The Role of International Campaigns for Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions b

More and more people are drawing comparisons between Apartheid South Africa and Palestine/Israel. It is a key lesson of struggle that international isolation is expedited by effective internal mobilization and sustained people’s resistance campaigns.

South Africa

The colonisation of South Africa started in 1652 when Jan van Riebeeck of the Netherlands, representing the United East Indian Trading Company, set foot on what was later called the Cape of Good Hope. He reported that he found a “kind of” empty land. This was a blatant lie: thousands of years before Christ, the Khoi-San lived on the land. In 1658, Van Riebeeck gave permission to the white employees of the trading company to stay in South Africa after their contracts expired. Some 40 years later, the British joined the Dutch in the colonisation of South Africa.

In 1948, the National Party of D.F. Malan came to power, using racist slogans in its political campaign. Malan consistently spoke of Apartheid, a Dutch word, and succeeded in introducing Apartheid in the law. According to the Apartheid government, black people needed to be separated from whites, with the result that for decades the Apartheid regime deported Africans out of the self-declared white areas to the Bantustans. Black people were seen as “slaves”, just good enough to work for the whites; all they needed was minor education to perform unskilled labour. Mixed marriages were forbidden. The Dutch and the South African Nationalists shared the Dutch Reformed religion and their language is very similar. The blood ties that were felt made the Dutch for a long time supporters of their oppressive blood brothers and sisters.

Palestine/Israel

The Second World War was a dark period in European history with the Nazi persecution of Jews, Roma and Sinti, homosexuals, communists and people resisting the Nazi’s. The tragedy of the holocaust hit the Jewish population hard. Before the Second World War 140,000 Jews lived in the Netherlands and it is estimated that 110,000 Jews (80 percent) were murdered.(¹) Compared to Belgium, France and Germany this was a remarkably high percentage; in these countries, this figure did not exceed 40 percent. It must be clear that the failure of the Netherlands government to protect its Jewish citizens has left the Dutch with feelings of guilt, matched by a special bond with Israel.

Comparing South Africa and Palestine/Israel

In our view, the comparison between Apartheid South Africa and Israel boils down to flagrant violations of human rights and other international (e.g. humanitarian) laws. The roots of these violations can be found in considering blacks and Palestinians respectively as inferior. Ronnie Kasrils, South African Minister of Intelligence and former commander in the ANC’s military wing, addressed the national Assembly during a debate on the report of a fact finding mission of parliamentarians in the Middle East. He noted that on the basis of their observations the parallel can be drawn with “oppression being experienced by Palestinians under the hand of Israel, and the oppression experienced in South Africa under Apartheid rule”.(²)

In the case of the Netherlands, a similarity can be found in the deep ties that - for different reasons – were and still are felt with South Africa and Israel.

The four pillars of the liberation struggle in South Africa

The struggle for liberation of black people in South Africa started well before 1948, the year of the formal adoption of Apartheid as a state policy by colonial forces under the leadership of the Nationalist Party. After almost three centuries of unorganised, sporadic resistance the South African Natives African Congress, later renamed the African National Congress (ANC) was founded in 1912. It was the result of a realisation by the African population of the need for an organised and unified approach.

[Photo 5 – Delegation from the South African Native National Congress (forerunner of the ANC) that went to England in 1914 to convey the objections of the African people to the 1913 Land Act. © University of the Witwatersrand Library, Department of Historical Papers/ANC.]

Dialogue: Between 1912 and 1948 the ANC’s approach favoured dialogue. During this time the leadership of the ANC believed in the humanity of whites in South Africa. They believed in the possibility of reaching a just settlement through persuasion. These beliefs were rebutted by a racist regime that persisted with its policies of dispossession. The pursuit of a solution through dialogue was never abandoned by the ANC, but it was later supplemented by other strategies directed at putting pressure on the regime to come to the negotiating table. Dialogue thus remained the ANC’s first pillar in its liberation struggle.

Armed resistance: After the declaration of Apartheid as state policy, the ANC Youth League, under the leadership of, amongst others, Nelson Mandela, Walter Sisulu and Oliver Tambo started to agitate within the ANC for a change in strategy. They saw a need to explore the armed struggle as an option. In 1960 Umkhonto WeSizwe, the armed wing of the ANC, was founded. Its main target was attacking symbols of oppression, and not people. From 1960 – nearly 50 years after the formation of the ANC – until its integration into the South African National Defence Force in 1994, armed resistance was the second pillar of the ANC’s liberation struggle.

International pressure: Already in 1959, Chief Albert Luthuli, then president of the ANC, asked the British people to boycott South Africa, stating that “…non-white South Africans have responded to attacks on them by sending deputations and submitted petitions to the authorities…. When these approaches were unsuccessful, they turned to passive resistance and then boycott.”(³) From this point onwards, the ANC sent delegations to address the international community on the need to isolate the Apartheid regime. The call for international pressure through boycotts, sanctions and divestment became an important third pillar of the ANC’s struggle for democracy.

International pressure gained momentum and in 1969 revolving credit loans by US banks amounting to US$40 million were terminated when institutions and individuals withdrew about US$23 million from the banks concerned. In 1973, loans of about US$70 million by a consortium of US and European banks were also terminated. This trend continued and South Africa declared a debt standstill in 1985, due to capital flight.

The success of calls for international isolation was partly due to the important role that was played by South Africans in exile. They worked tirelessly at raising the level of awareness of the international community to the atrocities being committed by the Apartheid regime.

[Mass mobilisation: The three pillars mentioned above contributed to the ultimate demise of Apartheid, but by far the most significant pillar was that of mass mobilisation inside the country. Early ANC campaigns such as the defiance campaign against unjust laws of the 1950s were informed by the analysis that it is the masses of the oppressed themselves who will determine the course of their liberation. The height of mass mobilisation was the formation of the Mass Democratic Movement (MDM) in the 1980s. This movement was formed to fill a void that was left by the banning of political activity and political formations, including the ANC.

The MDM brought together all formations that were opposed to Apartheid, including trade unions, students’ organisations, women’s organisations, NGOs, civic structures, academic formations, sympathetic business structures, etc. These were all brought together under the banner of the United Democratic Front (UDF). Some of the campaigns that were organised included the 'million signature campaign' denouncing Apartheid in 1984. Two years later, the largest stay-away in the history of South Africa took place. Other actions included a rent boycott in Soweto and a two day strike to protest the exclusion of Black people from parliamentary elections.

These are a few examples of how the MDM maintained an internal boycott campaign, which was the major spur to an overwhelming international response that saw the imposition of a comprehensive embargo against South Africa.

Palestinian call for isolation of Israel

One year after the publication of the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice on the illegality of the Wall, Palestinian civil society is jointly calling for international campaigns for boycotts, divestment and sanctions against Israel. As was learned during the liberation struggle in South Africa, international campaigns will be more successful when they are inspired and supported by activities inside. Some lessons can be learned by looking back on successful campaigns in the Netherlands, such as the campaign for an oil embargo and putting pressure on Shell to withdraw from South Africa by urging consumers not to fill their petrol tanks at Shell stations, so long as Shell was economically benefiting from Apartheid policies.

Factors for a successful campaign

Campaigning is first of all about moving people, about touching their heart and offering them an opportunity to act. In the case of Israel, the key issue is to stand up against violations of human rights and other breaches of international law. It is possible to organise campaigns to raise awareness as such, but it is more effective to consider what the public can contribute. In order to achieve this, one has to start by researching where the links are between your country and Israel. This is in order to assess what will hurt the economy or the public image of Israel and where success is possible.

After the choice of targets is made, a campaign has to look for partners that can give support, such as the churches, social movements, political parties and politicians and opinion leaders. A clear message with concrete demands needs to be developed and the campaign needs to be well planned. This includes informing the public through the media, organising events, picket lines and demonstrations. Campaigning is not about easy victories, but about consistent, solid work. It requires patience.

All it takes is some courage

In the Netherlands, campaigns to boycott Israel will be met with resistance, just like the campaigns for isolation of the South African Apartheid regime. One can predict that Israel and its supporters will accuse people involved in such campaigns of anti-Semitism. Such accusations should not become the focus of the debate. Therefore, the reaction should be to focus on the violation of human rights by Israel. These include: violations by Israeli occupying forces in the Palestinian territories, the building of the Wall and settlements on Palestinian land, the inequality of Jewish and Palestinian citizens in Israel.

Most of all, it is important to stress the deep longing for peace by the Israelis and the Palestinians. Campaigns for boycotts, divestment and sanctions should be guided by the courage to speak out and act against injustice. As Mandela writes in his memoirs: “I learned that courage was not the absence of fear, but the triumph over it. I felt fear myself more times than I can remember, but I hid it behind a mask of boldness. The brave man is not he who does not feel afraid, but he who conquers that fear.”

Bangani Ngeleza is member of a family that was actively involved in the African National Congress (ANC). His father spent 10 years on Robben Island, his brother was in the ANC’s military wing, his mother was in and out of prison because of her activities for the ANC Women’s League, and the author himself participated in ANC-linked student and teacher movements. Adri Nieuwhof was a member of the Holland Committee on Southern Africa, mobilising material and financial support for the ANC and organising campaigns for boycotts, divestment and sanctions.

Endnotes:
(1) See, http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geschiedenis_van_de_Nederlandse_Holocaust.
(2) See, http://www.mediareviewnet.com/RONNIE KASRILS SLAMS ISRAEL.htm.
(3) Statement by Albert Luthuli (Jointly with Dr. G.M. Naicker and Peter Brown) appealing to the British people to boycott South Africa.