The Limits of Symbolic Action in Gaza’s Crisis

Omar Barghouti, co-founder of the Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions (BDS) movement, has been a vocal advocate for Palestinian rights for over two decades. His commitment to international law and human rights remains unwavering despite the complexities and challenges of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

The British government’s recent pledge to introduce a comprehensive reset of its policy on Israel follows a report indicating that the UK is preparing to ban trade with Israeli settlements in the West Bank. While this decision may seem like a significant step towards holding Israel accountable, it falls short of what is truly necessary.

Barghouti argues that sanctions against individual settler groups or extremist ministers are nothing more than a smoke and mirrors cop-out – a distraction from the UK’s legal obligation to end all support for Israel. This includes arms exports, trade deals, and academic relations that may directly or indirectly enable Israel’s occupation of Gaza, the West Bank, and East Jerusalem.

The crux of Barghouti’s argument lies in his assertion that the UK’s current approach is merely symbolic. It fails to address the core issues at hand, relying instead on performative measures with little concrete effect in holding Israel accountable or pressuring it to comply with international law.

Critics of Western powers during South Africa’s apartheid era accused them of hypocrisy for perpetuating the regime through economic and diplomatic support while paying lip service to moral leadership. The parallels between this case and Israel’s occupation are striking. Just as the West continued to prop up the apartheid regime, so too is Israel’s occupation being met with symbolic gestures from governments like the UK.

Barghouti’s faith in international law remains unwavering, but he also acknowledges its limitations. He recognizes that human rights law must evolve alongside humanity itself – a dynamic process requiring constant vigilance and activism. This principle underpins the BDS movement’s efforts to hold states, corporations, and institutions accountable for their complicity in genocide.

The application of human rights law to Palestine is a critical test case. As Barghouti notes, “Where there is a risk, the obligation to prevent is triggered, and how do you prevent a genocide? You stop enabling it. You end all forms of complicity.”

In the coming weeks, we can expect more from the British government on its policy towards Israel. One thing is clear: symbolic action will not be enough. The UK must take concrete steps to end its support for Israel’s occupation – a move requiring genuine commitment and a willingness to challenge the status quo.

The stakes are high, but so too is the potential reward. As Barghouti reminds us, “People power” can achieve liberation when paired with international law and ethical accountability. The UK must decide whether it has what it takes to join the ranks of true champions of human rights – or if it will continue down a path of symbolic gestures that ultimately serve only to placate public opinion.

The world is watching.