The call to ‘recalibrate’ South African foreign policy on apartheid Israel smacks of opportunism 

Aiding and abetting Israel’s Illegal occupation of Palestinian territories has been outlawed by the latest advisory opinion issued by the International Court of Justice. The opinion has been welcomed by South Africa’s International Relations Minister Ronald Lamola, as it conforms to the country’s long held position on the apartheid state’s illegal settlements.

It’s no surprise, though, that Israel’s local Zionist lobby groups in South Africa have expressed their dismay. Not satisfied with that, they have also called for Pretoria to “recalibrate” its foreign policy on apartheid Israel.

Whenever anyone representing the South African Zionist Federation (SAZF) writes to complain about Israel being treated unfairly, I cannot help but be reminded of the apologists for the white minority apartheid regime in our country led by the National Party.

Writing in an article headed “Crucial crossroads — Realigning South Africa’s foreign policy”, Rowan Polovin of the SAZF resorted to discredited tactics used by the National Party that are not only irrational, but also steeped in the era of racism, apartheid and oppression of yesteryear.

Does this surprise anyone? It shouldn’t, because the SAZF is, by its own admission, an arm of the settler-colonial regime in Israel. Its declared aim is to defend Israel at all costs.

Usurping the role of Israel’s Embassy, the SAZF has in effect been swimming against the tide to save the disastrous public image of Israeli genocidaires. Polovin’s article is thus a classic example of pro-Israel hasbara (propaganda), painting the occupation state as a “victim” of South Africa’s foreign policy. In doing so he fails miserably to display an understanding of the history of our country’s revolutionary evolution of international relations from the vile era of apartheid to democracy.

The “recalibration” he argues for was instituted way back, post-94, when Nelson Mandela’s leadership laid the foundation for a foreign policy underpinned by human rights as enshrined in both the Bill of Rights as well as the South African Constitution.

READ: US Rep ‘outraged’ Congress gave ‘genocidal war criminal’ Netanyahu a platform

And, of course, this means that South Africa’s stance on Palestine aligns perfectly with our values of Ubuntu, a quality that includes the essential human virtues of compassion and humanity. To take a principled position against the horrific genocide committed by Israel in Gaza as South Africa has done by leading the world, particularly the global South, at the International Court of Justice, is an example of a foreign policy imbued with human rights.

Polovin’s irrational arguments contain a number of contradictions.

A particularly galling one is his insistence that Israel’s “right to self-defence” is enshrined in “international law”. It is interesting to note Israel’s decades-long defiance of international laws pertaining to illegal settlements across the Occupied Palestinian Territories; its practice of apartheid; its siege of Gaza; its demolitions of Palestinian homes; arbitrary detentions without trial; targeted executions without trial; persecution of journalists; state-sanctioned torture; and so on. All of this renders his argument on self-defence null and void.

In any case, an occupation state has no inherent right to claim self-defence when acting against the people living under its military occupation. Moreover, as many commentators have pointed out, and as correctly understood and explained by former Minister of International Relations Naledi Pandor, the events of 7 October last year did not happen in a vacuum.

In The Politics of Dispossession, the late Palestinian academic Edward Said traced his people’s struggle through decades of occupation and denial of fundamental rights. “That the Palestinians struggle against and resist this state of affairs is a function of how injustice and sufferings do not defeat a people, nor compel it into submission, but rather drive that people to resist more, and to struggle further for political justice and rights,” wrote Said.

OPINION: Growing racism in Israeli society

This climate of oppression and discrimination is known to most South Africans who were on the receiving end of white minority rule as apartheid, and is a perpetual atrocity committed by Israel against Palestinians. It is thus no surprise that South Africa’s foreign policy is rooted in a paradigm that espouses a firm commitment to freedom and justice for Palestine and its people.

Polovin is completely out of his depth by claiming that South Africa is “out of touch on the global stage” when the facts of the matter are entirely different. The articulation of sound legal arguments by South Africa’s galaxy of lawyers at the ICJ led the way for a host of countries to follow. Far from being “out of touch”, it affirmed a stamp of approval for being in touch with the harsh reality of the worst form of genocide against Palestinian civilians.

If anyone can be accused of being out of touch, it can only be the SAZF and likeminded pro-Israel lobby groups.

Should Polovin and the SAZF dare to be open-minded and scrutinise the levels of anger and disillusionment against Benjamin Netanyahu and his criminal gang of a coalition government, they will be surprised to discover that far from being a land of “milk and honey”, Israel is in fact a rogue regime. Professor John Dugard deals extensively with this theme in Confronting Apartheid, making an interesting observation in his assessment of Israel’s failure to comply with its obligations under human rights law.

Evidence of Israel’s violation of human rights law and international humanitarian law in the OPT, writes Dugard, is contained in the reports of UN fact-finding missions, NGOs and special rapporteurs, in books and the media. Unlike the past, Israel’s gruesome violence and defiance of international laws are vividly exposed for all to see.

The correctness of South Africa’s foreign policy — both morally and legally — has been vindicated by the highest court of the world, the ICJ. Al Jazeera’s summary of the court’s latest groundbreaking opinion underlines the relevance of South Africa’s foreign policies: “The court said Israel has no right to sovereignty of the territories, is violating international laws against acquiring territory by force and is impeding Palestinians’ right to self-determination. It said other nations were obliged not to ‘render aid or assistance in maintaining’ Israel’s presence in the territory. It said Israel must end settlement construction immediately and existing settlements must be removed, according to a summary of the more than 80-page opinion… Israel’s ‘abuse of its status as the occupying power’ renders its ‘presence in the occupied Palestinian territory unlawful.’”

If any “recalibration” is required, therefore, it must be by the relevant security and prosecuting authorities to investigate whether the SAZF is guilty of providing “aid or assistance in maintaining Israel’s presence in the OPT” in violation of the ICJ ruling.

READ: Palestinian flags unfurled by football fans in protest against Israel at Paris Olympics

The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.