By: Sude Guvendik, Peak Associate

The Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement stands as a beacon of hope in the face of the prolonged and deeply rooted injustices suffered by the Palestinian people. In July 2005, a coalition of Palestinian groups proposed a strategy to end the intensifying occupation of Palestinian land. Led by the Palestinian BDS National Committee, the BDS movement is a global coalition advocating for boycotts, divestment, and sanctions against Israel. Drawing inspiration from successful historical movements such as the South African anti-apartheid movement, BDS strategically targets companies and institutions complicit in Israel’s actions against the Palestinian people.

The Israeli occupation, dating back and beyond the unrecognized 1967 East Jerusalem territories occupation, maintains absolute segregation between Jewish settlers and Palestinians — a clear violation of international law. The absence of an actual, functional citizenship for Palestinians living in Israel, coupled with restricting certain rights and services like mobility, employment, and education, further perpetuates the injustices Palestinians living in occupied land face.

BDS is not only a strategy, but a form of foreign policy and diplomacy that starts from below — from the ordinary people. Boycotting involves withdrawing support for companies and institutions that are complicit, directly or indirectly, in the violation of Palestinian human rights. Divestment is the call to withdraw investments in the State of Israel and Israeli international companies that sustain apartheid. Sanctions is the call to pressure local and national governments to end Israeli apartheid, from military trade, to trade agreements, and sanctions in international forums. As BDS gains strength, it has the potential to compel governments to implement sanctions at an official level, similar to the approach taken against apartheid in South Africa. 

The grotesque situation in Gaza demands intervention, as two decades of diplomatic efforts have proven ineffective. The United States’ significant financial support to Israel, in the form of a $14.5 billion military aid package and continual assistance in their economy, requires grassroots interventions. A very similar story happened in South Africa, where racial segregation policies and political and economic discrimination governed the lives of non-white people. Years of internal and external resistance, as well as international pressure and sanctions — to which UK Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher and US President Ronald Reagan opposed but were overruled by their governments — eventually repealed the legal basis for apartheid. BDS has modeled its policies, actions, and proposed interventions in the anti-apartheid movement. 

The moral imperative of BDS lies in its historical effectiveness as a nonviolent tool, from bus boycotts to fossil fuel divestment. Targeted boycotts involve focusing on a limited number of carefully selected companies and products that directly contribute to Israel’s crimes. Notable successes include Mcdonalds, Starbucks, G4S, Veolia, Orange, Ben & Jerry’s, and Pillsbury, which have been strategically targeted to send a forceful message to other complicit entities. Organized consumers can boycott companies involved in illegal settlements or distributing weapons to Israel, trade unions can push for divestment, and municipal governments can apply ethical criteria for selecting contractors. BDS encourages collective action to challenge organizations that fund or are indirectly complicit in war crimes.

It’s crucial to recognize BDS as a strategy that welcomes Jewish Israelis opposing their country’s violations of international law. Just as some white South Africans supported anti-apartheid campaigns, approximately 500 Israelis, including artists and scholars, endorsed BDS during Operation Cast Lead under the banner of “boycott from within.”

Over the past two decades, Israel has aggressively targeted BDS through legal measures. In the United States, numerous anti-BDS bills have been introduced and enacted, impacting university funding, contracts, and public blacklists. Germany, too, revokes awards and funding for any form of BDS support.

BDS aims to target Israel’s dependence on trade with Europe and North America, altering its economy and global perception. Companies like Google, Amazon, Airbnb, Booking.com, Expedia, Disney, and Teva Pharmaceutical Industries are identified as targets for pressure campaigns, meaning boycott “when reasonable alternatives exist.” The BDS movement supports various forms of pressure, including boycotts, lobbying, peaceful disruptions, and social media campaigns.

For BDS to succeed, it requires sustained and mainstream support comparable to the anti-apartheid campaign. The current atrocities in Gaza strengthen the case for BDS, with grassroots boycotts already affecting companies like Starbucks and Puma. Although the movement has grown, reaching a critical moment similar to South Africa’s remains a challenge. As momentum builds, it is essential to distinguish legitimate activism from antisemitism and to acknowledge BDS as a serious, nonviolent movement with established principles. Take a moment to reflect on your actions and their ultimate goal; criticizing the actions of Israel as a governmental entity is not anti-semitic, but the harassment and attack on Jewish people is. 

BDS represents a moral imperative in challenging Israel’s policies, drawing parallels with the successful anti-apartheid movement. As global support for BDS intensifies, it could usher in a transformative moment, economically compelling peace for the land of Palestine.