal system of e.g. Armenia, Morrocco, Egypt, seem to fall short of perfect, too. Then there's Myanmar, Congo, Iran, Saudi Arabia............

If so many countries fall below what the EU might deem good human rights records, this raises two questions.

1) Can we actually define 'human rights'?  - is it in fact culturally-dependent in which case does a WEIRD (White Educated Industrialised Rich Democratic) - the acronym does exist, really - citizen have a 'right' to demand that other countries, often with very different cultural histories, current conflicts, religious mores and so on, follow the EU model of human rights.

2) Is the imposiition of an EU / WEIRD model of human rights upon the global community in fact a form of neo-colonialism, or is it a model that all countries around the world 'should' aspire to. Is Europe / N America really best, or can, ought, should, the human race accommodate multiple human rights models?

 

Dr Hillary J. Shaw
Director and Senior Research Consultant
Shaw Food Solutions
Newport
Shropshire
TF10 8NB
http://www.fooddeserts.org/

 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Ashok Kumar <[log in to unmask]>
To: CRIT-GEOG-FORUM <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Fri, 25 Jul 2014 21:32
Subject: Re: boycott israel motion

Dear Matthew, 

I don't want this to become a debate about the merits of boycotting apartheid - i simply wanted to see if anyone was aware of any campaigns or democratic ways to pass such a motion. But to answer your question, yes, other countries have indeed been boycotted, most efficaciously and famously South Africa under apartheid. Boycotting is a tactic that should respond to the subjective agency of the oppressed - in that respect the call for boycott was issued by hundreds of civil society organisations and leaders in Palestine in 2005. As i am sure you're already aware there is a UN-instituted arms embargo and US and UK already maintain a targeted sanctions policy against Zimbabwe after the government expropriated and then distributed land concentrated under the hands of the white colonial descendants. There have been no calls for boycott by the people of Zimbabwe, there are no campaigns to boycott Zimbabwean goods, and our governments already sanction the Zimbabwean government - these are the exact opposite of the conditions and the campaign to isolate Israel.

 

On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 8:38 PM, Matthew J Rippon <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

Does any other country ever get boycotted?  Or is it just Israel?

If so, why?

There are loads of other countries whose governments have worse human
rights abuses. For example, Zimbabwe.



On 25/07/14 17:14, Ashok Kumar wrote:
> Great letter Deborah. I know that in the past year the American Studies
> Association, North American and Indigenous Studies Association, Asian
> American Association and others have all backed an academic boycott of
> Israel
> [http://mondoweiss.net/2014/07/association-literature-academic.html]. I was
> wondering if anyone was aware of campaigns to get similar motions passed
> within the RGS, AAG or any other geographical association? Can't find
> anything [dont even know if those bodies are particularly democratic].

> --Â
> *******Ashok Kumar*
> *PhD Candidate, **Oxford University*
> P: 07544 903642 (UK)Â  Â  Â
> E:Â mailto:[log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> T:Â @broseph_stalin <https://twitter.com/broseph_stalin>
> W:Â oxford.academia.edu/AKumar <http://oxford.academia.edu/AKumar>

>
> On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 3:31 PM, Deborah Cowen <[log in to unmask]

> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
>
>     FYI: an open letter to the Canadian government signed by many of our
>     colleagues published today...
>
>     http://m.theglobeandmail.com/globe-debate/letter-to-ottawa-partisan-approach-to-gaza-is-a-discredit-to-canada/article19737495/?service=mobile
>
>
>
>
>



 

--

Ashok Kumar

PhD Candidate, Oxford University

P: 07544 903642 (UK)     

T: @broseph_stalin

W: oxford.academia.edu/AKumar



 

--

Kasia Narkowicz

PhD Candidate


LIVEDIFFERENCE Research Programme

Interdisciplinary Centre of the Social Sciences (ICOSS)
University of Sheffield

 

 

 

 

 

This message and its attachments are private and confidential. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender and remove it and its attachments from your system.

The University of Westminster is a charity and a company limited by guarantee. Registration number: 977818 England. Registered Office: 309 Regent Street, London W1B 2UW.