The BDS movement's presence on U.S. college campuses began in the early 2000s. In 2001, Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) at the University of California, Berkeley, launched a divestment campaign, marking one of the earliest instances of campus-based BDS activism (Jewish Virtual Library). [1] Since then, BDS activities have proliferated across numerous universities, with varying degrees of success and institutional response.

Impact on Jewish Students

The rise of BDS activities has had a significant impact on Jewish students:

Campus Climate: BDS campaigns can create a polarized environment, leading some Jewish students to feel marginalized or targeted, especially if they express support for Israel. Reports indicate that such activities have contributed to Jewish students feeling unsafe expressing their Jewish identity on campus (AJC). [2]

Incidents of Antisemitism: There have been cases where BDS activism has coincided with antisemitic incidents, including harassment and exclusion of Jewish students from campus activities. For example, at Columbia University, an anti-Israel student group distributed an incendiary newspaper titled "The Columbia Intifada," which was denounced by both the university and politicians (New York Post).[3]

Academic Freedom Concerns: The push for academic boycotts challenges the principles of academic freedom and open dialogue, potentially stifling diverse perspectives and scholarly exchange. The American Jewish Committee notes that BDS is antithetical to academic values, as it condemns the entire country of Israel and shuns its considerable human, technological, medical, and material capital, including academics, regardless of political orientation or exceptional utility (AJC). [4]

BDS Movement’s Messaging Strategy 

PART 1: Grassroots Movement: The BDS movement promotes itself as a grassroots initiative led by civil society. The "Handbook for Student Divestment Campaigns" emphasizes the importance of mobilizing local communities:

"A successful divestment campaign is built from the ground up, engaging student groups, faculty, and community allies."

This framing allows BDS to position itself as a collective struggle, masking the global coordination and centralized leadership behind many campaigns. By presenting itself as grassroots, BDS seeks legitimacy, portraying its cause as an organic response to injustice rather than an extremist movement tied to foreign terrorist organizations.

PART 2: Power Dynamic: BDS consistently frames the Israeli-Palestinian conflict through a lens of stark power disparity. The handbook uses language like:

"The Israeli government and its corporate allies profit from an ongoing system of occupation and apartheid against Palestinians."

This narrative casts Israel as an oppressor with unchecked power, simplifying complex political, historical, and security considerations.

PART 3: Shielding Hamas: BDS shields Hamas from all responsibility while redirecting attention to Israel's policies, which are largely implemented in response to terrorism. The handbook steers clear of discussions on Palestinian governance or violence, maintaining focus solely on alleged Israeli offenses.

PART 4: Intersectionality: BDS strategically aligns with global movements for social justice, leveraging intersectionality to build alliances. The handbook suggests:

"Frame the campaign within broader struggles for social justice, connecting Palestinian liberation with movements against systemic racism, colonialism, and global inequality."

This tactic allows BDS to align its cause with various activist communities, often equating Palestinian struggles with unrelated issues like Black Lives Matter or Indigenous rights.

PART 5: Postcolonialism: The movement frequently describes Israel as a "colonial enterprise," positioning Zionism as a settler-colonial project rather than a national liberation movement. The handbook states:

"The struggle against Israeli colonialism is part of a broader fight against global imperialism and historical injustices."

This rhetoric erases the historical and ancestral connection of the Jewish people to the land of Israel.

PART 6: Denying, Rewriting, or Erasing Jewish History: All these strategies converge to deny or distort Jewish history and identity. By recasting Jewish self-determination as colonialism, ignoring Israel’s security concerns, and amplifying one-sided narratives, the BDS movement fuels ignorance, hostility, and conflict.

PART 7: Anti-Zionism is Antisemitism:  In November 2005, the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights recognized that anti-Israel and anti-Zionist sentiment can cross the line into antisemitism, and in their words “should be distinguished from legitimate discourse regarding foreign policy.” The Commission clearly stated: “Antisemitic bigotry is no less morally deplorable when camouflaged as anti-Israelism or anti-Zionism.” The Commission specifically called on governmental institutions to publicly speak out and “set a moral example by denouncing antisemitic and other hate speech, while safeguarding all rights protected under the 1st Amendment and basic principles of academic freedom.”

Summary & Important Overview 

PART 1: Core Critique: They Just Don’t Want Israel to Exist → At its core, the BDS movement’s demands, taken collectively, aim to dismantle Israel as a Jewish and democratic state. By calling for the right of return and ending "occupation" without clarity, BDS seeks to erase Israel’s sovereignty and strip away Jewish rights to self-determination.

PART 2: Balanced Criticism of Israel: Criticism of Israel is legitimate and necessary, as it is for any country. However, the BDS approach undermines meaningful dialogue by promoting policies that escalate tensions rather than resolve them.

• "Israel, like any country, should be subject to criticism. But the goal should be improvement, not eradication," said former U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry.

PART 3: Divestment Does Not End Bad Israeli Policies: Economic pressure through divestment fails to address the complexities of Israeli policy. Instead, it polarizes stakeholders and exacerbates the conflict. Academic studies show that boycotts and divestment campaigns often harden public opinion, making compromise less likely.

PART 4: Working Together, Not Pressuring Israel as a Result of Palestinian Terror:  The BDS movement refuses to acknowledge the role of Palestinian terror organizations in perpetuating the conflict. Genuine progress requires collaboration and a focus on peacebuilding, not unilateral blame.

• “A sustainable peace can only come through dialogue and mutual understanding, not coercion,” said former Israeli President Shimon Peres

PART 5: Why BDS Does Not Benefit Anyone, Including Those Who Seek to Criticize Israel: The BDS movement claims to support Palestinian rights and justice, but in practice, it fails to achieve meaningful progress, alienates moderates, and harms all stakeholders—including those who wish to engage in constructive criticism of Israel.