Response to Josh Singer's Israel Apartheid NYT Article Review

An op-ed published in the New York Times last month compares Israel’s policies toward Palestine and Eritrean and Sudan refugees to South Africa’s Apartheid. Israel has been engaged in ongoing disputes with Palestine over whose land it rightfully is, and countless people have died for this cause over the course of the past 65 years. Josh’s blog even notes the barrier fence at the West Bank separating Palestinians from Israelis. The fact of the matter is that Israel has made every effort to guarantee its security. It releases very limited information regarding its military, and even refuses to admit that it possesses nuclear weapons (it is generally believed that they have about 100 warheads). Israel has ensured that it would be a formidable opponent on the battlefield, but that is not what matters in a propaganda war. The op-ed argues that peace is the only way to end this war, not the use of force or the threat thereof.

Josh argues in his blog post that it doesn’t really matter whether or not people think Israel is an apartheid state because Israel will continue to do what it is doing to keep its people safe regardless. In reality, it matters quite a bit whether or not people think Israel is an apartheid state. South Africa saw in the 1980’s,  “possessing nuclear weapons may deter foes on the battlefield, but it doesn’t help you win a propaganda war.” According the the op-ed, delegitimization is Israel’s soft belly and apartheid is the buzzword to make it happen. Israel may not be able to just ignore the opinions of other states and continue doing what it is doing. Certain members of the EU have already begun to divest and boycott Israeli banks and other business. According to the finance minister even a partial European boycott could cost Israel 20 billion shekels (about $5.7 billion US). Even the new generation of Palestinians understand that stones and suicide bombers are the weapons of yesterday. They understand that the most effective weapons are boycott, divestment, and sanctions. The op-ed closes with: “As anyone who has bought a “Gucci” bag in a Bangkok market can tell you, it’s all in the label.” Even if it is not empirically true that Israel is an apartheid state, all that matters is that it gets labeled one.