Benvenisti is giving out marks. Apparently Gush Shalom has earned his respect because of its "uncompromising stand on the issues of Israeli- Palestinian peace," yet he regards the call for a boycott as merely "a gimmick," "destined to be quickly forgotten." If this is the case, then what is all the hoopla about? Why the media uproar, why the Foreign Ministry outcry, and why would such a prominent man as Benvenisti bother to dedicate a newspaper article to the matter? The truth is that the boycott resonates with a deep need of many, a fact which explains its widespread appeal as well as the obvious anxiety on the part of the settlers.

Benvenisti characterizes Gush Shalom by the cliched term "fringe group." Here one should heed the words of renowned anthropologist Margaret Mead: "Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world; indeed it's the only thing that ever has." Look at the ideas that came out of our "fringe group": The call for recognition of the Palestinian people, the demand for negotiations with the PLO, the acceptance of the establishment of a Palestinian state alongside Israel. Today the majority of the Israeli public accepts these ideas.

"In the list of settlement products generated by 'Gush Shalom'," writes Benvenisti, "there are over 140 enterprises, of which only a dozen are physically within the settlements proper... [the others are in industrial areas adjacent to the settlements]. They opened there because the state granted them economic benefits. Their owners are not ideological settlers, merely businessmen interested in making a profit." But this is precisely why a boycott is necessary. Each such an enterprise serves to strengthen Israel's hold on the occupied territories. Each such enterprise steals the land and water necessary for the building of a Palestinian society, our only partner in the making of a lasting peace.

Now the Netanyahyu government is set to establish seven additional industrial sites in the West Bank. The boycott is meant to act as a deterrent. It makes the statement: You may get governmental perks, but the consumer boycott will affect your bottom line. Benvenisti claims that "the boycott will hurt the entire Israeli economy, "since many companies have affiliates or storage facilities in the settlements. We tell the entrepreneurs: Because of the boycott, you would be better off picking development towns like Ofakim and Shderot, thus contibuting to the state's economic growth. And indeed, there are some early indications of success.

States Benvenisti, "It is vital to many within the left camp to define Jews living in the West Bank as colonialist settlers." Isn't the colonialist nature of the settlements fairly obvious to everyone? Netanyahu's government and the settlers work in tandem, characteristic of the colonialist system of the 19th century. By means of a blockade, tens of thousands of Palestinian workers from the West Bank and the Gaza Strip are forced into starvation. The employers in the settlements offer them work at starvation wages, considerably lower than the minimum legal wage in Israel proper. The Palestinians have no choice. Thus the classic colonialist circle closes. This is the dark side of the Israeli economy.

In the language of the Right, Benvenisti complains that "the Left tattles to the Gentiles," because the idea of a boycott on settlement products has repercussions around the world. For Benvenisti's information: There is a growing movement around the world to boycott ALL of Israeli products. We appeal to peace-lovers around the world: Please distinguish between settlement products and Israeli products, because a general boycott would punish all Israelis.

The practical and inescapable conclusion from Benvenisti's words is to leave the settlements alone. It is a call to Netanyahu's government to hurry and build more settlements. An increasing portion of Israel's economy, systematically transferred into the occupied territories, can stay there forever. In short, the occupation is eternal, exploitation and oppression will prevail, and peace will forever remain out of reach.

No thanks, Meron. We're not giving up on peace.

(translated by Michael Robinson)