They Say, We Say: Making a big deal about settlements unnecessarily foments discord between America and Israel.

They Say We Say We know that pro-Israel does not mean blindly supporting policies that are irrational, reckless, and counter-productive. Pro-Israel means supporting policies that are consistent with Israel's interests and promote its survival as a Jewish, democratic state.

You've heard the arguments of the religious and political right-wing, and so have we. They've had their say. Now, we'll have ours.

Go HERE for all installments of APN's "They Say, We Say"

Are settlements really a problem?

They Say:

Making a big deal about settlements unnecessarily foments discord between America and Israel.

We Say:

The U.S. has long opposed settlement activity in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, recognizing settlements as a political and security liability for Israel and an impediment to achieving a negotiated solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The policy dates back to the birth of the settlement movement and has remained consistent across administrations led by both political parties. This is entirely the correct position for the U.S. and it is unfortunate that successive U.S. administrations have failed to translate this longstanding official opposition to settlements into a coherent policy that has convinced Israel to stop settlement expansion.

For decades U.S. presidents have pressed Israel to stop building settlements. The administration of George W. Bush put settlements under the spotlight with the Mitchell Report and the Roadmap, both of which called for a complete settlement freeze (the latter of which also called for the removal of illegal outposts). The Obama Administration early on sought a settlement freeze. Both of these administrations focused on settlements because settlements are a central obstacle to Israeli-Palestinian peace. It should be emphasized that a settlement freeze is not and has never been an end unto itself: the goal of any peace policy is to achieve a conflict-ending agreement that renders the settlement issue moot. That said, while a settlement freeze need not be a precondition for peace negotiations, continued settlement growth cannot be dismissed or ignored.

For the sake of Israeli-Palestinian peace, the U.S. - regardless of who is in the White House - must convince Israel's leaders that American opposition to settlements can no longer be dismissed. Continued settlement expansion undermines Palestinian moderates, feeds extremism, exacerbates tensions on the ground, and diminishes the chances of achieving a negotiated agreement that could end the conflict. Likewise, Israel's failure to rein in settler renegades threatens the viability of peace efforts.

They Say, We Say: "A boycott of settlements is not only politically misguided but also pointless."

They Say We Say We know that pro-Israel does not mean blindly supporting policies that are irrational, reckless, and counter-productive. Pro-Israel means supporting policies that are consistent with Israel's interests and promote its survival as a Jewish, democratic state.

You've heard the arguments of the religious and political right-wing, and so have we. They've had their say. Now, we'll have ours.

Go HERE for all installments of APN's "They Say, We Say"

Is Peace Possible?

They Say:

A boycott of settlements is not only politically misguided but it is also pointless, practically speaking, since it won't have any real economic impact on settlements.

We Say:

The Israeli right's reaction to settlement boycott efforts demonstrates that settlement supporters, at least, fear boycotts can have a real impact. Indeed, the pro-settler lobby and its Knesset partisans appear terrified of settlement boycotts - so much so that they pushed through a flagrantly undemocratic law against them.

The settlers and their supporters know that boycotting settlements is a big deal. They've spent decades trying to erase the Green Line. They want you to enjoy your wine and your homemade orange soda courtesy of that nifty gizmo that lets you carbonate water in your own kitchen. Pay no attention to the fact that in doing so, you're supporting an ideologically rooted political enterprise with an explicit goal to block a two-state solution. Drink up, and for the love of Greater Israel, don't worry about where it came from.

They Say, We Say: "Why doesn't APN support boycotts and divestment efforts targeting Israel?"

They Say We Say We know that pro-Israel does not mean blindly supporting policies that are irrational, reckless, and counter-productive. Pro-Israel means supporting policies that are consistent with Israel's interests and promote its survival as a Jewish, democratic state.

You've heard the arguments of the religious and political right-wing, and so have we. They've had their say. Now, we'll have ours.

Go HERE for all installments of APN's "They Say, We Say"

Is Peace Possible?

They Say:

Why doesn't APN support boycotts and divestment efforts targeting Israel? Until Israelis understand that there is a real cost to their government's anti-peace, pro-settlement policies, nothing will change.

We Say:

We weigh all activism in light of our primary mission and concern: preserving Israel's future and its security and viability as a democracy and a Jewish state. From this mission, we, as a Jewish, Zionist organization, derive our conviction that settlement expansion must stop, the settlement enterprise must be rolled back, and the occupation must end - for the sake of Israel's own security and its own future. Consistent with this mission, we have always opposed boycott, divestment, and sanctions efforts targeting Israel itself. We believe such campaigns are misguided and counterproductive. They target the average, innocent Israeli citizen -- who may well support an end to the occupation and a two-state solution -- rather than the Israeli government policies that are ostensibly the target of the campaigns. They have caused many Israelis and supporters of Israel -- people whose voices are vitally needed to oppose the policies that such campaigns target -- to feel compelled to defend Israel, regardless of the policies in question.

We also categorically oppose the efforts of organizations and activists whose goal, explicit or implicit, is to undermine Israel's existence. Historically, much of the pressure for BDS campaigns originated with anti-Israel sources not interested in Israeli security concerns or Palestinian behavior, giving rise to concerns about global anti-Semitism and the perception that the campaigns are not truly (or only) about Israeli policies but rather reflect a deep-seated hatred for and rejection of Israel.

Consistent with our mission and our convictions, APN has long argued that activism should be targeted across the Green Line separating Israel and the occupied territories. We believe that for activism to be both effective and morally defensible, activists must make clear, emphatically and unambiguously, that their target is the occupation and its manifestations - like settlements and acts of collective punishment - and not Israel proper, innocent Israeli civilians, or legitimate Israeli security practices. Doing so underscores the fact that such activism is not anti-Israel, but rather is opposed to specific policies and practices related to Israeli behavior in the occupied territories.

They Say, We Say: "Why does APN differentiate between boycotts and similar efforts targeting Israel and the same kind of efforts targeting settlements and/or the occupation?"

They Say We Say We know that pro-Israel does not mean blindly supporting policies that are irrational, reckless, and counter-productive. Pro-Israel means supporting policies that are consistent with Israel's interests and promote its survival as a Jewish, democratic state.

You've heard the arguments of the religious and political right-wing, and so have we. They've had their say. Now, we'll have ours.

Go HERE for all installments of APN's "They Say, We Say"

Is Peace Possible?

They Say:

Why does APN differentiate between boycotts and similar efforts targeting Israel and the same kind of efforts targeting settlements and/or the occupation? They're all part of the same effort to delegitimize and attack Israel and undermine its very existence.

We Say:

The window is closing on the two-state solution. All of us who believe peace is possible and believe it is only possible through an end to the occupation and the achievement of a credible, viable two-state solution, must vote with our feet by insisting, adamantly, on the line that separates Israel and the occupied territories. Activism, even if well-intentioned, that blurs this line is misguided and counterproductive. Clearly and unequivocally focusing activism on the territories occupied by Israel in 1967 sends a powerful and unmistakable message to Israelis living on both sides of the Green Line and helps Israelis understand how great a liability the settlements are for their country and their future.

They Say, We Say: "What about boycotts and divestment efforts targeting the occupation?"

They Say We Say We know that pro-Israel does not mean blindly supporting policies that are irrational, reckless, and counter-productive. Pro-Israel means supporting policies that are consistent with Israel's interests and promote its survival as a Jewish, democratic state.

You've heard the arguments of the religious and political right-wing, and so have we. They've had their say. Now, we'll have ours.

Go HERE for all installments of APN's "They Say, We Say"

BDS & Criticism of Israel

They Say:

What about boycotts and divestment efforts targeting the occupation? Isn't this just another pretext to delegitimize and attack Israel?

We Say:

There is a growing movement seeking to focus boycott and divestment efforts on settlements and the occupation, supported by activists who are neither anti-Israel nor anti-Semitic. This effort is gaining traction as a direct consequence of Israeli policies that are deepening the occupation to the point of potential irreversibility in the near term, in tandem with the apparent inability or unwillingness of governments around the world to in any meaningful way challenge these policies.

We believe that activists who seek to focus boycott and divestment efforts squarely on the occupation and settlements deserve credit. Indeed, APN long ago suggested that activists focus on opportunities for people to "invest for peace" - supporting companies and projects whose work is consistent with peace, coexistence, and the two-state solution to the Israeli- Palestinian conflict - and on raising awareness about companies based in or operating in settlements, to permit people to make informed choices about their investment options. We recognize, too, that some companies play a role in enabling the occupation and supporting settlements. Some do so directly, for example by investing in settlements; others do so indirectly and perhaps unknowingly - for example through the sale of equipment used both in Israel and in settlements.

We believe it is legitimate for activists to press companies to adopt practices that deny support to settlements and the occupation, including through targeted boycotts and divestment. Narrowly targeting such activism presents serious challenges: absent a peace agreement, Israel has undeniable security needs related to the occupied territories, for example, securing its border with Jordan and preventing terrorism emanating from the West Bank into Israel. In many cases, like these, the line between contributing to the occupation and permitting Israel to address legitimate security concerns is not clear. Nonetheless, if careful enough distinctions are drawn, such activism can advance the goals of ending the occupation and promoting peace and a negotiated two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

In short, the legitimacy and effectiveness of settlement- and occupation-focused activism will be a function of how its proponents address these challenges. To the extent that such efforts can be portrayed by critics as ignoring or dismissing Israel's legitimate security needs, or as blurring the line between Israel and the occupied territories, they have the potential to be as problematic and counterproductive as efforts directly targeting Israel. Moreover, they risk playing into the hands of settlers and their supporters who gladly blur this same line and who are eager to denounce all anti-settlement and anti-occupation activism as anti-Israel and anti-Semitic.

They Say, We Say: "Criticism of Israel, even by people who claim to support Israel, only feeds the global campaign to delegitimize Israel."

They Say We Say We know that pro-Israel does not mean blindly supporting policies that are irrational, reckless, and counter-productive. Pro-Israel means supporting policies that are consistent with Israel's interests and promote its survival as a Jewish, democratic state.

You've heard the arguments of the religious and political right-wing, and so have we. They've had their say. Now, we'll have ours.

Go HERE for all installments of APN's "They Say, We Say"

Is Peace Possible?

They Say:

Criticism of Israel, even by people who claim to support Israel, only feeds the global campaign to delegitimize Israel. Public criticism of Israel has to stop.

We Say:

A truly pro-Israel position is one that recognizes that criticism of Israeli policies and actions must be judged on its content. It is both true and deeply troubling that anti-Israel and anti-Semitic sentiment is sometimes cloaked in criticism of Israeli government policies and actions. At the same time, it is both true and deeply troubling that some Israeli policies and actions legitimately merit criticism.

The notion that being pro-Israel leaves no room for any criticism of Israel, on the grounds that such criticism "delegitimizes" Israel, should trouble anyone who cares about Israel's future and Israel's democratic character.

It is foolish, as well as reckless and irresponsible, for anyone to deny Israel's right to exist, call for Israel's destruction, or deny Jewish ties to the land of Israel. At the same time, criticizing and challenging Israeli policies and actions - like its continued settlement in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, its harsh treatment of non-violent protestors in Israel and the West Bank, its continued closure of Gaza, or the ongoing attacks inside Israel on democracy and democratic institutions - is entirely legitimate and, indeed, appropriate.

A vibrant debate over these issues, both in Israel and the U.S., is sorely needed. Efforts to quash all criticism/protest - whether in Israel or outside Israel - by labeling it "delegitimization" are inconsistent with the core democratic values of both Israel and the U.S. - like freedom of speech, freedom to organize, and freedom to peacefully protest.

They Say, We Say: "What is the Left's obsession with bashing Israel?"

They Say We Say We know that pro-Israel does not mean blindly supporting policies that are irrational, reckless, and counter-productive. Pro-Israel means supporting policies that are consistent with Israel's interests and promote its survival as a Jewish, democratic state.

You've heard the arguments of the religious and political right-wing, and so have we. They've had their say. Now, we'll have ours.

Go HERE for all installments of APN's "They Say, We Say"

Is Peace Possible?

They Say:

The Left always wants to criticize Israel - over settlements, over statements, over everything. Why is there this obsession with bashing Israel?

We Say:

Americans for Peace Now is an American organization that has a clearly defined mission: working to advance American and Israeli policies that will lead to comprehensive, durable peace and security for Israel, consistent with U.S. national security interests. APN is also the sister organization of Shalom Achshav, Israel's peace movement. APN and Peace Now share the overarching objective of ensuring Israel's future, including its security and its viability as a tolerant, egalitarian democracy and as a Jewish state. When the Israeli government undertakes actions or policies that run counter to this goal, we and our colleagues in Israel say so. We strongly feel that it is imperative to do so publicly. Public discourse provides transparency and accountability.

We don't "bash" Israel. Our love for Israel is why we care so much about it and why we exist as an organization. What we do criticize - and we do it carefully and responsibly - are Israeli government policies that we know are destructive to Israel's own interests. We criticize violent and illegal conduct of Israeli settlers and their sympathizers, which we recognize as harmful to Israel. And we reject efforts to quash free speech and the right to protest, and to undermine the rule of law or the integrity and independence of Israel's courts, and all other efforts to threaten Israel's character as a democracy.

Legislative Round-Up: Jan 27-Feb 12, 2014

1.  Bills, Resolutions & Letters
2.  Pro-Diplomacy Forces Gain Ground in Iran Hill Battle
3.  The New Strategy: Fighting BDS with Legislation Attacking Free Speech?
4.  Hearings
5. Members on the Record

Note:  Apologies for the irregular schedule of Round-Ups in recent weeks (due to winter colds, international visitors, and now an impending snow storm).  The Round-Up should return to its regular Friday schedule starting next week.

Continue reading

Press Release: APN Applauds House Letter Supporting Diplomacy with Iran

Washington, DC – Americans for Peace Now (APN) thanks the 104 members of the House of Representatives, Republicans and Democrats, who today sent a letter to President Obama supporting the current diplomatic efforts to resolve concerns over Iran's nuclear program.

APN strongly supported the letter and urged House members to sign it.

Continue reading

News Nosh 02.13.14

APN's daily news review from Israel
Thursday February 13, 2014

Quote of the day:
"Naftali Bennett and his people are not willing to hear things they do not like in German. And submarines, Naftali? German submarines we can receive in German?"
--Merav Michaeli reminds pro-settler Economy Minister and his party members of the war submarines Germany is selling to Israel after they walked out on the German EU President's speech.**

Continue reading
1 2 34 5 6 7