Hamas Lawmaker: Gaza Flotilla Did More Than 10,000 Rockets

Who now doubts that strategic nonviolent action can transform the
politics of the Israel/Palestine conflict?

Not Hamas parliamentarian Aziz Dweik, the Wall Street Journal
reports:

"When we use violence, we help Israel win international
support," said Aziz Dweik, a leading Hamas lawmaker in the West Bank.
"The Gaza flotilla has done more for Gaza than 10,000
rockets."

A few months ago, the Israeli government's blockade of Gaza was not a
prominent issue on the world's agenda. Now, the Israeli government is
being politically compelled to "ease" the blockade. Not end it: still,
materials for reconstruction are not yet being let it in; still,
exports from Gaza are not yet being allowed out; still, inputs for
Gaza's factories are not yet being allowed in. But even the measures
to "ease" the blockade which have now been announced, such as
replacing the list of allowed items with a list of prohibited items,
are demands which prior to the Gaza Freedom Flotilla the Israeli
government summarily rejected.

And this story is far from over: international press are reporting on
the blockade as they did not do before, scrutinizing Israeli
government claims as they did not do before, citing the counter-claims
of Israeli, Palestinian, and international human rights groups as they
did not do before. And more boats are on
the way.

What else could be accomplished if governments and mass movements that
oppose Israeli government policies towards the Palestinians threw
their weight behind other strategic and morally irrefutable demands?

What if, for example, governments and mass movements that oppose
Israeli government policies toward the Palestinians demanded that the
U.S. government stop subsidizing, through abuse of the U.S. tax code
by pro-settler groups, Israeli settlements in the West Bank that even
the Israeli government says are illegal?

Many groups in the U.S. are using tax-exempt donations to help Israeli
settlers establish permanence in the Israeli-occupied territories,
effectively obstructing the creation of a Palestinian state, against
the stated policy of the U.S. government and even of the Israeli
government, the New York Times reports.

The Times notes several remarkable things about this activity:

• some of it appears to run clearly afoul of the U.S. tax code
• some of the Israeli settlements subsidized by this activity are
  illegal under Israeli law
• the Israeli government does not grant tax-exempt status to groups
  supporting the settlements which, as U.S. law is currently (not) being
  enforced, are de facto exempt in the U.S.
• U.S. officials and Israeli military officials are privately
  complaining about this activity, in part because some of the supported
  groups are openly defiant of the Israeli government and regularly
  engage in violence to resist Israeli government policy.
• much of this activity is funded by right-wing Christian
  "Dispensationalist" groups that actually want to foster conflict
  between Israel and its neighbors because they believe that war between
  Israel and its neighbors fulfills biblical prophecy.

What if governments and mass movements that oppose Israeli government
policies towards the Palestinians demanded that the U.S. government
stop subsidizing Israeli settlements in the West Bank by granting
tax-exempt status to groups that are promoting Israeli settlements in
the West Bank? In particular, what if they demanded that:

• the U.S. government vigorously enforce its own tax laws
  against groups that are supporting Israeli settlements in the West
  Bank
• the U.S. government deny tax-exempt status to any activity that
  supports Israeli settlements in the West Bank that the Israeli
  government considers illegal
• the U.S. government deny tax exempt status to any activity in the
  West Bank in support of Israeli settlements there that is not
  tax-exempt under Israeli law

How could the U.S. government plausibly explain in public its refusal
to accede to these demands? If this issue became an international
liability for the U.S. government, wouldn't some Washington think
tanks, pundits, peace groups and Members of Congress start to speak
up?

The Israeli military attack on the Mavi Marmara brought forth
a lot of loose talk in the world about "boycotting Israel." This is an
arena where a government like Turkey - and other governments of
"moderate" Muslim-majority countries - could help change history by
providing strategic leadership to this unfocused energy. As Naomi
Klein has written, "Boycott is not a dogma; it is a tactic." Boycotts
are much more likely to be effective when they are strategic,
when they are specifically targeted against extreme
behavior which the broad mass of humanity can be united
against. It's not the nation, it's the occupation.

Imagine if the government of Turkey - which has threatened to cut off
diplomatic relations with Israel over the Gaza blockade - were now to
announce that it is prepared to lead an international boycott of
corporations linked to the Israeli occupation of the West Bank,
Gaza, and East Jerusalem. What if Turkey banned the import into
Turkey of Caterpillar bulldozers, like the one that killed Rachel
Corrie?

What if Turkey and other "moderate" Muslim-majority countries were to
introduce a resolution in the Organization of the Islamic Conference
in support of boycott of corporations linked to the Israeli
occupation of the West Bank, Gaza, and East Jerusalem? What
plausible argument could the government of the United States make
publicly against such a move, when by targeting the
occupation, these Muslim-majority countries would simply be
attempting to implement stated U.S. government
policy?

Memo to Hamas and all results-oriented Islamists: if you are looking
for strategic companies linked to the Israeli occupation to target,
Jewish Voice for Peace has published some
key examples here. The sea is behind us and the adversary in
front.