Editorial: Invest in Israel

There are many steps to be taken before peace is reached in the Middle East, but divestment from Israel is not one of them.

DukeDivest, a group of students, staff and faculty members, kicked off its campaign this week to urge the University to withdraw holdings from any company involved in providing Israel with military supplies. The organization mimics movements that began last semester at Harvard University and the University of California at Berkeley, and in the minds of the organizers it also mimics the 1980s movement to divest from apartheid South Africa. Their goal is to use financial pressure to force Israel to give into the desires of the Palestinian Authority, but their efforts will do nothing of the sort and are, in fact, quite counterproductive.

The nature of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is a failure of trust, prompted by the refusal of both some Palestinians and some Israelis to recognize the other people's basic right to exist. The Palestinian leadership has continually failed to negotiate a peaceful solution, causing Israelis to fear for their own security. Israelis' concern for their basic safety in response to terrorist attacks manifested itself in the most recent election, when they voted for a prime minister, Ariel Sharon, who sets national security as a prerequisite for continued negotiations.

Calls to divest from Israel- even just from companies that deal arms to Israel - can only heighten most Israelis concern for their security. Furthermore, the nature of the military supplies sold to the Israel are not simply used in conflicts with the Palestinian Authority, but in all aspects of national security.

DukeDivest should be an outspoken opponent of the violent factions of the Palestinian national movement - those groups, such as Hamas and Fatah, that use bombings and other violent means to try to intimidate Israelis and stifle peace. Breaking the hold of such organizations on the Palestinian majority is essential to the start of a peace process, and students can facilitate that outcome by renouncing their practices and offering an alternative, democratic vision for Palestinian economic and political development.

In the 1980s, divestment contributed to the end of apartheid because outcry was widespread as American companies were profiting from an immoral situation. In this instance, however, no companies are profiting from the conflict in the Middle East. Moreover, the political dynamics of the situation were vastly different from those in Israel.

While Duke should consider divestment in some situations, the Palestinian-Israeli conflict is not one of them. The experience of divestment from South Africa taught the world that sometimes economic pressures can have profound effects, and the University should consider divestment in certain situations. Occasionally, there do exist problems that are so morally troublesome that to invest in parties involved would be outrageous. The situation between Israelis and the Palestinians is certainly a tragedy, but divestment will do nothing to bring it to an end.