The anti-Israel boycott began during the Mandatory Palestine era, waned during the Oslo years, and surged with the rise of the BDS movement—drawing inspiration from the anti-apartheid boycott in South Africa. But how exactly does this boycott movement work, and who is most affected?

The boycott of Israel did not originate with Operation "Iron Swords"or whatever name is chosen to describe this colossal failure.

The Arab-backed boycott—a fascinating phenomenon of political-economic resistance—spans the same historical length as the “Israeli-Palestinian” conflict itself and shares its ironic inefficacy. Even as the region underwent dramatic transformations—from rising and falling regimes to bloody wars and historic peace agreements—the boycott stood firm, adapting its form and language while stubbornly persisting.

It began long before the word "Zionism" entered popular discourse, when Arab merchants in the Ottoman Empire-controlled region, called to refrain from purchasing Jewish goods. What started as a local initiative quickly matured into fully-fledged ideology, especially after the formation of the Arab Higher Committee in 1936, which formally called for a boycott of Jewish products. A historical irony: many of those same merchants secretly continued trading with their Jewish neighbors—economic pragmatism often outpaced ideological fervor.

While a considerable portion of the Israeli public believes that today’s antisemitism is merely a modern incarnation of deeply-rooted generational antisemitism, that same group should question the correlation between Boycott movements against Israel and the cycles of war and peace times.

The Infamous Blacklist
After Israel's establishment, the boycott underwent a transformation into an official, sophisticated project of the Arab League, which set up the “Central Boycott Office” in Damascus, notorious for its "blacklist.” One side of the Arab League signed armistice agreements, while the other expanded the boycott into surprising new circles, reaching Hollywood with constant boycott successes deterring musicians and celebrities from daring to perform in Israel, fearful to be placed on a blacklist. The same goes for businesses and brands. When's the last time a beverage company opened a factory in Tel Aviv? If working with Israel is banned by 22 Arab countries, would a global hotel chain feel comfortable hosting a conference in Israel? It would meanCairo and Riyadh closing their doors.

Over the years, the boycott movement showed impressive adaptability. Global political-economic ties didn’t skip the Middle East, creating a spectacular paradox: Egypt signed a peace deal with Israel in 1979, yet continued cold economic relations; American companies found ways to do business with both sides via proxy subsidiaries; and Palestinian merchants in the West Bank imported Israeli goods through third countries—all while voicing opposition to normalization.

Then, just as the boycott seemed to be fading—with the Oslo Accords and increasing Israeli-Gulf ties—many companies previously deterred by boycott fears (like Toyota and Honda) entered the Israeli market. However from the ashes arose a new phoenix, the BDS movement. Paradoxically, born at the 2001 Durban Conference against racism, the BDS movement adapted using classic boycott principles of the 21st century, however it was draped in semiotics of human rights and universal justice. No longer an Arab boycott—but a "global boycott." No longer nationalistic-religious resistance—but “support for human rights.”

For heaven’s sake—even an Oscar-winning Palestinian-Israeli documentary film (No Other Land, 2024) that exposed violence by Settlers, (backed by certain army personnel), in the South Hebron Hills, has become taboo to screen in Israel, or even speak about. The content was irrelevant. What mattered was the identity of some of the film’s Creators—How could an Israeli create a film negatively portraying Israel? Just another brick in the wall.

In a remarkable historical twist, just as the Arab world began moving past its traditional boycott with the Abraham Accords and Gulf normalization, Europe and parts of the Western academic world enthusiastically adopted this ideological banner. The tool that had shown partial effectiveness over decades found a new audience in elite universities and Western city councils.

From sideshow to dominant player
The BDS campaign, long dismissed as fringe radicalism, merely felt by frustrated Israeli Pink Floyd fans, became a real attacking force at the end of 2023—graduating from cardboard signs and plastic megaphones to mainstream discourse.

How Did It Start?
In 2005, as the Arab boycott waned following peace agreements and normalization, the BDS movement emerged. With a coalition of Palestinian organizations led by Omar Barghouti, it adopted a new language of human rights and built itself around three pillars:

• Ending "occupation and colonization of all Arab lands"
• Full equality for Arab-Palestinian citizens of Israel
• Respecting the “right of return” for Palestinian refugees

Who’s on the Blacklist?
The BDS movement target list is extensively vast and reflects a strategy of extending the boycott far beyond traditional economic channels:

Corporations and Businesses:

• Companies operating in settlements—from SodaStream (before it relocated) to Airbnb (which exited and then returned)
• Defense contractors—Elbit, Rafael, IAI, and international firms like G4S
• Banks financing settlement projects— Hapoalim, Leumi, and foreign banks with Israeli investments
• Tech firms—HP, Motorola, Microsoft (through defense projects)
• Global consumer brands—Coca-Cola, McDonald’s, Starbucks (with branches and offices in Israel)

Academic and Cultural Institutions:

• Israeli universities—especially those tied to defense research
• Artists performing in Israel—from Elton John to Taylor Swift
• International festivals hosting Israeli representatives—Cannes Film Festival, Berlinale, Eurovision, the list is long…
• Israeli Sporting bodies—teams, federations, individuals – all denied or roadblocked from participation in tournaments.

Governmental and Academic Ties:

• International academic collaborations with Israeli institutions
• Student/faculty exchange programs with Israeli universities
• Joint research grants and academic partnerships

Flexible Criteria
Unlike the traditional Arab boycott with its rigid rules, the BDS movement developed flexible criteria for expansion and successful attack:

• Direct involvement with Settlements —the easiest justification
• “Assisting the occupation”—broadly defined to include any company offering services or technology to the army or police
• Normalization partnerships—used to target those promoting a “positive image” of Israel
• “Silence is consent”—applies to entities that haven't publicly opposed Israeli policy
• Institutional ties—used to boycott organizations, not individuals, with official Israeli links

Geography of the Boycott: Where Does It Actually Work?

• U.S. campuses—especially elite East and West Coast universities (Columbia, Berkeley, Harvard)
• Western Europe—especially the UK, Ireland, and Scandinavia, with active academic cells
• International human rights organizations—like Amnesty and Human Rights Watch, which adopted parts of the rhetoric
• Professional unions—especially in academia, the arts, and social sectors

Key centers of activity have also shifted:

• Ramallah—central hub for international coordination
• London—major European activity hub
• New York/San Francisco—main U.S. strongholds

Effectiveness: Between Noise and Results
Before October 7, the economic impact was limited—Israel's economy grew significantly despite the boycott, with foreign investment peaking at $27 billion in 2021. Yet the movement scored major PR victories, reframing discourse around “apartheid” and “colonialism.” Even before the war, it had notable wins: companies withdrawing from settlements or the West Bank, artist cancellations, Scandinavian pension fund divestments, just to name a few.

The Gaza war caused a dramatic shift in scope and impact:

• Widening support, especially on U.S. campuses with tent protests and mass demonstrations
• A shift from settlement-focused boycott to general boycott of Israel
• Significant blows to tourism and certain industries, compounded by the war
• Widespread academic boycotts—cancelled partnerships, rejected papers, withdrawn invitations

For heaven’s sake—even a Palestinian-Israeli Oscar-winning film exposing settler abuses became taboo. The content didn’t matter—just the fact that one of the creators was Israeli. Another brick in the wall.

The Paradox: Strengthening the Right through Boycott
Perhaps the greatest irony of the boycott is its political boomerang effect. As the international boycott expands—especially in its undifferentiated form—Israelis increasingly feel “under siege,” fueling political unity around a sense of existential threat.

Scholars argue that the boycott, rather than dividing Israeli society or alienating citizens from the state, actually unifies it. Right-wing politicians use the boycott as proof of “new antisemitism” and as evidence that “no matter what we do, they’ll hate us.”

Where Do We Go from Here?
Assuming—realistically—that Israeli policy remains unchanged, several trajectories lie ahead:

• Institutionalization via decision-making of global organizations 
• Expansion or fragmentation—will it grow, or split between radical and moderate approaches?
• Legal confrontation—anti-BDS laws in 35 U.S. states and elsewhere, with free speech litigation underway

Will Israel become a global pariah like apartheid-era South Africa or modern-day Russia? Probably not—certainly not in the short term. Israel still enjoys U.S. backing, even in its erratic Trumpian form. That alone is enough to block serious steps like exclusion from global financial systems or international sports competitions.

Still, think about this: every successful boycott move hurts the Israeli economy—and by extension, the welfare of each and every one of us.

“A people that dwells alone” may be a stirring biblical slogan—but a small, open economy like Israel’s cannot afford to isolate itself from the global stage, no matter how turbulent the current shocks may be.

While a considerable part of the Israeli public claims that this is just a new wave of ancient antisemitism, that same group must seek to understand the undeniable link between boycott spikes and whether the country is at war or at peace. It’s more comfortable to believe we suffer no matter what—just because we’re Jewish. But that view ignores the relationship, and historical repetition that shows: boycott momentum rises and falls in direct relation to Israeli wartime.