It makes perfect sense to boycott Israeli goods, divest from Israeli institutions, and impose sanctions on the Israeli government until the siege and occupation ends. Unfortunately, the BDS movement in its current form lacks the means to reverse or halt Israeli expansionism. BDS fails to maximize its efficacy in the struggle for Palestinian liberation because it refuses to take a stance on Palestinian statehood, tacitly endorsing the idea of “one democratic state” in Greater Israel (as it would most likely be known).



First, the one state solution undermines Palestinian self-determination by offering a proposal that a) enlarges Israel’s boundaries to annex what remains of Palestine, b) effectively calls for the Israelization of the Palestinians, and c) naïvely entrusts the Israeli government with providing equal rights to newly-absorbed Palestinians without taking into consideration the root cause of that government’s racist laws.

The only binational unitary state that the Israeli government would permit voluntarily is indistinguishable from the ultimate goals of the occupation. The mandate of “one democratic state” could only be established involuntarily. This requires the depreciation and abolition of Israeli national sovereignty, either by way of debilitating international pressure or significant military defeat. The former possibility would require a challenge to Israel’s membership in the United Nations. Although Israel is in violation of the UN charter, this is unfeasible since the veto of the United States guarantees the sovereignty of the present Israeli government. The latter, insufferable, possibility is even more unlikely, for which the above reasoning holds with much greater force. Neither is within the scope or means of BDS, but Palestinian statehood is.

Second, BDS is in contradiction because it claims to be “anchored in international law”, yet remains agnostic on the legitimacy of the state of Israel at its 1948 borders. In general, the retirement of nationalism and dissolution of states in favor of a peaceful supranational union should be welcomed. However. the abolition of a UN member state is forbidden by international law. If BDS wants to claim that international law is a fraud, a liberal colonial convention, then that is a conversation worth having - but at the United Nations, the same law that mandates a Palestinian state also mandates the Israeli state at its 1948 borders. One way to resolve this anomaly is to endorse the two state solution under international law.



Third, “one democratic state” is endorsed by no legitimate civic representative, while Palestinian independence has universal consensus, US obstruction notwithstanding. The Palestinian Authority wants an independent Palestinian state, as do Hamas, the European Union and nearly the rest of the world (see below). So what country de facto supports one state? The US and Israel. Every year the United Nations General Assembly votes overwhelmingly in favor of a Palestinian state and an end to Israeli settlements; Israel and the United States are the only consistent negative votes. The US and Israel must be fought on this point specifically, using tactical diplomacy coupled with massive nonviolent direct action. It cannot be done through striking fantastical poses. Officially, the US is against Israeli settlements and endorses the 1967 borders. Therefore legal-politically, one way to end the Israel-Palestine conflict would be to cause the US to align its UN vote with its stated foreign policy. With regards to the two state solution, it’s the entire world against US and Israel; with the one state solution, it’s the entire world against BDS:

States that support the two state solution on the basis of the 1967 borders and the right of return according to their United Nations vote in 2012: Afghanistan, Algeria , Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Armenia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahrain , Bangladesh, Belarus, Belgium, Belize, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cambodia, Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, Chile, China , Comoros, Congo, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Cuba, Cyprus, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt , El Salvador, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Finland, France , Gabon, Gambia, Georgia, Ghana, Greece, Grenada, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Honduras, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Iran , Iraq , Ireland, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan , Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait , Kyrgyzstan, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Lebanon , Lesotho, Libya , Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Norway, Oman , Pakistan , Peru, Philippines, Portugal, Qatar , Russian Federation , Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Sao Tome and Principe, Saudi Arabia , Senegal, Serbia, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Solomon Islands, Somalia , South Africa, South Sudan, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan , Suriname, Swaziland, Sweden, Switzerland, Syria , Tajikistan, Thailand, Timor-Leste, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey , Turkmenistan, Tuvalu, Uganda, United Arab Emirates , United Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay, Uzbekistan, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen , Zambia, Zimbabwe.



the two state solution on the basis of the 1967 borders and the right of return according to their United Nations vote in 2012: Afghanistan, , Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Armenia, Austria, Azerbaijan, , Bangladesh, Belarus, Belgium, Belize, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cambodia, Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, Chile, , Comoros, Congo, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Cuba, Cyprus, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, , El Salvador, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Finland, , Gabon, Gambia, Georgia, Ghana, Greece, Grenada, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Honduras, Iceland, India, Indonesia, , , Ireland, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, , Kazakhstan, Kenya, , Kyrgyzstan, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, , Lesotho, , Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Norway, , , Peru, Philippines, Portugal, , , Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Sao Tome and Principe, , Senegal, Serbia, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Solomon Islands, , South Africa, South Sudan, Spain, Sri Lanka, , Suriname, Swaziland, Sweden, Switzerland, , Tajikistan, Thailand, Timor-Leste, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, , Turkmenistan, Tuvalu, Uganda, , United Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay, Uzbekistan, Venezuela, Viet Nam, , Zambia, Zimbabwe. States that oppose two state solution: Canada, Czech Republic, Israel, Marshall Islands, Micronesia (Federated States of), Nauru, Palau, Panama, United States.



[In bold: Arab League member states, Iran, Pakistan, Turkey, and states with UN Security Council veto.]

Fourth, it should be noted that the actual two-state solution, as formulated by international consensus, grants an independent Palestinian state and Palestinian right of return to within Israeli borders. The universal consensus is therefore much more radical than “one democratic state” because it not only halts and partially reverses Israeli colonialism, it mandates both an independent Palestinian state as well as a democratic Palestinian-inclusive state in Israel.

Finally, as long as BDS refuses to endorse Palestinian statehood, its academic popularity cannot bear diplomatic fruit. Rather, recent substantive political victories like the Hamas-Fatah unity government and Swedish, French, Irish, and British parliamentary recognition of Palestine are lost opportunities for BDS in its current form. But if the movement were to endorse Palestinian national liberation, it would leverage the popular consensus to great effect.

We mustn’t equivocate when the end to the catastrophe is so clear. Boycott, divest from, and sanction Israel, but do it for the end of the occupation, which is no different from saying: do it for Palestinian statehood!