Israel’s New Rules
By A.J. Caschetta, Daily
Caller, 17 March 2017. Hugh Lanning, a British citizen and chairman of the
Palestine Solidarity Campaign, was denied entry into Israel Sunday night,
the first militant anti-Zionist to fall victim to a new law banning entry to
any foreigner “who knowingly issues a public call for boycotting Israel.”
Caller, 17 March 2017. Hugh Lanning, a British citizen and chairman of the
Palestine Solidarity Campaign, was denied entry into Israel Sunday night,
the first militant anti-Zionist to fall victim to a new law banning entry to
any foreigner “who knowingly issues a public call for boycotting Israel.”
“Whoever acts against
Israel should understand that the rules of the game have changed,” Strategic
Affairs Minister Gilad Erdan said afterwards.
Israel should understand that the rules of the game have changed,” Strategic
Affairs Minister Gilad Erdan said afterwards.
Prior to the new law,
anyone from a “friendly country” who came to the Jewish state could stay on a
three-month entry visa unless specifically singled out for non-entry by the
Interior Ministry. As Miriam Ellman notes, the new law places the
onus on visitors connected to boycott movements to explain why they should be
granted admission.
anyone from a “friendly country” who came to the Jewish state could stay on a
three-month entry visa unless specifically singled out for non-entry by the
Interior Ministry. As Miriam Ellman notes, the new law places the
onus on visitors connected to boycott movements to explain why they should be
granted admission.
The ambiguous
language can be construed as applying not only to those, like Lanning, who are
involved in the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement, but also to
those who embrace what I call Backdoor BDS –accepting
and advocating some parts of the BDS program, such as boycotting only “West
Bank” products or sanctioning only certain Israelis.
language can be construed as applying not only to those, like Lanning, who are
involved in the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement, but also to
those who embrace what I call Backdoor BDS –accepting
and advocating some parts of the BDS program, such as boycotting only “West
Bank” products or sanctioning only certain Israelis.
The law is a
determined act of self-defense, an increasingly rare occurrence among free
nations in the 21st century. As one of the bill’s
sponsors explained, “Preventing
BDS supporters who come here [from] hurt[ing] us from the inside is the very
least we should be doing against haters of Israel.”
determined act of self-defense, an increasingly rare occurrence among free
nations in the 21st century. As one of the bill’s
sponsors explained, “Preventing
BDS supporters who come here [from] hurt[ing] us from the inside is the very
least we should be doing against haters of Israel.”
The English
philosopher Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679) called self-defense
the “second principle of natural law.” Only the foolish and the dead
refuse to defend themselves.
philosopher Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679) called self-defense
the “second principle of natural law.” Only the foolish and the dead
refuse to defend themselves.
Yet many in the media
and academia find fault in Israel doing what every other nation on Earth does.
and academia find fault in Israel doing what every other nation on Earth does.
Making no attempts to
disguise its contempt for Israel, The New York Times misleads
its readers with the headline “New
Israel Law Bars Foreign Critics From Entering the Country.” Preventing
entry of “critics” is not the same as preventing entry to enemies who are
determined to undermine and delegitimize the country.
disguise its contempt for Israel, The New York Times misleads
its readers with the headline “New
Israel Law Bars Foreign Critics From Entering the Country.” Preventing
entry of “critics” is not the same as preventing entry to enemies who are
determined to undermine and delegitimize the country.
American academics
have responded to the new law in ways that will not surprise those who follow
such matters. The BDS-ers are outraged that they will have to contain
their activities to countries other than the one they are attempting to
erase. Backdoor BDS-ers are worried they will be conflated with “genuine”
BDS-ers. And of course everyone is concerned about their academic
freedom, as Elizabeth Redden documents at Inside
Higher Ed.
have responded to the new law in ways that will not surprise those who follow
such matters. The BDS-ers are outraged that they will have to contain
their activities to countries other than the one they are attempting to
erase. Backdoor BDS-ers are worried they will be conflated with “genuine”
BDS-ers. And of course everyone is concerned about their academic
freedom, as Elizabeth Redden documents at Inside
Higher Ed.
- BDS-er and MLA Members for Justice in Palestine
(MLAMJP) activist Cynthia Franklin,
an English professor at the University of Hawaii, worries that she will be
prevented from teaching at Al-Quds University next year. - BDS-er Nadia Abu El-Haj, anthropology professor
at Columbia University, is concerned about “international scholars who
work on Palestine” like a colleague who “may well be turned around at the
Tel Aviv airport” en route to a conference at Birzeit University. - Backdoor BDS-er David Biale, a professor of
Jewish history at UC-Davis (who favors “a boycott of the settlements but
not the country as a whole”), fears he will be mistakenly barred from
entering Israel. Biale asks “Is this [law] just for propaganda
reasons for the extreme right-wingers in Israel?” - But the tin-ear award goes to Laurie A. Brand,
chair of Academic Freedom committee at the Middle East Studies Association
(MESA), who worries that the new law constitutes (you guessed it) “a
violation of free speech, freedom of conscience and specifically academic
freedom.”
Those Israeli
citizens who join the BDS movement are still perfectly free to undermine their
country’s legitimacy if they choose. Outraged non-Israelis are still perfectly
free (academically and otherwise) to follow their consciences wherever these
paths may lead; they’re just not allowed to visit the country they’re working
to destroy.
citizens who join the BDS movement are still perfectly free to undermine their
country’s legitimacy if they choose. Outraged non-Israelis are still perfectly
free (academically and otherwise) to follow their consciences wherever these
paths may lead; they’re just not allowed to visit the country they’re working
to destroy.
So bravo to the 46
Israeli politicians who stood up for the Jewish state (28 voted against
it). No longer can Judith Butler fly into Israel, catch a show in Jenin,
give a lecture at
Birzeit, and then fly home to denounce Israel and humanize terrorists. MLAMJP
members wishing to visit Israel (or
“Palestine”) to write up fanciful reports of
oppression will have to fly into Egypt, take a bus to Gaza, and then enter the
country through the network of tunnels traversed by Hamas bombers and stabbers.
Israeli politicians who stood up for the Jewish state (28 voted against
it). No longer can Judith Butler fly into Israel, catch a show in Jenin,
give a lecture at
Birzeit, and then fly home to denounce Israel and humanize terrorists. MLAMJP
members wishing to visit Israel (or
“Palestine”) to write up fanciful reports of
oppression will have to fly into Egypt, take a bus to Gaza, and then enter the
country through the network of tunnels traversed by Hamas bombers and stabbers.
Good luck with that.
A.J. Caschetta is a
Shillman-Ginsburg fellow at the Middle East Forum and a senior lecturer at the
Rochester Institute of
Technology.
Shillman-Ginsburg fellow at the Middle East Forum and a senior lecturer at the
Rochester Institute of
Technology.
