Mandela’s struggle was never perfectly united, why demand it of Palestinians?

Nelson Mandela is often remembered as the man who led a perfectly united struggle: one leader, one movement, one people. This tidy narrative is frequently thrown at Palestinians: “If only you were united like Mandela, you would succeed too.”

But history tells a different story. South Africa’s path to freedom was messy, divided, and full of conflict. To demand from Palestinians a mythical unity that never truly existed elsewhere is both unrealistic and unfair.

South Africa’s fractured reality

Mandela and the African National Congress (ANC) were never the only voice against apartheid. The regime deliberately created divisions by establishing “Bantustans,” fragmented territories run by chiefs given hollow authority. Many of these leaders collaborated, enjoying privileges that helped prolong apartheid’s rule.

There were also insiders: Black ministers, officials, and police officers who served the system, legitimising it while doing little to advance liberation.

Meanwhile, the Inkatha Freedom Party, led by Zulu chief Mangosuthu Buthelezi, fought bloody battles with the ANC in the 1980s and 1990s. Thousands were killed in this fratricidal conflict. Buthelezi rejected accusations of collaboration, but many saw his movement as an ally, even a tool, of apartheid.

Even within the Black Consciousness movement, rifts deepened after Steve Biko’s death. Some activists accused Mandela and the ANC of conceding too much, warning that compromise could never deliver genuine freedom. Far from a tale of unity, South Africa’s liberation was scarred by rivalries, suspicion, and competing visions.

READ: Who is really behind Britain’s anti-refugee protests?

A familiar pattern in liberation struggles

South Africa was not unique. In Ireland, some local figures sided with British authorities against republicans. In Libya, certain clerics denounced Omar al-Mukhtar and urged obedience to Italian occupiers. History rarely remembers their names. It remembers those who resisted.

No anti-colonial struggle has ever been seamless. Some fought, some faltered, others collaborated. To insist that Palestinians must first achieve “perfect unity” before their struggle is recognised sets a standard no liberation movement in history has ever met.

Why the myth survives

Why, then, does the image of “one Mandela, one people, one victory” persist? Because neat stories are easier to tell. They make good documentaries, school textbooks, and protest placards. They fit a Hollywood script of good versus evil. But liberation struggles are never that simple.

The Palestinian reality

Palestinian politics are fragmented, as South Africa’s once were. There are collaborators, rivals, and bitter disputes. Yet none of this changes the essential fact: for more than seven decades, an entire people have lived under military occupation and dispossession.

History suggests that when Palestine’s story is told, it will not center on those who cooperated with oppression or urged surrender. Just as Mandela’s name endures while the chiefs of the Bantustans are forgotten, and just as Omar al-Mukhtar is remembered while his detractors are erased, so too will the memory of steadfastness outlast the noise of division.

Even amid the devastation in Gaza, marked by mass killing, starvation, and siege, what endures is not disunity but resilience. The demand for a mythical unity distracts from the more urgent truth: a people under occupation continues to resist, despite everything.

READ: Recognition without justice is not liberation: Gaza demands more

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