The events of the Palestine Solidarity Movement conference kicked off Friday night with a panel offering the case for divestment from Israel. About 200 participants from across the country gathered for the talk, which began a full weekend of panels and workshops.
Diana Buttu, legal advisor to the Palestine Liberation Organization, explained some of the recent history of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, focusing on the wall that the Israeli government is building.
The wall is encroaching on Palestinian land and is designed to unlawfully annex additional territory into Israel, she said. Buttu also talked about the unequal system of treatment for Palestinians in the Israeli state.
“All of the things we saw in place in South Africa are now in place in Palestine and have been in place for 37 years,” she said. “Israel doesn’t view the Palestinians as equals.”
Buttu advocated divestment, or the selling off of stocks, as a non-violent way to exert pressure on Israel to change its policies. A massive divestment campaign helped lead to regime change in South Africa in the 1980s, and PSM is using a similar model. The General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church USA voted this summer to divest from corporations that profit from Israelis’ occupation of Palestinian territories.
Rev. Mark Davidson, pastor of a Presbyterian church in Chapel Hill, explained that his church has condemned the violence in the Middle East for years and thought it was time to take action. The national church’s decision to divest its $8 billion portfolio, PSM moderators said, has given the movement momentum.
“What has generated all the heat, and should I say all the hysteria, is the Presbyterian Church has put its money where its mouth is,” Davidson told attendees, noting that if the campaign goes forward it will be done in phases and directed as specific companies.
Dennis Brutus, an author and poet who was active in the South African anti-apartheid campaign, was supposed to speak as well, but a scheduling conflict prevented him from attending the Friday event.
Panelists fielded questions about the rationale behind their positions and the history of the conflict. Several questions came from people challenging aspects of PSM and criticism ranged from the choice of Israel as a divestment target to the movement’s refusal to condemn terrorism.
All questioners who challenged PSM directly were allowed to talk, but speakers said such questions were a distraction from the issue of solving the violence in the region.
Get The Chronicle straight to your inbox
Signup for our weekly newsletter. Cancel at any time.