Nilanjana Roy, at Akhond of Swat, has done a pretty thorough round-up of the recent controversy surrounding Amitav Ghosh and Margaret Atwood’s decision to accept a prestigious Israeli literary prize, and I won’t rehash it all here. Ghosh and Atwood were offered the Dan David Prize this spring, and were urged to refuse to accept it by pro-Palestinian groups, including a significant number of academics from the Indian left (based both in India and in western universities).
I just wanted to put in my own two-cents’ worth: I support the decision made by Amitav Ghosh and Margaret Atwood to accept the prize. In contrast to many of my colleagues who signed the recent open letter to Ghosh, I do not think there was anything to be gained by boycotting a cultural prize given by an institution outside of the Israeli government. Far better to stay, to continue to engage, and to dissent where necessary.
A viable argument against “cultural” boycotts is that they simply don’t do anything, though defenders of the practice might say that the symbolic value and media coverage is worth it. (Note that I’m not talking about economic boycotts, which may be more effective.) Ghosh himself points out that in writing In an Antique Land, he worked with Israeli as well as Arab academics to learn the written language (Judeo-Arabic) used by Abraham Ben-Yiju; a boycott would have made that project impossible. Similarly, this kind of cultural boycott would also lead us to be unable to engage with dissenting Israeli cultural expression, such as the recent film Waltz With Bashir.
But for me the most compelling argument against this way of reacting to Israeli cultural institutions is that, as bad as things are for the Palestinians, what the U.S. itself has engaged in over the past decade — especially the debacle of an unjustifiable and badly executed war in Iraq — is far worse. By any reasonable standard, if we’re boycotting Israel, we should be boycotting ourselves! (And similar kind of accusations could be made against India or Pakistan, for any number of reasons.) In short, this kind of thing doesn’t get us anywhere. Structurally, if we pay taxes and receive benefits from a government, we are all “complicit” in what that government does. Ghosh and Atwood expressed their dissenting views with the current situation in Israel in their acceptance speech on May 9. Here is an excerpt from the speech:
MARGARET: Propaganda deals in absolutes: in Yes and No. But the novel is a creature of nuance: of perhaps, of maybe. It concerns itself, not with gods and demons, but with mortal people, with their flawed characters, their unsatisfactory bodies, their sufferings, their limited and often wrong choices; with the dubiousness of their own actions and the unfairness of their fates.
AMITAV: Writing a novel often requires you to see life through the eyes of those you may not agree with. It is a polyphonic form. It pleads for the complex humanity of all human beings.
Yes. Later they went on to acknowledge the untenable treatment of the Palestinians, and express support for the current round of talks led by George Mitchell. Isn’t it more effective to go to Tel Aviv and talk about the “unequal, unjust, and harsh and dangerous conditions of the Palestinian people in the Occupied Territories,” than it would be to stay home in Park Slope, and write articles denouncing Israel for Counterpunch?
Ghosh explains his attitude towards the disinvestment movement on Margaret Atwood’s blog in a longer statement, here. There is also a discussion of Ghosh’s approach at Kafila, here, with most voices coming out against Ghosh. And here is a little coverage of the acceptance speech in Tel Aviv from Rediff.
Wait, we should Talk about such things, in an Open and Honest discussion, without prejudging and saying that Everything ‘they’ do is wrong?? Sorry, too radical, it’ll never catch on… cue Blues song on harmonica
I am reminded of this.
There is also a discussion of Ghosh’s approach at Kafila, here, with most voices coming out against Ghosh.
If ‘voices’ on that site were against imbibing liquid petroleum, I’d give petroleum a second chance.
From a “desi” perspective, why are people so attracted to the Palestinian issue? They are blatantly being sycophants to non-desi groups and a non-desi agenda. From the “desi” perspective, there are plenty of poorer and occupied people (Kashmiris–perspectives will of course differ as to who the occupier is) right here in the subcontinent. Also Tamil issue in SL, Naxals in Orissa, etc. I think it is servile to follow such a blatantly non-desi agenda and call it “desi.” By the way, Israel is our second-largest non-military trading partner in Asia (mostly diamonds). When Kasab came to kill Indians, he and his friends also came to kill Israelis. The average man on the street cares two hoots for this Palestinian issue. Plenty of local and more worthy causes. Palestinian-pity is for artsy jet-setters. (We banker jet-setters prefer to cut deals with the Isrealis. So it has always been, so it will always be, friends.)
Correction: Colleagues are reading my post and correcting me–Israel is our largest trading partner in Asia, and no longer mostly diamonds. Apologies for being behind times (I focus on East Asia). People are laughing and joking at my post–there is a lot of stress in Bombay–security is still not much improved. People are, shall we say, jealous of Israel–colleague just said “we need to learn from them.”
Interesting discussion on linked sites. Looks like this prize has been awarded to a at least a couple of Indians (Professor Rao) or Indian-born (Zubin Mehta) before. Were they also pressured not to accept this prize or do writers get more flak for accepting/not accepting awards?
As one of those who think AIPAC has too much influence here, I am not an Israeli sympathizer. Having said that, I always felt the left and some other Indians bent over backwards to appease Palestinians while they never returned the favor. Israel definitely is bullying their way with the settlements. Still are they any worse of a country than your typical middle eastern nation? I doubt such objections would be raised if the UAE or Iran offered such a prize. Or Pakistan where the majority of the islamic terrorism seems to have some link.
The real issue here is that America is more hated for being an ally of Israel than for being an aggressor toward Iraq. Israel has some ridiculous policies, but I can’t help but wonder why the political left worldwide is so allied to the Palestinian cause to the exclusion of all other causes. Bankerboy, isn’t that ironic? The artsy jet-setter classes of India are fueled by capitalism, and yet so publicly leftist. When was the last time they commented on Darfur?
I’m glad they accepted the award. We need more dialogue, and fewer echo chambers.
i’ve also been mulling over these issues ever since carrie prejean propositioned me
And you’re still standing? Beware, Prejeans grow up to be Coulters. Now there’s a scary proposition.
well, she’s enticing me with these diamondbacks box seats.
The names on both petitions – the US one and the Indian one – consist of several hearty Hinduphobes. Some of them such as S. Anand, Janaki Nair, and Nivedita Menon are hard to match for sheer zeal. India has no problems maintaining cordial diplomatic relations with far more unsavoury regimes than Israel – N.Korea, Sudan, Middle East autocracies (pick one, any one). To borrow from someone I do not like at all, I would be represented rather by the last 542 individuals from the New Delhi telephone directory, than by the signatories of these two petitions.
Sanctimony, hypocrisy…OK I will stop there.
and the policies of the apartheid state of Israel in which Arab and Jewish members have different rights.
why do so many people who protest Israel’s treatment of Palestinians resort to calling Israel an apartheid state, when I believe most states in the middle east are “apartheid” by anti-Israel contingent’s own definition? Certain Arab groups have more rights than any other group in most of these states, whether that division is made by religious or ethnic lines. Frankly to me, there’s much worst human rights abuses in that area of the world than what goes on in Israel. I’m so glad Ghosh accepted the award.
soft-bigotry of higher expectations
kudos to amitav ghosh for standing up – I have always enjoyed his books – and now I feel I also respect him as a person.
I am so sick of the fawning behavior of indian liberals towards the arab and iranian middle-east. There is a kind of hysterical anti-westernism which excuses stalin’s dead millions, saddam’s dead kurds, even the 1000s massacred in Tibet, but finds it necessary to blame israel for all the regions problems.
The reality is that ALL the nations in the region are recent constructs: saudi arabia, iraq, lebanon and looking further out – india and pakistan. Most have unsettled borders and problems with this or that group.
And what of the open hatred and bigotry towards jews and israelis by all muslims?? Shouldnt that be condemmed as well? Doesnt that have an impact on finding a solution to the problem?
From Wikipedia on Saudi Arabia’s own laws – you can only be a citizen if you are a Muslim, etc. Talk about apartheid. I hope other middle eastern nations protest the apartheid practiced in other countries besides Israel, starting with Saudi Arabia.
“The Government prohibits the public practice of other religions. The Government has declared the Holy Quran and the Sunna (tradition) of the Prophet Muhammad to be the country’s constitution. The Government bases its legitimacy on governance according to the precepts of the rigorously conservative and strict interpretation of the Salafi or Wahhabi school of the Sunni branch of Islam and discriminates against other branches of Islam. Neither the Government nor society in general accepts the concepts of separation of religion and state, and such separation does not exist. The legal system is based on Sharia (Islamic law), with Shari’a courts basing their judgments largely on a code derived from the Quran and the Sunna. The Government permits Shi’a Muslims to use their own legal tradition to adjudicate noncriminal cases within their community.[23]
The U.S. State Department’s 1997 Human Rights Report on Saudi Arabia states. “Islam is the official religion, and all citizens must be Muslims. The government prohibits the public practice of other religions.” Under Pope Benedict XVI, Vatican officials have raised the issue of Christians being forbidden from worshipping openly in Saudi Arabia[24]. As an Islamic State, Saudi Arabia gives preferential treatment for Muslims. While allowing foreigners to come and work, Saudi Arabia prohibits the burial of Non-Muslims on Saudi soil[25][26] During Ramadan, eating, drinking, or smoking in public during daylight hours is not allowed.[27] Foreign schools are often required to teach a yearly introductory segment on Islam. Saudi Arabia forbids missionary work by any religion other than Wahabi/Salafi Islam. Saudi religious police have detained Shiite pilgrims participating in the Hajj, allegedly calling them “infidels in Mecca”.[28] The restrictions on the Shi’a branch of Islam in the kingdom along with the banning of displaying Jewish and Christian symbols have been referred to as apartheid.”
As a reminder – Zubin Mehta is the conductor of the Israel Philharmonic Orchestra. He has been associated with it continuously since the 60s. I somehow doubt that he would be inclined to boycott Israel. CNR Rao is won it for solid state physics. I doubt if the typical Indian leftist cares about such things — most probably the leftists would not have known about the award at the time. They do care about literature, and have some influence there, unfortunately for Ghosh.
Anti-Israel-ism (or Anti-semitism or Anti-Zionism as per your political views) has been a staple of many western Campuses for years now. The Indian left is not particularly original and tends to adopt western ideas wholesale. Plus the muslim block in India has always been anti Israel. The fact that the BJP is pro Israel does not really help matters either.
Overall, though this protest is a good thing .. as you pointed out the Israel-India ties right now are far too strong for this to have any impact, and this keeps the Indian left busy.
I doubt if anyone outside India considers the 50 signatories as “intellectuals”, so it will not have any impact outside either. A kahawat that comes to mind immediately is Kutte Bhowke Hazaar Haathi Chale Bazaar.
So as an onlooker I urge the 50 signatories and all their supporters to concentrate on this issue for the next few years. Go lefties go! Fight the good fight and do not get dispirited! :-).
when I believe most states in the middle east are “apartheid” by anti-Israel contingent’s own definition?
this is ridiculous. israel is expected to a civilized nation. for a civilized (western) nation israel’s policies are rather shocking. so yeah, of course there are different standards for civilized peoples and barbaric ones. unfortunately, israel decided to embed itself in a barbaric region where i am actually somewhat skeptical that civilized norms have any long term chance of persistence because of the structural biases against them.
that being said, i personally don’t get the obsession with israel by non-muslims or non-arabs.muslims and arabs have religio and ethnocentric reasons to preoccupy over the death of dozens and oppression of hundreds of thousands, but leftists of non-muslim or non-arab provenance should be focusing on the deaths of hundreds of thousands and oppression of millions in africa. ah, but see point #1. black people killing black people is one thing, but the israeli elite (ashkenazi) is of european origin, so they can’t be doing what they’re doing. reminds me of when bill clinton expressed shock & outrage that genocide was occurring in bosnia, in europe, in the late 20th century. even though the bosnia genocide was dwarfed by what was going on in rwanda at the same time (a genocide that the clinton administration pulled strings to get the UN not to declare a genocide).
btw, if you look at israeli property laws and such they do strike westerners as shocking. as well as the idea of self-consciously ethnic state (in fact, israelis were mooting the idea of an official ban on non-jewish heads of state recently). on the other hand, israel is on the liberal side for a middle eastern nation. if leftist anti-israel types would simply admit more often that they’re working off a double standard because middle eastern nations are barbaric to begin with then there would be less accusation of anti-semitic bigotry to ward off their critiques. the critics don’t hate jews, they actually just hold them to the standards of full humans! by contrast, if the double standards were admitted, those of us who don’t think all nations and cultures are exchangeable, and honestly admit that some cultures have values which we feel to be superior and admirable, while others are positively barbaric, should also be open to examining israel in a more skeptical light, and considering whether it should be moved into the category of barbaric nations who aren’t expected to respect individual rights. if we want to keep it in the western and civilized category, then the anti-israel critique is warranted and necessary (my own position though is the idealistic one of giving every israeli citizen temporary emigration rights to any western nation of their choosing and letting the arabs take over israel).
Faced with the level of existential threat as Israel, rest assured that even the “civilized” western nations would adopt similar practices. Hell, if America was under half the threat Israel is you’d have people goosestepping through the streets before you know it.
Are you sure it wasn’t Morgan Elizabeth Woolard?
Not really.The various Muslim League(s) have bought into the anti-Israeli cult in stages. While at one time UP ML were the loudest about the depredations of Israel (about as loud as a soft spoken science professor, that’s how loud) ML leaders in other places latched on to this cause in stages. First the Hyderabadi MLs (including ML friendly Islamicist groups like the Majlis) until it finally reached the Kerala MLs. Even here the coastal MLs started to talk anti-Israel only to maintain their own political base that was being deleted by migration to the jihadophile groups, and the CPI(M) which decided to go postal about Israel to woo the Muslim youth. OTOH Muslims in the Congress have as a rule, even when the party leadership has used them cynically as vote catchers, have been concerned with other bread and butter issues. We will talk about APJA Kalam, Dr. Hamid Ansari, and the younger leadership like Salman Khurshid a little later when the discussion gets active.
the critics don’t hate jews, they actually just hold them to the standards of full humans!
okay; I kindof think you are joking when you say this but maybe not.
Razib, you draw a very distinct line with Western and non Western countries. Western, civilized norms and Non-Western uncivilized norms? I totally disagree with you on this. I think India is a civilized country, I think there’s plenty in Asian and Middle Eastern cultures that is “civilized” or maybe the word should be humane. I think there’s plenty in the West that’s been uncivilized. At different times I think cultures are capable of exposing their humanity and inhumanity. I’m not caught up with demarcations of West and nonWest…I think generally all cultures created by humans are capable of humanity and inhumanity.
I think the intellectuals that criticize Israel’s policy for Palestinians would never want to admit that their support for Palestinians partially derives from them thinking that Israel should have a higher standards then their “uncivilized” Arab neighbors.
Faced with the level of existential threat as Israel, rest assured that even the “civilized” western nations would adopt similar practices.
i think this is probably true, which is why i am in favor of relocating israelis to more civilized locales. just as immigrants from countries with conservative social mores tend to liberalize in subsequent generations in the west, so i think you’re seeing the same thing in reverse with israel. it’s original ashkenazi dominated european culture is becoming more middle eastern, in part due to the demographic rise of sephardic and mizrachi jews (though this has been blunted by the recent influx of russian jews, as well as the skewed tendency of mixed origin sabras to identify as ashkenazi if they identify at all). but additionally israel can’t maintain swedish values because it isn’t bordered by finland, norway and denmark.
but one issue is how you would define “existential.” israelis are very keen to keep israel a jewish state. israel is an ethno-state. i don’t have problems with ethno-states myself in the abstract, there are non-ethno-states out there for cosmopolitan types like myself, so i think it is OK if various groups want to maintain purity of whatever in the world so long as they don’t get hitlerian about it. but in the west the espousal of ethno-states is now verboten, in part because of the experience of the holocaust, and in the united states the cultural influence of secular jews who were part of the coalition which abolished the american self-identity as a white protestant nation (blacks, liberal protestants, and catholics were also part of the coalition).
My guess is that Amitav Ghosh’s accepting this prize got more attention because in the past, he’s removed himself from consideration for at least one award.
http://www.ezipangu.org/english/contents/news/forward/3/2.html
If memory serves, his statement of why he chose to accept this more recent award references this first case.
The Dan David prize is NOT a prestigious literary prize. each year the foundation bestows prizes in three categories: Past, Present, Future. Atwood and Ghosh were awarded in the Present category for their “rendition” of the 20th century.
I think people singled out Ghosh because he refused to be considered for the Commonwealth Prize and his writing has long held a subaltern, anti-colonial voice. So it seems incongruous that he should accept a prize from a foundation that is thoroughly entrenched in the Israeli establishment.
I wish I could say I was surprised to read that people don’t understand why others sympathize with the Palestinians, or that anyone can think the Palestinians, who have been literally herded on to reservations, and are denied basic rights. How have they been appeased?
It’s all well to argue that Israel is “better” than Arab dictatorships, but Israel is held as a beacon of “Western democracy” in the Middle East. But as many South Africans have pointed out, the situation there for Palestinians is that of apartheid. The very premise of religious democracy is a negation of the democratic principle.
Israeli leaders, including Ehud Barak, say the situation is apartheid, and untenable.
People relate with the Palestinians, since they remain a victim of Western colonialism, long after other colonial regimes have been dismantled.
@Al beruni—- And what of the open hatred and bigotry towards jews and israelis by all muslims
well, i’m muslim and I don’t hate jews or israelis. My friends come from many different cultures and religions, including my jewish friends who are not close minded enough to not want me as a friend because we have different beliefs. close to a quarter of the world’s population is muslim. generalizing to say they all think this or do that is just. plain. stupid.
In every war, Israel has shipped in weapons to India, whereas the OIC countries have shipped in weapons to Pakistan In Kashmir, there have been jihadis from every OIC In addition, in 1948, 1 million jews were expelled from arab countries why not ship the palestinians there or to other OIC countries from where millions of kafirs have been expelled in the last 65 years, such as South Asian islamic countries
Israel represents a reversal for islam and thats why they hate it
barani … we don’t ALL hate israel… whether or not everyone agrees with their policies is a different matter.
and wtf is a jihadi.. i hate when people appropriate words and symbols and make them so evil (swastika, anyone?). These people you call jihadis are killing innocent people and committing suicide. those are sins in islam!! and jihad means a struggle for Islam. contradiction!!!
How many of you know that there is already two states made out of Palistian land and this was done way back in 1922? How many of you know that ~75% of the Palestine region was given to Arabs, and only ~25% was given to Jews? I think that is more than fair, especially since the Middle East has been increasingly ethnically cleansed of Jews. What are the names of these two states? Jordan and Israel. This link has the historical documents: http://www.mythsandfacts.org/conflict/mandate_for_palestine/mandate_for_palestine.htm
The goal of the Arabs is not peace, it is the obliteration of Israel.
Not as much is heard about the Jewish refugees: http://www.mythsandfacts.org/Conflict/8/Refugees.pdf
“How much better off Hussein would be if he had been induced to abandon his pose as a benevolent ‘host’ to ‘refugees’ and to affirm the fact that Jordan is the Palestinian Arab nation-state, just as Israel is the Palestinian Jewish nation-state.”
“Not as much is heard about the Jewish refugees”
No and it’s a pity, b/c I think that would put a different spin on things. It is just so odd to me the types of people who seem to identify with the Palestinian issue whether it’s Indian intellectuals or black American teens on the subway wearing the checkered scarf.
Imo, the reason the Palestinians are in the situation is not just in Israel’s hands. When the Israel was created thousands (probably more than the Palestinian population at the time) of Jewish Syrians, Jordanians, etc were expelled from their countries. Why is there not a huge contingent of Jewish refugees in the middle east – – b/c Israel took them in or they were able to move into other countries (that weren’t persecuting them ); None of the Arab countries took the Palestinians in.
And imo the Arab govts (not the mothers and fathers and children) are milking the Palestinian refugee issue for all its worth, partially to put social reforms in their own society. The Palestinian families have been treated inhumanely by the other Arab countries and I just don’t buy it, when Arab govts ask for sympathy. these Indian “intellectuals” should know better. They can focus their attention on caste discrimination, religious discrimination issues, gender discrimination at home…(not saying they aren’t already doing that).
The truth about Arabs posing as “Palestinians”:
“# “There is no such country [as Palestine]! ‘Palestine’ is a term the Zionists invented! There is no Palestine in the Bible. Our country was for centuries part of Syria.”
“Palestine was part of the Province of Syria…
…politically, the Arabs of Palestine were not independent in the sense of forming a separate political entity.”
There will never be peace in the Middle East because Muslims do not want a non-Muslim country in the Middle East. They will never stop until Israel is destroyed. No amount of land will be enough – not 75% not 90% nothing. They want the Jews to live under Islamic Arab rule as dhimmis. That is the end game. They know how to play left wing sentiments to their advantage by playing the victim. But it is the Jews whose very existence lies in the balance in the Middle East.
“None of the Arab countries took the Palestinians in”
True. But keep in mind that the majority of the population of Jordan, which was created out of the Palestine region (~75%) to the East of the river Jordan, is Arab “Palestinian.” See the link about Jordan above #32. So the Arab “refugees” in question are a subsection not the majority of Arab “Palestinians”.
In Israel there is plenty of religious pluralism, so no, it is the Muslims who will never tolerate the existence of Israel because it is non Islamic. http://www.mythsandfacts.org/media/user/documents/freedom-of-religion.pdf
Look at the charters of the PLO, Fatah, Hamas. They state their end goal pretty clearly – http://www.mythsandfacts.org/Conflict/statute-treaties/all.htm
All those Indian leftists should read those links before piling on Ghosh and Atwood.
I’m still reading through the comments here but I’m lucky enough to have something of some interest to mention regarding a comment by PS so I just read so I’ll jump in quickly.
An American friend of mine is of Jewish descent but doesn’t particularly believe in the religion. In any case, he works in air conditioner and refrigerator repair and found out about a lucrative position in Saudi Arabia so he travelled out there and received the job. Apparently at some point in customs he was asked whether he was Jewish and responded in the negative because he didn;t think he was. From his perspective two of his grandparents were Jewish but neither he nor his parents were.
A few months in somehow it came out that – at least by the Saudi definition – he WAS Jewish and he was thus fined and expelled…after serving a six month sentence in a Saudi prison for his crime.
When he mentioned this to me I found it rather hard to believe but after visiting the Saudi government’s tourism website where they warmly encouraged everyone to visit with the exception of people who had “been to Israel or Jews” I realized that there’s much about the middle east that doesn’t get a lot of play in certain circles. (I also happen to have engaged in a two day public vociferous protest to this racism with the result (it seems) of their having removed the offending mention of their excluding Jews on their website. I’d guess that the practice is still ongoing though, just not internet-available, at least not on the official english-language site of the government’s tourism department.)
I just read Razib’s first two comments and they’re surprising coming from him. He makes a few good points and a few bad ones but his glaring error appears to be the impression he offers that Israel’s laws are judeo-centric. With the exception of their immigration laws (which allow for immigration from anywhere in accordance with similar laws to other civilized locales but which adopt a “no questions asked” policy for Jews who wish to immigrate) Israel’s laws are ISRAEL-centric, a thing wholly different from Judeo-centric when you consider that Arab Israeli’s have not one right less than Jewish Israelis — and they comprise a full 1/3 of Israel’s elementary school youth.
Israel’s issue with the West Bank (and until recently Gaza) of course are otherwise. Whatever the justifications for holding on to the West Bank, the fact is that many of the people there – Palestinians or Jordanians or whatever one might call them – are living in a land where they don’t get to vote for the composition of the legislature. And while it’s true that they would face this same issue in most any other Middle-Eastern country, Israel is, after all, a civilized nation — hence the problem.
That may perhaps be, but Congress certainly had an anti-Israeli mindset. It took an RSS wallah like PVNR to establish diplomatic relations with Israel, and even then things did not get into high gear until after Rao managed to transfer power to the BJP by scuttling the Congress organisation. And most if not all of these lefties badgering Ghosh would be Congress voters.
Btw, boycotts are not always useless. Israel is very concerned about the boycott of products in the West Bank: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-wires/20100518/ml-israel-palestinians/
Btw, boycotts are not always useless. Israel is very concerned about the boycott of products in the West Bank: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-wires/20100518/ml-israel-palestinians/
Yep, but that’s a focused economic boycott — with a clear goal. It’s achievable, and if successful it might lead to a change policy (maybe). It’s very different from a broad and indiscriminate, ‘cultural’ boycott.
At any rate, thanks for the link. I hadn’t seen that.
Amardeep: Wasn’t the South African boycott in the 80s a more broad and indiscriminate boycott which arguably worked at some level?
Yes, but it was first and foremost economic (there were of course also cultural elements, such as “Don’t play sun city” and the international sporting events boycotts, etc.). It was only when the U.S. came on board with trade sanctions in the late 1980s that South Africa started to feel any real pressure. (See the “Comprehensive Anti-Apartheid Act of 1986”)
I also think the South Africa example was a different kind of case. The context there was a broad international consensus that the government of South Africa had to completely restructure — a new regime had to come into place. That is not the international consensus on Israel. Specific policies have to change, and there is the means to do that using a different kind of pressure. Moreover, as long as the U.S. government remains divided over how to approach Israel (again, there’s no economic pressure), this academic and cultural boycott has no chance of doing anything.
The hostility to the Palestinian cause here in the comments is mostly because Palestinian are Muslims.
There is something to this, definitely. Ironically the same charge is levelled against those who are in favour of it – at least in far away India.
The hostility to the Palestinian cause here in the comments is mostly because Palestinian are Muslims.
No, at least I can speak for myself. I don’t have any bigotry towards Muslims or any other religious; I am disgusted that countries that offer no rights to their immigrants and minorities hypocritically call out Israel on their “apartheid”, when they don’t apply those same standards to themselves. End of story. I can’t take the govts seriously in their stance. The Egyptian govt has ruthlessly put down Palestinians who were trying to come into their country. There is apartheid, prejudice that is written in the laws of countries of countries like Saudi. There is real bigotry toward Muslims and other religious groups; it’s unfortunate that when people rightfully call attention to a govt like Saudi accusing the Israeli policy as apartheid as bogus is met with accusations of bigotry, you lessen the real bigotry that many religous groups actually experience.
I think some of the anger directed against Amitav Ghosh might have been due to his 2001 decision to withdraw his book “The Glass Palace” from contention for the commonwealth prize (his reasoning is here). Now, there are subtleties and differences between the two situations, and I don’t think Ghosh deserves the recrimination for his decision to accept this particular prize inspite of what, I think, is Israel’s egregious behavior (primarily because I remain unconvinced of the value of boycotts like this), but he himself did wade into this cesspool voluntarily a few years ago.
Elvis Costello cancels performance, stating these reasons – http://www.elviscostello.com/news/it-is-after-cosiderable-contemplation/44
But for me the most compelling argument against this way of reacting to Israeli cultural institutions is that, as bad as things are for the Palestinians, what the U.S. itself has engaged in over the past decade — especially the debacle of an unjustifiable and badly executed war in Iraq — is far worse. By any reasonable standard, if we’re boycotting Israel, we should be boycotting ourselves!
If that’s the crux of your argument then it cannot possibly apply to Margaret Atwood who is a Canadian. It is possible for her to boycott both of these nations if she so chooses.