 Hello and welcome to Tiski Sauer. I'm joined this evening by Palestinian writer and activist and co-founder of the Boycott, Divest and Sanction movement, Omar Barguchi. Thank you for joining me this evening. Thank you for having me. And we're going to have a very expansive discussion this evening. I want to start there by saying, you know, we're quite lucky to have you here this evening because you've been having some problems traveling around recently. There was a travel ban that stopped you going to the US early last year and then you were supposed to speak at Labour Party conference and the world transformed. But you had problems with your visas. I was wondering if you could talk a bit about that. Yes, sure. Thanks for having me. I'm really happy to be here. Israel since 2014 has considered our human rights movement, the BDS movement, quote, a strategic threat, and they've treated it as such. But of late, they've been outsourcing anti BDS repression and McCarthyism to friendly Western governments like the British government and the American government. Yes, in 2019, the Trump administration banned me from entering the US. What I was supposed to speak in Congress to some Congress members at the synagogue for the first time ever and at Harvard University and others. Of course, I spoke everywhere via Skype except Congress and I was supposed to go to my daughter's wedding in Texas and I was denied that that I couldn't make up my Skype. On the UK, yes, during the Labour conference, I was supposed to speak at a fringe meeting and the British Embassy in Amman played a trick delaying intentionally delaying my visa and the Home Office made some contradictory claims as to what's happening with my visa. They never said they're banning me. They said, oh, it's a bureaucratic delay. It's normal procedures and so on and so forth. The day after the Labour Party conference, the visa was issued. So that showed clearly that it was a political game, more or less. And you were saying that you're pretty sure that this was a political game because people in Israel were celebrating the fact that they blocked you attending a party conference in Britain? In the far right Israeli government circles, they were celebrating that they've succeeded with the UK as they had succeeded with the US by banning me. But there was never a ban, actually. There was just an intentional delay in issuing the visa. So, yes, the Israelis took credit for that. I want to talk about the boycott-divest sanction movement. But I suppose first of all, your personal background, how you came to be a leading Palestinian activist, how you came to this particular movement. I think my first encounter with activism was when I was a student at Columbia University. I was an engineering student in New York where I was active not just on Palestine but also on South Africa. I was active in the anti-apartheid South African movement. And I think I've learned quite a lot from that experience in fighting apartheid. The most important lesson is that you cannot just fight injustice in your context. You've got to fight injustice everywhere. And you've got to see the connections between the struggles. Moving forward, when I moved to Palestine with my wife, and it was a very difficult process because I'm a refugee, to live in my homeland was extremely difficult. But eventually, when I got the papers and I did start living there, I started seeing that traditional forms of resistance and solidarity were not leading to an actual change in the balance of powers. And we needed to do something different. So several colleagues and I started the BDS movement by getting the absolute majority of Palestinian civil society to endorse it, women's unions, trade unions, farmers unions, academic unions, political parties and so on and so forth. So that was the beginning of the movement. And it was very inspired by the South African anti-apartheid movement, the US civil rights movement and a few other struggles. There's pushback at the moment, isn't there? We'll talk a lot about the pushback against Palestinian activism in this country. But I suppose I want to start just by talking about that apartheid analogy. There have been lots of people who are saying it's outrageous that anyone could compare the situation in Israel and Palestine to South African apartheid. What do you make of that? apartheid is not an analogy. It's an analysis. There's a UN convention on the suppression and punishment of the crime of apartheid since 1973. So apartheid is not just a South Africa crime. It's a universal crime that applied in South Africa and it applies in Israel. So other than being an occupation and a settler colonial state, Israel is guilty of the crime of apartheid because it fits the bill. The convention on apartheid says racial domination and discrimination by one racial group against another, denying them equal rights based on law, not just on policy. And it takes several forms and all those forms apply to Israel. Israel has more than 60 racist laws that discriminate against its own non-Jewish that is indigenous Palestinian citizens just because they're not Jewish. They're not entitled to the same set of rights. UN experts, international law experts, including many prominent Jewish international law experts have come out and said Israel is guilty of the crime of apartheid. So it's not an analogy to South Africa. They're not identical. They belong to the same family of oppression. But of course, Israel is not just an apartheid. It's also a settler colonial state. So apartheid isn't, yeah, so you're saying it's not just about comparison and analogy. There is a definition of apartheid that exists. Exactly. It's a UN definition. And you think that, well, you're saying that applies in this situation. A UN report in 2017 reached that same conclusion. And in fact, increasingly human rights organizations are saying Israel is practicing the crime of apartheid. How successful do you think it's been up to this point? So it started in 2005, wasn't it? So you're saying, you know, one of the reasons of its success and, you know, the real achievement at the start was that you managed to get so many organizations in Palestinian civil society to back it. And that's why it's had so much legitimacy elsewhere in the world when people follow the call. But how much do you think it's changed politics in the region? Not yet. But it's changing the balance of powers incrementally, gradually. We cannot over exaggerate how much it takes to change that balance of powers against nuclear power like Israel that is armed to its teeth by the West, the U.S., Britain, Germany, France and others. And that's funded by those Western powers and protected, shielded from accountability to international law by those same powers. It's a very difficult fight, but we're doing it. And in fact, perhaps the most important indicator of the effectiveness, impact of BDS is that Israel, since 2015, has dedicated a full government ministry, the Minister of Strategic Affairs for fighting BDS. So there's an anti-BDS ministry in the government with tens of millions of dollars in annual budgets for fighting BDS. So Israel is sparing no effort, no money to fight BDS worldwide with lobby groups in the U.S. and across Europe fighting the movement as, quote, a strategic threat. At one point, they compared it to the worst threats against Israel because Israel doesn't know how to deal with a nonviolent human rights movement that's anti-racist. And that's a key point. You mentioned success. It's not just because we have a near consensus among Palestinians. It's also because it's anchored in the universal declaration of human rights. So it's anti-racist. It's opposed to all forms of discrimination and racism, anti-LGBT, anti-Muslim, anti-Jewish, anti-women, anti-Black racism and so on. We're very consistent morally in our message that we're opposed to all forms of discrimination and racism that had a universal appeal across the world, especially among progressive and even some liberal mainstream movements. And you've seen, I suppose, one of the measures of the success of BDS or at least the extent to which it poses a threat to the Israelis is that they've set up a whole department to challenge it. So we should probably talk about the backlash to BDS on a global scale because they've had some success, right? We saw that last year there was a motion in Congress, which was almost unanimously passed, which was condemning BDS, condemning your movement. In Britain at the moment, it was in the conservative manifesto that the government would introduce legislation which would ban public bodies from boycotting any foreign government if the foreign policy objective that they were aiming to achieve was counter to what was official government policy. I mean, how significant do you see these threats as to the efficacy of your movement? They're serious, they're effective. Legal warfare is one of three pillars that Israel adopted since 2014 for fighting BDS when it recognized the movement as having strategic impact. The other two are using the intelligence services to fight BDS, Mossad and so on, spying on the movement, cyber sabotage, smearing reputations and so on, and propaganda. Lots of propaganda, well-funded propaganda against anyone who supports Palestinian rights, but lawfare, legal warfare is certainly a very serious component. The main point is that Israel has failed at the grassroots level. BDS is growing among LGBT communities and trade unions and communities of color, progressive Jewish groups, Jewish millennials across the U.S. are coming to support BDS. On most U.S. campuses, there's a disproportionately high number of Jewish students in BDS groups, and Israel recognizes that it's losing the battle at the grassroots level. So the most effective way to suppress BDS is from above, by passing legislation that's McCarthyite, that's repressive, anti-democratic as they're doing in this country, as they're doing in the United States. So Boris Johnson's anti-BDS legislative attempt that he's committed to would not just undermine the struggle for Palestinian rights, and people who think it would stop there are wrong. It's just like those who thought McCarthyism in the U.S. would only go after the communists, and then they found out it's going after everyone who disagrees with the official imperialist policies at the time. They won't stop here. If they succeed in suppressing freedom of expression on Palestine, no one is safe. The LGBT justice groups are not safe. The climate justice are not safe. The black just, no one is safe. They'll go after anyone whom they consider as a threat to their right-wing policies. We'll return to some of these issues a little bit later. First of all, you're watching Tisgesau, you're watching Navarro Media. As you know, this show, this organization is only possible because of your kind donations. We're not funded by billionaires or governments, which means we can say whatever we want and invite whoever we want on our show. So please do go to support.navarromedia.com and donate the equivalent of one hour's wage a month. Like this video, keep your comments coming, although for once this show is not live. We're recording on Monday. It's going to go out later in the week, so we won't be going to your questions at the end, but we love to see your comments anyway. I want to talk a little bit about contemporary politics in the region, and particularly because it's a big story this week. Trump's, I suppose if you can call it a peace plan, or the deal of the century or whatever he wants to call it. So, as we're speaking, Netanyahu, the Prime Minister of Israel and Benny Gantz, who is his main opposition in upcoming elections, which we'll talk about in a moment as well, they are meeting with Donald Trump, who is agreeing with them the contours of what he sees and what he's planning to impose as a peace deal on Israel and Palestine on the region. It involves, as far as I understand, trying to cough up a little bit of cash in exchange for Israel essentially getting to annex a lot of land, annex many of the illegal settlements to just become part of Israel. I suppose could you explain a little bit how you understand this so-called peace process and what it would mean for the region and how Palestinians are responding to what Trump has come up with here? I think no serious or honest commentator would describe this as a peace plan. This is anything but a peace plan, because as you said, it's cash for rights. Palestinians have to give up their basic rights under international law and return for some cash, and not even that much cash. So it's not tempting even sellouts among Palestinians. We think that no one is taking it seriously, that it's designed to appease the right-wing supporters of Trump, especially evangelical Christian Zionists in the U.S. and the far right constituency in Israel that supports Netanyahu. It's supposed to appease to those, the settlers in Israel that have become mainstream and a very big power in Israeli politics and the far right and white supremacists in the U.S. So I think it's not even proposing to be anything that brings us close to peace, because any peace has to be based on justice, has to be based on rights under international law, because who's the arbiter, what people are entitled to? Palestinians have been suffering under settler colonialism for seven decades. It's not up to Trump to give up our rights, and it's not up to Netanyahu to deny those rights. We're entitled to those rights as a people. We're entitled to self-determination, and we will continue to resist until we achieve our full menu of rights as Archbishop Desmond Tutu of South Africa would say. I mean, there's two issues there. I mean, it's almost irrelevant to the so-called Trump peace plan, because there's no nuances here. This is just someone trying to impose what's clearly a wholly unjust so-called solution to the conflicts involving Israel and Palestine. But there is also a way this is phrased in terms of there should be no negotiations until the absolute rights are respected. But in many peace negotiations, and I recognize that you're a million miles away from Israel coming to a table in good faith for actual peace negotiations, but often there will be rights which are compromised to reach some sort of agreement. If you look in terms of the Northern Irish struggle and the Irish Republicans, they had as one of their fundamental demands, Irish unity, because they saw Britain as a colonialist nation. But ultimately, they came to a peace agreement which had democratic consent, widespread democratic consent from the population of Northern Ireland or the six counties. And in retrospect, people seem to think that was a good thing. So I suppose, hypothetically, because obviously these are not, well, they don't seem to be any negotiations, but were there to be negotiations had in good faith? Are there compromises that you imagine you would be willing to make? As a representative of the BDS movement, I cannot comment on that because we don't have a position on the final outcome of this colonial conflict. But as a human rights defender, I have always had my personal view. And my strictly private personal view is that only a democracy that treats everyone equally can be ethical and sustainable in solving this colonial conflict. A secular democratic state that offers equal citizenship to Palestinians, to Jewish Israelis, including Palestinian refugees, and that treats everyone equally, no master, no slave, no colonial masters, is the only ethical solution that can succeed. Because it doesn't exclude anyone. It doesn't suppress anyone's rights. And therefore, it has a reason to succeed. People would be invested in it because it's giving them equal rights. Only those who insist on being colonial masters would object to that because they want to maintain their supremacy, as some Afrikaners did in South Africa. They refused to have a deal with Nelson Mandela and they insisted on a white supremacist state. Similarly, some Jewish Israelis would insist on that. But I think more and more people, once resistance increases, once BDS starts biting even more within Israeli society, they'll start feeling that we don't want to live by the sword forever. We want to live in a society where we can think of our careers and our lives and prosperity and security, not about killing others, not about excluding others and denying them their basic rights. I mean, is there any, speaking pragmatically now, is there any indication at this point within Israeli society that there is any movement or any growing widespread acceptance that potentially a final outcome would involve there being a state which is not Jewish in character and where there would potentially be a Jewish minority? I mean, because I suppose one reason why your vision of the outcome is seen as far fetched by many people is they cannot imagine Israel or Israelis accepting something along those lines. In the early 1980s, it was unimaginable that the Afrikaners would ever accept a Black majority controlled state, a democracy for all, equal rights for all. But they had to. Colonial powers never have to be persuaded. They have to be compelled. And the way we choose to compel them in the BDS movement is through a nonviolent, ethically responsible and ethically consistent way. But it's all about changing the balance of powers. Colonial powers, as long as they can enjoy their power without serious challenge to their supremacy will continue at infinitum. We've got to challenge that power imbalance and grow our movement enough to be a serious challenge to that power structure. And then we can impose international law. We can compel Israeli regime of oppression to accept international law. So it's not a matter of persuasion. Now a snapshot of the situation might look like it's impossible. How can we go from here to there? Israel is so powerful. It's a nuclear power. Why would it ever accept equal rights for Palestinians? It wouldn't have to accept by persuasion. At one point, it will have to be forced to accept that through a change in balance of powers. In terms of Israel as a colonial power, I think most people on the left in Britain would accept that Israel is a colonial power. But there's also a debate and an understanding that it's not just a colonial power because it was also a state founded by refugees. Just by chance, we happen to be conducting this interview on Holocaust Memorial Day. It will be going out later in the week. But I suppose the reason why many people have sympathy for the Israeli cause or the idea that potentially the Jewish people want a state in which they form a majority is because of the history of the 20th century, which wasn't the same for the Africans in South Africa. And I wonder how you respond to those concerns or ideas or those intuitions. Actually, it was the same for the Africaners. They were persecuted by the British. They were massacred by the British, not the same scale of course. But hundreds of thousands of Africaners were massacred and they felt that they needed a safe home. Of course, they forgot the point that there were some natives there that you had to expel and massacre to establish your white exclusionary home. Of course, refugees are entitled to safety, but not at the expense of expelling an indigenous community and saying, you know, tough luck. We want to take over this land because we need a safe haven. Well, not at my expense. How about a safe haven with me, not without me, not excluding me? How about living in countries as Jewish refugees had done in North Africa and many other countries in the United States? They did not impose an exclusionary supremacist reality. They became part of society. And we've always had Jewish communities in Palestine. It's not like a foreign invention. Jewish presence was always part of the indigenous Palestinian presence. So it wouldn't be completely unheard of. My grandmother's best friend in Safad in the north of what's today Israel was a Jewish girl. So it's not completely unheard of in our Arab society to have Jews, Jewish Arabs as part of indigenous communities, but not supremacist colonialists that exclude us and denies our basic rights. I want to talk a bit about contemporary Israeli politics. There's going to be elections coming up on the 2nd of March. There'll be the 3rd in about 18 months, I think, because there were two elections last year with inconclusive results. No one could form a majority. What do you see as the significance of these elections for the Palestinian cause, for context, Netanyahu, who's been prime minister. How long has he been prime minister? I can't remember. A long time, a decade or so. He potentially will lose his position as prime minister because there is an opposition party led by Benny Gantz, the blue and white party, which in the last election got more seats, but neither of them were able to form a stable government. If he falls, is that a significant win for the Palestinians? No, because there's no better alternative. I mean, they're all bad. So the so-called opposition agrees with Netanyahu on 90% of his plans against Palestinians. It's a matter of some rhetorical differences. But when Netanyahu first said, I would annex major parts of the occupied Palestinian territory, Gantz said, you're plagiarizing me. I was the first to call for an exception. So I mean, they're competing. Gantz, in his advertisements for election, in the second election, I think, was boasting that he reduced Gaza to a stone age territory. And he was telling Netanyahu... Not because he was the military chief during Operation Castlehead. Yes, exactly. And he was saying, Netanyahu, what did you do? So basically, he's boasting that I killed many more Palestinians than you. So what credentials do you have to lead Israel? So they're fighting on who's more fascist, basically, not who's interested in peace with the Palestinians, God forbid, who can devour more Palestinian rights and get away with it. And Gantz is saying, I can get away with much more because Netanyahu is in bed with the far right across the world with Bolsonaro and Modi and Orban and Trump. So he's making Israel look really, really bad, including among many Jewish millennials. I mentioned young Jewish students in the U.S. joining BDS. It's no coincidence. They're sick and tired of Israel. They say, this Israel, this Zionism, do not speak for me. I'm a liberal person. I'm a progressive person on everything, including Palestine today. So Israel doesn't speak to my values as a progressive Jew. And we're hearing that increasingly from many young Jewish people. Do you organize politically with anyone in electoral politics? Or do you see all as completely alien to your struggle? No, totally alien. It's not our mandate. We stick to, with our human rights movement, we don't do politics as such. So we're not involved in any political game, not neither Palestinian, Israeli or anywhere else. But what about your personal take? So for example, there is like the joint list in these upcoming elections, which is formed of the Arab parties. I mean, is there anything for someone with your politics or a left winger who wants Palestinian rights and to end the occupation, et cetera? Is there anyone who is organizing, representing those kind of views? Not in the Knesset elections, because you wouldn't be in the Knesset elections. You have to kind of be loyal to a Zionist structure, a Zionist system. So if you have views that you want to have a democratic state for everyone, there's no way to be represented in the Knesset with those views. Why do you think that Israeli politics moved so far to the right? So I've read that you've said that you do think that Israeli politics has become more far right than it was. And what do you think is the, you know, what processes have led to that shift to the right in terms of mainstream political parties? Yeah, I don't know if there's one factor that's a very difficult question. I think it's quite complex. There are quite a few factors. One of them is the neoliberal shift in Israel that's happening in several Western states, the United States, the UK and so on. This neoliberal shift for some reason comes associated with far right politics. Settlers have increased their power in Israeli society tremendously. They have organized very, very well in Israeli society. Jewish fundamentalism of the worst, most racist types have increased tremendously. It was a minority movement not too long ago, 20 years ago. Racist Jewish fundamentalism was really on the margins today. It's very, very mainstream in Israel saying outrageously racist, in your face racist statements is mainstream in Israel today. And I think the neoliberal politics played a role. This urge to end this Palestinian question as quickly as possible, to get rid of those Palestinians as quickly as possible, because I think some far right Israeli leaders are saying that although the Palestinians are weaker than ever politically speaking, although some dictators in the Arab world today are cozying up with Israel, they know that at the grassroots level, Israel is losing the mainstream at the grassroots level, not at government level. If you look at Boris Johnson, you would think Israel is on top of the world. But you mean the grassroots external to the region, right? So you mean the United States, you mean the UK and? Exactly. And Israel recognizes that without support worldwide, it cannot continue its system of oppression. So that also feeling that you're faced with a resistance to use a Western metaphor, you circle the wagons basically, you close up ranks and say they're all against us, so we have to fight together. That has led to this part of the factors that have led. Because you think that's filtered into the electorate as well, not just the political class. Yes, yes. So everyone sort of feels that, you know, they have to close ranks basically against the Palestinians because they've been a hostile world even in the context of the United States. Exactly. So Jewish Israeli dissenters are facing a backlash like never before, are facing real repression like never before. Let's talk about, you know, changes in external pressures on Israel. And first, I suppose in a speculative fashion in the United States presidential elections, potentially Trump will get reelected. And then I don't know what you think in terms of whether, you know, this plan of the deal of the century, whatever it's called, will get implemented, or if you think it's just pie in the sky and, you know, political posturing. The other option, of course, is that a Democrat wins, and it could be Bernie Sanders, who's probably the most pro-Palestinian candidate that's ever got this close to the presidency in recent memory. I don't know what you think about the stakes of the upcoming U.S. presidential election for the Palestinian struggle. It matters tremendously because our oppression, although created by the UK, by the British Empire, today is made in the USA. Without U.S. support for Israel's system of apartheid, it cannot exist. It cannot continue to oppress Palestinians, this apartheid system. And therefore, it matters a lot. Of course, we're cognizant of the fact that the U.S. is not run by a dictator, although Trump is coming close to that. It's an establishment. So a change in the presidency is not a radical shift that would lead to immediate changes on the ground, but it will certainly open the doors. As Trump has shown, a determined U.S. president who wants to fight the establishment and set his own rules can get away with it. Trump, indeed, challenged the entire U.S. establishment, including the CIA, including the FBI, including some of the business community, and he's getting his way, because he has massive support among the right constituency, the evangelicals and the white supremacists, and the very, very rich, the 1 percent. So he's getting away with a lot. So imagine a Bernie Sanders being as assertive, as determined as U.S. president, the first social democratic president in U.S. history can change a lot, not just for Palestinians, for the whole world. It's like as if Corbyn had won the British elections times 1000, because that's the U.S. Yeah, so the global hegemon. I suppose another international development, the International Criminal Court has said just in December, I think, that they are now, or they have enough evidence to open a proper investigation into Israeli war crimes in Gaza in 2014. Not yet. Not yet. The first step towards that, they're extremely slow. They're going at a glacial pace. But the prosecutor presented her case to the court that they must approve opening an investigation. But she said there's enough reason to open an investigation, but they have to decide. They have not yet made that decision. They're taking their sweet time. And do you think they will decide in the favor of the Palestinians? We hope so. They're under enormous pressure by the U.S., Israel, and some European states, in fact, not to investigate Israeli crimes. But there's enormous pressure from the other side, the rest of the world, that's seeing this as a litmus test for international law, whether the rule of law will continue or Trump Netanyahu will get away with destroying the international legal structure as we know it. That it's the law of the jungle from now on. Whoever is strong enough can twist arms and decide what goes and what doesn't go. And when next for the BDS movement? I suppose, I mean, your immediate struggle or your immediate, what you need to be focused on, I suppose, is resisting this reaction against the BDS movement in the United States, in the U.K., as you're saying, which is heavily lobbied on by behalf of the ministries of strategic affairs? Yes. So you'll be resisting those encroachments on your right to organize. How do you see, in a more positive sense, how do you see BDS growing in a sense that means that Israel will feel genuinely pressured to change its behavior and its action? Because it does still seem to be acting with impunity. It is certainly acting with a lot of impunity, but it's terrified of the growth of the BDS movement. There isn't a day that passes without the mainstream Israeli media reflecting the panic in the Israeli establishment. So, as I said, if you take a snapshot, Israel looks on top of the world. So powerful, so dominant influencing policy in the U.S. and the U.K. and Germany and elsewhere. But if you scratch beneath the surface, you'll see that they're losing the mainstream, the liberal mainstream that has sustained support for Israel for so long. So the next generation of politicians will not maintain Israeli apartheid. They know that Trump and Johnson will not survive forever. New leaders will come that won't toe the line, that won't support Israeli expansionism, apartheid, settler colonialism, and siege of Gaza. And they recognize that this is changing. But in the BDS movement, we're not stuck on the defensive posture. Yes, we're defending the space, which is shrinking for humanized defenders, because we're defending it on the grounds that this is a freedom of expression issue, that all liberals should defend, all Democrats should defend. It's not just about Palestine. It's about respect for your own democracy and your own freedoms. If you let them get away with this, no one is safe, as I said earlier. But we're continuing with our campaigns. We're intensifying our campaigns. That's our key response. So when they attack, we fight back, but we also do a lot more BDS. We're not stuck on the defense alone. In the last couple of years, we've reached that many more pension funds and churches. We've affected that many more companies. Major corporations started to get out of projects in Israel that violate international law under BDS pressure. A company like Viola, a conglomerate, a French conglomerate in 2015 pulled out of Israel completely after losing more than 20 billion dollars worth of contracts over a seven-year period of BDS campaigning. Orange telecommunications and other companies are pulling out. Major churches in the U.S. have pulled out their investments in companies like HP and Caterpillar and others involved in Israel's occupation. So definitely this movement is not stuck on defense. It's growing by the day. What about, I suppose, the relationship between BDS and non-Western states, the states in the Arab region? What are the connections that BDS has in the region, not in terms of on campuses in the United States and Europe? Oh, BDS is a global movement. It's not just in the West. Across the Arab world, in India, in Brazil, in Chile, in many countries across the world, there's a very thriving BDS movement in Malaysia recently, Thailand, to an extent. So it's all over the world. It's a global South phenomenon, not just global North. Across the Arab world, especially in Jordan, Lebanon, Kuwait, Morocco, Egypt, Tunisia, there's a growing BDS movement that's also holding many companies accountable. For example, I mentioned Viola. The final straw that got Viola out of its illegal Israeli projects was losing two major contracts in Kuwait, worth 2.25 billion dollars. After that, Viola shareholders went up in arms against their board of directors and said, enough is enough. Until when shall we continue involvement in illegal Israeli projects and lose billions and billions of dollars of contracts across the world, from Sweden to the UK to Ireland to the US, to Kuwait? So they pulled out, ultimately. So across the Arab world, BDS is growing. But of course, our relationship with Arab regimes, nonexistent. We don't deal with dictators and autocrats and authoritarian regimes anywhere in the world, including the Arab world. Thank you so much for joining me this evening. Thank you. Thanks. You've been watching Tisgisau. You've been watching Navara Media. As you know, this is only possible because of your kind support. Please go to support.navaremedia.com and donate the equivalent of one hour's wage a month. We will be back very soon. Good night.