Over the last couple of weeks I have been, thanks to Freeview, flicking between the Commonwealth Games and Al Jazeera. I have been able to compare the joy in Glasgow with the total despair of Gaza. 

The pictures make me feel that Israel could now have reached its Sharpeville moment. 

Older readers may remember that 69 black South Africans were massacred at Sharpeville, which proved to be a turning point in western attitudes toward apartheid South Africa.

In 2004, writing in the Guardian, Sir Gerald Kaufman MP made a very articulate case for economic sanctions and an arms ban on Israel as the only way of breaking the impasse on peace negotiations. 

He argued that such a policy had contributed to the ending of apartheid in South Africa. Ironically it was sanctions imposed by US president George HW Bush that forced Israeli prime minister Yitzhak Shamir to peace talks in Madrid after he suspended $10 billion in loan guarantees. 

Ten years later in 2014, the behaviour of the Israeli Defence Forces in Gaza is making the case for sanctions in an even more articulate way.

During the last attacks on Gaza back in 2009 the International Co-operative Alliance, with the prompting of the co-operative movements in Israel, Palestine and Iran, said they supported “the United Nations resolution calling for an immediate ceasefire and recognise that only through the auspices of the UN will a solution be found. 

“That solution must ensure the right to peace, self-determination and statehood for all peoples in that region.”

I am sure those sentiments hold good today even though the desired outcome seems farther away than ever. 

Without some pressure on Israel, which currently seems to act with impunity, how can we get it to negotiate in good faith? 

If our governments do not act, what is the role of the responsible citizen? Particularly of those nations, like ours, allies of Israel, who are providing them with aid and armaments? 

Should we be calling for a sporting and cultural boycott of Israel? Asking our sports teams not to continue to play football against Israeli teams in Uefa competitions?

Or should we campaign to exclude them from Eurovision? It was always slightly odd that a Middle Eastern country should participate in these ways.

Clearly these are merely symbolic actions and I doubt a Palestinian under shell fire in Gaza would be very impressed. 

But there is no doubt that a sporting and cultural boycott did have an effect on South Africa and we have to start somewhere.

Building an effective sanctions regime and a weapons ban will not be easy or without cost. 

Back in 2004, Kaufman said: “That a task is difficult does not mean that it should not be attempted. 

“There is no point in seeking to change Israeli policy by appealing to its government’s better nature, since such a nature does not exist. Sanctions and an arms ban must be our objective. 

“Even a determined campaign may itself help to shift the government’s policies and bring about a peace settlement to end the plight of Palestinians and Israelis alike.”

Historically we in the co-operative movement have a proud record of standing up for human rights. Indeed as far back 2009 the Co-op Group stopped selling produce from the occupied territories and in 2012 it took that further in determining that it would no longer engage with any supplier of produce known to be sourcing from the illegal Israeli settlements in the West Bank. 

That position was extended after deep consideration and was not taken until after discussions with Jewish community leaders. 

Today the Co-op is not alone in having this position — Tesco and in some of its markets Aldi have adopted a similar stance, although they often argue that this is for commercial reasons. 

The Ecumenical Council for Corporate Responsibility has been in dialogue with 10 British and Irish supermarket chains asking them whether or not they source settlement goods and, if they do, how they label them.

As a consequence it would appear that most of the major British supermarkets have now stopped sourcing fresh fruit and vegetables from settlements, although some still appear to source a few manufactured or processed goods from the occupied Palestinian territories.

So in a way the Co-op example has had a positive effect. However, let us be frank, the British retail co-operative movement is in a very weak place. 

Everyone knows that our business could be stronger. That means that even if we decided to take the next step and have a complete ban on Israeli products it would only have a very small effect and could leave us open to attacks from the pro-Israel lobby. 

I think the key question is: are consumers ahead of us in supporting such a ban? If so, could we be part of a campaign to persuade all British retailers to stop stocking Israeli products?

These are very difficult questions both ethically and commercially. 

Our unique democracy does leave us open to this type of discussion and our ethical stance does mean we are held to a higher standard than others. 

We have in the past resisted organised attempts for us to cease contact with Israel on the basis that it was not what the vast majority of our members wanted us to do. 

As the Co-op Group sets about the task of creating a new, more inclusive democratic infrastructure this issue could well be its first test. 

Personally I feel that recent events may have changed the nature of the discussion and we are in danger of being behind the public mood. 

I very much hope we can open up this debate in a constructive way. Soon one hopes those dreadful scenes from Gaza will be off our television screens but the issues that propelled them there will not go away so easily.