Celtic v Hapoel Be'er Sheva: A right to protest – but right to protest?

Here we go again.

In the spirit of navel-gazing nostalgia that has come with the tenth anniversary of this blog, I have found myself compelled to self-reference again.

Because, yes – you've guessed it – Celtic have been drawn against another Israeli team in the Champions League qualifiers and some people just HAVE to demand a protest.

As I said almost seven years ago, when Celtic were drawn against Hapoel Tel-Aviv; I am no supporter of Zionism. In that, I am joined by the most orthodox Jews,

I abhor the oppression of the Palestinians, brutally denied their rights by a murderous regime.

I do not believe that Israel should be part of UEFA because, quite simply, Israel is not part of Europe, by any stretch of the imagination.

And I particularly note that the Israeli Defence Force has been accused of attacking young Palestinian footballers, which should be enough to mobilise the entire football community in a demand to stop such attacks, even to the point of suspending the Israeli football association from participating in international competition.

But how and when is it appropriate to protest?

Not for the first time, Celtic fans are being told what they must do, when they must do it – and being told that dissenting from this means abandoning Palestinian children.

All very well-meaning, avowing noble intentions but carrying the logical weight of the Manic Street Preachers saying that pacifists are willingly condemning their children to death at the hands of Fascists.

You remember them – those young Welsh lads born just too young to join the International Brigades or to take arms with Ernesto "Che" Guevara Lynch in pursuit of the international liberation of the

Che: 'In my son's veins flowed the
blood of Irish rebels'

working classes – so they formed a preachy pop band, instead. (Great tune, though.)

And much of the cry for an anti-Israel protest during the match is similar in nature.

We'll just fly some flags, take the fine – the club has plenty of money – and declare ourselves sedentary liberators of the Palestinian people and the international working class.

And if you don't – well, then take a good look at yourselves. You obviously don't care about the Palestinian children who could have been saved by that protest.

Who are these people and what to they actually DO to make a difference, (in the event that you don't consider Tweets and Facebook postings to be actually “doing” anything of substance)?

What sacrifices do they make, I wonder, in defence of Palestinians, in their daily lives. Boycott Israeli goods? Probably – that involves laying off the Soda Stream, eliminating 1% of your available wine list and being careful to avoid kosher salt.

How many of these people, for example, protest outside the Israeli embassy or risk arrest and incurring criminal records and fines? I have no doubt that there are a few – but, as for the rest, do they only notice what is happening to the Palestinians when Celtic are playing a team from Israel?

They insist that it will “only be a fine” but that's not clear at all. Do they want Celtic to play European matches with a stand closed – to make a statement? Perhaps they can dedicate that empty stand to Nir Bitton, so that he can watch the game in an atmosphere of acceptable solitude.

And, no, being Israeli or Jewish is not he same as being a Zionist but we do well when we remember to recognise the sensitivities of those closer to the issues that rightly inflame world opinion.

Why stop at the risk of a stand being closed? Surely the only morally defensible protest would be to refuse to play any Israeli club, risking expulsion from the tournament, as the club did under Bob Kelly when he took his stand against Warsaw Pact nations who had crushed the Prague Spring?

Why aren't they calling for that? Is it because Celtic being deprived of European football is too high a price to pay to save the Palestinians?

Where are the protests against Celtic's involvement in the International Champions Cup, given that it is an American tournament? The US is the greatest sponsor Israel has, without whose support, the IDF could not defend its country, never mind act with impunity in oppressing the Palestinians.

Why should we tolerate dealings with companies from the country that has done more to spread terror across the Middle-East and Latin America than any other?

Would it be too inconvenient to target American institutions? Would the costs to the club be “too high a price to pay”?

And who do these people think they are to dictate the exact nature that any protest must take?

Why can't they buy their tickets and refuse to take their seats, for example? They could have a public ceremony – away from the ground – burning their tickets, which would surely draw media attention.

They could raise funds for Gaza, take the opportunity to start a campaign to place pressure on UEFA and FIFA to expel the Israeli Football Association from its competitions, unless attacks on Palestinian players end.

There are a million causes and that of the Palestinians is one of those most deserving of support. That said, there are as many ways of supporting the people of that region as there are people there.

A pointless banner or flag-waving exercise that brings the club closer to the closure of a stand – depriving the team of support and fellow fans the opportunity to attend European games – will not achieve anything.

If someone can tell me or anyone else just why the above statement is wrong, please let them do so.

And before Wednesday – I'd quite like to watch the game.
--