It's Almost Supernatural

The role of South African Jewry— past and present

A few months ago, I blogged about a controversial article, ‘The Beloved Country: Minority Politics and South African Jewry’, by Daniel Greenberg, on the response of South African Jewry to the tumultuous experiences, both past and present, that has shaped this country’s history. The article has generated an unprecedented response. The number of hits it has received is in the tens of thousands and Greenberg has been inundated with emails from readers, ranging for the fiercely critical to the admiring. A small taste of the debate it has stirred up can be seem in the letters section of the latest edition of the influential American Jewish student journal, The Current, where Greenberg’s original article was published.

Greenberg has come in for some biting (but expected) criticism from Zev Krengel, the current National Chairman of the South African Jewish Board of Deputies (SAJBD). But interestingly, Russell Gaddin, a former National Chairman of the SAJBD has come to Greenberg’s defense. In his letter he condemned the SAJBD’s 'policy of appeasement' towards the ANC. The third letter was from Sasha Polakow-Suransky, an associate editor at Foreign Affairs, praising Greenberg for taking on the South African Jewish establishment. This type of public disagreement by such prominent members of the community is seriously unheard of. Agree with him or not, Greenberg must be complimented for advancing the debate about the role of this community in South African society.

In the spirit of what Greenberg has achieved, I am not going to write a long critique of each letter (although I do have strong views) but rather encourage readers to give their opinions. While all responses will be viewable in the comments section, we will post some of the more interesting ones as articles on the front page (there is no obligation to leave your name if you feel uncomfortable). It would be appreciated if regular readers could help spread the word so that we can encourage as wide and diverse a debate as possible.

While everyone should read all three letters (and Greenberg’s article of course), here are some snip bits:

Daniel Greenberg : “When the ANC refuses to accept the link between HIV and AIDS and installs a Minister of Health who advocates the eating of beetroots and garlic instead of Antiretroviral medication as a treatment for HIV, should the community not take a stand? When the government refuses to condemn the tyrant Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe because of liberation credentials, should the community not take a stand? When there is widespread poverty and the government spends $5 billion on unneeded armaments, probably traceable to the petty gains of a few corrupt politicians, should the community not take a stand?” “But for now, the omnipresent fear of crime stands above all other considerations. Fear—fear of suffering Sheldon Cohen’s fate—drives many Jews away from the country. Fear causes those remaining to look inwards at the expense of all else. Whether under a racist regime or in the midst of appalling insecurity, the South African Jewish experience has been characterized by fear.”

Zev Krengel:  “Greenberg also does the SAJBD a profound injustice by simplistically caricaturizing its members as knee–jerk “yes men” for the South African government. In reality, the SAJBD has on frequent occasions strenuously criticized government, both publicly and privately…Earlier this year, for example, the SAJBD spoke out strongly against an especially one–sided statement on the Middle East conflict issued by the Department of Foreign Affairs… These, and many other statements regularly issued by the SAJBD since the beginning of the decade, clearly debunk the notion that we indiscriminately seek to “ingratiate” ourselves with the government of the day.” “Finally, concluding that “the South African Jewish experience has been characterized by fear,” apart from being unnecessarily melodramatic, is simply untrue. Jews are certainly not blind to the local and regional problems facing their country, and the unacceptably high crime levels are indeed a matter of deep concern. However, “concern” is not the same thing as “fear.” Taken as a whole, South African Jewry, while reduced in numbers, is better organized, united and Jewishly committed than at any other time in its history. Whatever the future holds—and no Jewish community anywhere can be certain in this regard—the SAJBD will always be there to represent its best interests.”

Russell Gaddin: “The role of the Jewish community during the Apartheid era is usually misrepresented by commentators who do not understand the background and harsh influence of those awful times… The world had stood by while six million Jews perished. There wasn’t the international Jewish support system that exists today, and there was as yet no strong Israel. There was a bullying government that dealt harshly with its critics in South Africa. The SAJBD made a decision, supported by the views of the majority of the community, to remain silent and not confront the government or draw attention to themselves.” “…the SAJBD today has adopted a policy of appeasement, or silent diplomacy. This silence is not supported by the community at large. The ANC Government of Thabo Mbeki has largely failed in its leadership of the country. The silent diplomacy has not influenced the South African Government to take a fair stance in its handling of Israel and Middle Eastern affairs. It has not added to Jewish security, nor to the devastation caused by crime. Emigration is peaking again…” “It will be interesting to see how the Jewish leadership reacts to the new ANC leadership whose numbers include many with tainted and questionable pasts. The political game in South Africa has never been an easy one, and there is no indication that this situation will improve soon.”

Sasha Polakow-Suransky: “The community is notoriously touchy and remains extremely insular. Since the demise of Apartheid, communal leaders who once denounced their fellow Jews in the anti–Apartheid movement now seek to claim that heritage of resistance as their own.” “ When Nelson Mandela’s ANC comrades Arthur Goldreich and Harold Wolpe escaped from prison in 1963, the Jewish Board of Deputies took great pains to denounce them, distance themselves, and assure the pro–government press that, “except at his circumcision, [Goldreich] has never again been in a synagogue.” When American Jewish organizations, outraged by the Apartheid regime’s violence, passed a tame resolution in 1983 calling merely for “the granting of freedom, justice and equal rights,” the Board’s leaders blew up and told their American brethren to stay out of South Africa’s business…Harry Schwarz, a child refugee from Nazi Germany who rose to become an opposition member of parliament during the Apartheid years and then ambassador to the United States, believes that the community behaved like the “Court Jews” of the Middle Ages, currying favor with the country’s leaders.” “Even former Board President Boomie Abramowitz lends support to Greenberg’s argument, claiming “There’s a parallel...Whether you like it or not there are almost echoes of the past. We must not say anything that will upset the status quo.”

The Kasrils Affair Book Launch

Our very own South African Jewish maverick, Joel Pollak, will be launching his controversial book “The Kasrils Affair: Jews and Minority Politics in Post-Apartheid South Africa,” Tuesday 11 November, at 17:30 in the Harry Oppenheimer Institute Building, UCT.

All those in Cape Town, who can make it, should definitely go. There will be a round table discussion with Historian Richard Mendelsohn, President of the South African Jewish Board of Deputies Michael Bagraim and Dr Sally Frankental.

I have previewed the book and think it is a must read for anyone interested the future of the Jewish community in this country. Joel has over the years made a name for himself as one of the most outspoken critics of the SAJBD, in particular of its policy of quiet acquiescence towards the ANC.

In his book, he provides a forthright analysis of the pivotal role the Kasrils affair has played in the evolution of the South African Jewish response towards the Government. After a brief moment of public debate with the ANC over its policy towards Israel in the late 1990s, the community has reverted to its historic strategy of refraining from public condemnation and even supporting the ruling party while voicing its concerns through back door channels. A strategy that, as Pollak points out, can be dangerous not only for the community but also for South African democracy.

What is interesting about the book, is that it is also a comparative study. It becomes clear that Minister Kasrils' public attacks on Israel and the community were not an isolated case. Other minority groups like the Portuguese community and Afrikaners were also placed under tremendous pressure to endorse the ANC line. Whether we realize it or not, our community has become caught up in the ANC's desire to dominate every aspect of South African society and silence all opposition. The morality and pragmatism of such a situation are things that we as a community should be discussing.

As South Africa heads into uncertain political territory, this book comes at a crucial time to understand the mistakes we have made as well as the things we got right in our endeavour to promote a democratic and prosperous Jewish community in South Africa. Hopefully it can serve as a launching pad for a broad debate within our community of what the way forwards should be.

Now is the time to squeeze Iran

For all the things that made Bill Clinton’s presidency memorable, his insightful campaign slogan ‘it’s the economy stupid’ had somewhat faded into insignificance until the recent American sub-mortgage crisis. The economy is now once again front and centre in this year’s US election. If Barak Obama is in fact to win on Tuesday night, as the polls suggest, market crash and liquidity freeze will certainly have a lot to do with it. But financial hard times are not only key to momentous internal political change in democracies; they have also shown themselves to be tenacious in disposing of authoritarian regimes. Over the next few months, the Islamic Republic of Iran will hopefully provide us with our latest case study.

Only a few months ago the strategic situation in the Middle East from an Israeli, Western and moderate Arab perspective looked horrible. Awash with petrodollar as a result of record high oil prices, the Iranian regime looked unstoppable from acquiring nuclear weapon and fomenting chaos through its proxies, Hezbollah and Hamas. With military action seeming politically unfeasible and technically problematic, many had begun to whisper about just having to get use to living with a nuclear Iran. But all of this has now changed. Fears of a global slowdown have caused oil prices to collapse from over $140 a barrel to below $70. If this fall is sustained, it could as much as halve the Iranian regime’s fiscal revenue and places the country at risk for a serious budget crisis. Given the already poor state of the economy with rising inflation and high unemployment, Iran has few benign macro-economic options.

Iran is now showing symptoms of what economists refer to as the Dutch Diseases, the almost counter intuitive situation where countries that experience commodity export booms usually end up in serious financial trouble. Given the Iranian regime’s shaky internal political position and its messianic belief that oil prices would continue to rise until the Twelfth Imam returns, they have spent almost all their additional oil revenue in the form of cash handouts and price subsidies to buy the support of their people. But just throwing money at the people ala Evita Peron, as we saw in Argentina, does not create economic growth. It only fuels inflation.

Moreover their arrogant disdain for Western advice has led them to reject perhaps the most important macro-economic policy of the last few decades, an independent central bank. Under Ahmadinejad’s control the Iranian printing press has been working overtime (with money growth in the region of 40% per annum) to keep interest rates low and consumers and businesses happy. But this temporarily effective political strategy has disastrous economic consequences. Coupled with the excessive government spending, it has unleashed the dragon of stagflation (high inflation and low growth) on the Iranian people. Inflation climbed last month to 27 percent while unemployment continues to remains high at high at 11 percent.

Given the structure of the economy, this is a self perpetuating financial collapse. As inflation rises the government of Iran will be forced to spend more and more money, money they no longer have, to maintain the various price subsidies they offer. With falling oil revenues they will either have to borrow or print more money to fund this additional expenditure. The latter will serve to further boast inflation and cause this downward economic spiral to continue over and over again.

So what should the Iranians do to stop their march towards economic ruin? Conventional economic advice would be to cut spending, stop printing money and give the central bank independence. But Ahmadinejad does not seem prepared to listen. In the last 3 years he has fired 3 central bankers for suggesting just such a policy. Moreover, he faces an election in the near future and cannot afford politically to cut back on handouts to the people. By all accounts he is already in a precarious position in the polls. So in fact, expect government spending to increase, at least in the short term.

Natan Sharansky has for the last few years been talking up an imminent internal Iranian revolution. When he visited South Africa a couple of years ago, he told me that from what he has read and heard the Iranian people remind him of Russians in the late 1980’s just before the fall of the Berlin wall. “Almost everyone is a ‘double-thinker’ there”, he told me emphatically. He was predicting regime change within a year. Of course it did not materialize: not because I believe Sharansky’s analysis was wrong but because he failed to foresee the oil price boom that has allowed Ahmadinejad to maintain stability by buying off political support. This has now come to an end. In fact, the current reality in Iran actually now much more closely mirrors the USSR. The fall of the Soviet too was ultimately sparked by falling oil prices and the resulting economic challenges that this wrought.

Clearly now is the time for those who wish to stop Iran acquiring a nuclear bomb and terrorizing the region to act. Simple measures like limiting the Iranians access to foreign finance would force the regime to fund its expenditure through printing more money, seriously accelerating the economic collapse that is under way. Of course large scale sanction that prevented countries from buying Iranian exports would really cripple them economically but given that 80% of their exports are oil, this is not seen as economically viable for the rest of the world. A public disinvestment campaign would also help.

On a political level, now is not the time for meetings between Western leaders and the Iranian regime. Quite the opposite. We need to make it clear that this government is not legitimate. Financial and moral support for dissident groups should be urgently augmented. The West and moderate Muslim states must publicly declare that they will do whatever they can to stand by the Iranian people against their tyrannical government.

The financial crisis has resulted in the hope that change is possible here in America. But this applies equally to our enemies as well. If Obama would only formulate a foreign policy position on the same basis as he does his domestic political strategy then this could really be the moment when the rise of Islamic fundamentalism begins to slow and our planet begins to heal.

Response to SA Jewish Board of Deputies

I am extremely pleased that Zev Krengel, National Chairman of the South African Jewish Board of Deputies, has taken the time to respond to some of my concerns. Choosing to engage with members of the community on a public forum like IAS shows a commitment to a degree of democratic leadership we have not seen from previous leaders of SA Jewry. One of the major goals of this blog is to provide a space for open debate in the community. I hope that we are making progress in achieving this.

Mr Krengel and I, have a serious difference of opinion on the role of the South African Jewish Board of Deputies in the New South Africa. I see it as a Jewish Human Rights organization with a commitment not only to defend Jewish interests, but South African democracy more generally. He views its role more as a lobby group whose aim is ‘to safeguard the Jewish way of life in South Africa’. But arguing for the triumph of idealism over pragmatism in SAJBD policy towards the government was not the point of my original post.

My major concern was the perception that Mr Krengel’s Above Board column gave about the SAJBD’s efforts to build relationships with the new Motlanthe/Zuma/Malema ANC administration in last week’s Jewish report. At a time of so much political uncertainty in South Africa, particularly within the ruling party, I believed it was risky for the community to be seen to be engaging with only 1 camp in the now split ANC. Thus I am relieved to read Mr Krengel’s commitment to meet with Lekota et al. I am also comforted to learn of the SAJBD’s interaction with opposition political parties.

But why was none of this mentioned in the original Above Board article? If the SAJBD does in fact adhere to its policy of “not taking sides” what was the purpose of highlighting the President’s Shabbas dinner at Mr Krengel’s home over 3 years ago? I believe the column was an attempt to reassure the community that despite the political changes the SAJBD still has influence with those in power. Whether Mr Krengel realizes it or not, stressing the SAJBD’s strong relationship with Motlanthe while not stating the SAJBD’s commitment to “not take sides” or its policy of broad political engagement results in the community being perceived as supporting one side. This does involve South African Jewry in the internal ANC power struggle.

In warning about the risks for the Jewish community of being perceived to support one party in a political conflict, I used the historical example of the SAJBD’s constructive engagement with the Nationalist Party under Apartheid. It was not an attempt to make any moral comparison between Mothlanthe’s ANC and the Apartheid government. I am acutely aware of the ethical difference between the Jewish community building a relationship with an illegitimate regime and now trying to engage with a democratically elected one. I was merely trying to point out the negative consequences in deeply divided societies of being caught clinging to the wrong tree when the winds of political change begin to blow.

I also disagree with Krengel’s analysis of the democratic significance of the recent regime change in South Africa. While I am of course grateful that President Mbeki’s ouster was relatively bloodless, I do not as Krengel put it think this ‘demonstrates democracy in action’. Usually in democratic countries political change comes through the national ballot box. Here the decision of a few ANC apparatchiks is being imposed on the nation. In fact it’s much more reminiscent of the internal politics of the former Soviet Union than a democracy, in particular the ‘recalling’ of Khrushchev as Premier by the communist Party Politburo in 1964.

No matter how positive Mr Krengel may personally feel about the recent political turmoil in the country, I do not believe it is his role as SABJD chairman to advocate such a partisan position on the issue to the community. Adopting the narrative that this is a triumph for democracy in South Africa is endorsing the position of those who have managed to dethrone Mbeki and alienates the Lekota et al camp, who feel they have been unjustly treated. Once again it calls into question the SAJBD’s stated policy of political neutrality.

While in the past I did not support the SAJBD’s approach towards the ruling party, I could understand it. When Thabo Mbeki’s ANC seemed to have hegemonic control of South African society there was some logic to being a part of its sphere of influence. But now with a divided ANC, being seen to associate with or promote the narrative of only one faction of the party can be politically costly. At least until things settle down (probably only after the next general election) Mr Krengel and the SAJBD should be far more circumspect in what they say and how they portray who they have Shabbas dinner with. As much as they may declare otherwise, how and when their political activities are communicated to the community makes them political.

SA Jews must not pick sides in ANC fight

One of my all time favorite films is ‘a Man for All Seasons’, that tragic tale of Sir Thomas Moore. In particular I love the contrast between the moral fortitude of Moore and the actions of his obsequious and conniving servant. While Moore’s refusal to deviate from his principles results in his dramatic fall from grace, his cunning servant on the other hands manages to continually improve his standing in society. In the final scene this parallel rises and fall of fortunes is brought to a dramatic climax when it is the servant who is given the responsibility to administer the guillotine that ends Moore’s life.

Despite understanding the risks (as evidenced by the movie) I have always advocated for the Jewish community to adopt a more Moorean approach to dealing with the ANC government. Even in the current context of a split ANC, I would hope that our official representatives speak out in favor of defending the constitution and highlight the very serious risks that many in the new ruling coalition pose to our young democracy. But I know given the position of the powers in this community that sadly this will never happen.

In fact the very opposite is underway. The South African Jewish Board of Deputies seems to be engaging in a charm offensive with the new ANC administration. According to the Above Board column in last week’s Jewish Report, not only have they organized a meeting with the President for select Jewish businessmen, but Motlanthe has in fact been an honored guest at SAJBD chairman Zev Krengel’s Shabbas table.

Values aside, given the current political uncertainty in the country, openly aligning the community with the Motlanthe/Zuma/ Malema camp is an extremely dangerous strategy. There is a very real chance that former defense minister Mosiuoa Lekota and his new ‘movement’ could cause a significant break within the ruling party. What if it happens that in elections next year this new ‘movement’, together with other more established political parties, actually manages to gain enough votes to form a coalition government? How will this new/old government now be disposed towards the Jews given that we did not hesitate to jump in bed with their enemies at our first opportunity? Even if this outcome has even a 10% probability, this is not the sort of gamble that the leadership of this community should be making with our future.

We have already experienced the consequences of this sort of mistake in the past. Would anyone deny that the SAJBD’s relationship with the old Nationalist government did not hurt the communities standing in the new South Africa? I fear our leaders are once again making the same mistakes. I am not asking the SAJBD for grand Moorean moral stands, but at least to be pragmatic in being pragmatists. Now is the time to take a wait-and-see approach. But if you just cannot resist ingratiating yourselves with the new ANC administration, at least keep it quiet!

Rosh Hashanah Message from the President of South Africa

Newly appointed South African President Kgalema Motlanthe has sent out a Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur message to the Jewish community. This is the first time that I can recall such a message being issued by the presidency. It is clearly a sign that this new administration is committed to restoring the inclusive stance of the pre-Mbeki ANC. I have serious reservation about Mothlanthe and the people around him, but this renewed attempt to reach out to all South Africans (Black and White) does bode well for the Jewish community and the country.

The celebration of Rosh Hashana is more than just the celebration of the Jewish New Year. It is a moment of renewal. It is the renewal that comes from having earnestly sought forgiveness. It is the renewal that comes from remembrance and the review of history. During these, the first two days of the Jewish month of Tishri, it is appropriate to seek renewal as one calls to mind the many moments of Jewish suffering in the long history of human kind. The renewal that comes with Rosh Hashana must also make us, as a South African government and nation; proclaim to the Jewish community that you have earned your place in the South African nation as equal citizens, where we uphold, as we do for all South Africans, the freedom to enjoy both shared and unique rights. On the occasion of Rosh Hashana, we are committed to living together in peace and harmony with our Jewish brothers and sisters. May you be inscribed in the Book of Life. Issue by: The Presidency

It would be interesting to know who wrote it. At least we can be sure it wasn’t Ronnie Kasrils!

South Africa almost tops anti-Semitism charts

Of all the challenges facing South African Jewry, anti-Semitism was not commonly thought of as one of them. In fact the South African Jewish Board of Deputies (SAJBD) regularly boasts that South Africa has one of the lowest rates of anti-Semitism in the world. Non-racism is a cornerstone of our new democracy. Or is it?

(Left: Anti-Semitic graffitti adorning the walls of Wits university earlier this year.)

The just released 2008 Pew Global Attitudes Survey finds that South Africans (along with Spaniards, Mexicans and Brazilians) have some of the most negative views of Jews of all the non Muslim nation surveyed. A shocking 46% claim to have an unfavourable view of Jews. Breaking this figure down further, over two thirds of these South African who dislike Jews dislike them in the extreme. According to the survey 31% of South Africans have a very unfavorable (as opposed to 15% who have a somewhat unfavorable attitude towards Jews).

Compare this to an unfavourable score of 9% from Britain, a country which is regularly in the Jewish press for its high levels of anti-Semitism or 11% for Australia where attacks on Jews are also often reported. Even African nations like Tanzania and Nigeria were found to be less anti-Jewish than South Africa. This is a complete disgrace! But at least we do still rate far behind Muslim and Arab countries were negative perceptions of Jews are in the high 90s.

The Muslim community in South Africa doesn’t fare much better. An equally shocking 45% of South African respondents expressed an unfavourable view of Muslims. Unfavourable views of Christians were recorded at only 10%.

Interestingly, except for South Africa countries with significant Jewish populations report high favourable ratings of Jew (77%,79% and 73% for the US, France and Britain respectively and 73% for Australia). These countries also display a very small number of ‘undecideds’. In South Africa the ‘undecideds’ at 28% outrank the favourables at 26% (of which only 7% views Jews very favourably). While this figure exposes the failure of South African Jewry to promote a positive image of itself among the broader populace, it is also our sliver of hope.

That there are many people in South Africa that hate us, is now no longer just the paranoia of a few ‘rightwing’ Jews. It is a quantifiable fact. Moreover, the lack of support the community seems to get from other segment of South African society when we are threatened is borne out by the survey. It’s clear, very few people in this country really like us. However we still have an opportunity to change the views of almost one third of the population. But it will require real leadership on our part.

Over the last few months, the danger of ‘denialism’ has become all too apparent as Mbeki’s administration has imploded. South African Jewish leaders have to be careful not to suffer the same fate. It is time to start honestly confronting the challenges this community faces. We can no longer delude ourselves and others into believing that there is no anti-Semitism in South Africa. This Pew Survey should form the basis of that response.

Survey in hand prominent members of this community need to call an urgent press conference on the issue. South Africans from the government, to media, to NGOs, to business, need to be challenged to do some serious soul searching about the high levels of intolerance that are plaguing our society. This of course is not limited to Jews and Muslims. The shocking xenophobia that we experienced at the beginning of the year has its source in the same septic pit.

Daniel Greenberg in his controversial article The Beloved Country: Minority Politics and South African Jewry charged that ‘the South African Jewish experience (whether under a racist regime or in the midst of appalling insecurity) has above all else been characterized by fear’. Now is our chance to demonstrate that this powerful community is no longer afraid to stand up for itself.

Israel’s Africa Policy Revisited

Our friends at ‘Z’ word have posted a great in depth article on the history of Africa-Israel relations. Contrary to the myths peddled by many anti-Zionists and the fears of the more paranoid Israel supporters, Africa has not displayed a uniform or timeless opposition to the Jewish state. This article by Michelle Sieff (Associate Director of the Africa Institute of the American Jewish Committee) details both the disparity between different African states and changes over time in their policies towards Israel. Thus for those interested in understanding how to improve the Israel/Jewish-Afro relationship going forward this article is a must read.

African liberation movements and newly independent states felt a strong sense of kinship towards Zionism and the Jewish state. There was of course the common bond of historical suffering but also a tremendous respect for the Israeli model of state building and economic development. For example, Nelson Mandela at the Rivonia Trial told the court that the structure of the ANC’s armed wing had been based on the right wing Irgun movement that fought against the British occupation of Palestine in the 1940’s.

By 1972 Israel had established diplomatic relations with 32 African states. Aside from the former colonial powers, this amazingly represented the largest diplomatic network in Africa. Every country that established diplomatic relations with the Jewish state benefited from an aid and technical assistance program administered by Mashav, Israel's Division for International Cooperation.

But the ideological winds had begun to blow against Israel. Nassar and later Qadhafi began to strategically demonize Israel in ways that conformed with, as Sieff puts it, ‘the cognitive frames that African nationalists used to make sense of the world’. They were able to exploit African fears of "neo-colonialism" by portraying Israel as a tool of the former colonial powers designed to perpetuate their control over the continent. The allure of vast sums in aid from the petro-rich Arab states was also no small incentives. While for a time some prominent African heads of state attempted to rebuff this ideological and financial pressure to cut ties with Israel, the 1973 Yom Kippur war was the event that finally broke the relationship. Israel’s crossing of the Suez Canal and stationing of troops on African soil was a red line whose crossing most African states could not support. By mid-November of 1973 Malawi, Swaziland, Lesotho, and Mauritius were the only black African states to still maintain diplomatic relations with Israel.

Following 1973, declarations equating Zionism with racism and Apartheid became the staple of African bodies like the OAU and African voting blocks at the United Nations regularly aided Arab states in ramming through anti-Israel resolutions. 20 African states supported the infamous 1975 UN Zionism = Racism resolution for example (Although five states - the Central African Republic, Ivory Coast, Liberia, Malawi, and Swaziland – did oppose it and twelve states abstained). During the 1980s Israel’s relationship with Apartheid South Africa also further complicated Afro-Israel relations.

The fall of the apartheid regime and the signing of the Olso accords paved the way for the 1990s to be the decade of Africa-Israel rapprochement. By the end of the turn of the millennium, forty African governments had established ties with the Jewish state. But as Sieff warns, the civil societies of many of these countries have remained hostile or even become more so. Sadly South Africa is used as the prime example. Looking forward, given the more active role of NGOs in African politics, this may pose a serious challenge to strengthening these renewed ties in the future.

In light of this, as Sieff asks at the end of her piece, what can Israel and the Jewish world do to safeguard and continue to improve Africa Israel relations. Darfur is her answer. For she claims that firstly, the atrocities in Darfur lay to rest, once and for all, any myths of Arab-African unity. Secondly, she argues that the "rhetoric of reaction" which the Sudanese government, other Arab governments, and the Arab press have used to deflect attention from the real cause of the atrocities reveals the absurdity and pernicious nature of anti-Zionist discourses.

From New York this solution may seem plausible but given what I have seen in South Africa I seriously doubt it would have any significant impact. It might surprise foreign reads but Darfur has elicited almost zero media attention or concern in South Africa. Our government has consistently supported Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir; there have been no big save Darfur rallies or campaigns nor do most people even think of the violence in racial Arab verse African terms. In fact the large amount of attention that Sudan gets in the West (particular America) is certainly not comforting to Africans. Oil, imperialism and precipitating war in Africa are all seen as possible reasons. Many Africans fear Sudan is the next Iraq. The significant Jewish contribution to the international save Darfur effort only aggravates this suspicion.

Apart from solving the Arab-Israeli conflict (in particular the Palestinian issue), the only way for Israel to improve its branding in Africa is a return to its strategy of old. Development assistance, development assistance and more development assistance. Now 50 years on sine the first African states gained independence, prosperity is surely more important to Africans than ideology. Israel represents a unique example of a poor country with no natural resources that was able, within a relatively short space of time, to achieve massive economic development. We hear so often about the Asian Tigers or the Celtic Tiger but never about the Jewish Lion. Strengthening Israel’s future relationship with Africa lies in sharing its knowledge and experience on how to build a modern and successful market base and democratic nation state.

SA Embraces Chavez

In a disturbing but not unusual move, the South African government is hosting Venezuelan strongman Hugo Chavez this week in what the DFA website has dubbed an‘historic’ visit. Chavez is in South Africa to sign an energy cooperation agreement. But even more worrying, South Africa is also hoping to increase its arm sales to this rogue regime. At a time when those who value freedom and democracy are putting their differences aside to stand united against growing international totalitarianism, the South African government has once again made it abundantly clear where it stands.

Chavez, not unlike the new leadership of the ANC, portrays himself as a cadre of a new popularist revolution. Although democratically elected Chavez has shown a particular disdain for liberal democracy both at home and abroad. Venezuela’s once independent judiciary, now stacked with Chavez’ supporters is a mere rubber stamp, the oversight functions of the legislature have been curtailed and now media critical of the president have been closed down and threatened. Drunk with the power that petro-dollars have brought, internationally Chavez has sought to roll back the neo-liberal reforms that South America has made over the last 2 decades. He has explicitly attempted to meddle in the democratic processes of his neighbours and is rumored to have been funding FARC Leftist rebels in their struggle to overthrow the pro-Western Columbian government.

The Center for Security Policy describes Chávez as a "self-absorbed, unstable strongman" who has found "common cause with terrorists and the regimes that support them." While Foreign Policy Magazine says that Chávez has "updated tyranny for today" and "is practicing a new style of authoritarianism". Clearly not the type of guy a democratic country like South Africa should be flirting with!

But more worrying from a Jewish perspective is Mr Chavez’s extreme anti-Israel rhetoric and his strong support for Iran. In an interview with Al Jazeera during the Lebanon war, Chávez likened Israel to the Nazis saying, "They are doing what Hitler did against the Jews." He was also quoted by the Miami Herald, two days later, on his Sunday radio program, Aló Presidente (Hello President), of accusing Israel of "going mad and inflicting on the people of Palestine and Lebanon the same thing they have criticized, and with reason: the Holocaust. But this is a new Holocaust”, he added. If this wasn’t bad enough, Jewish human rights groups like the ADL, have chastised Chavez of more classical anti-Semitism. In 2005, he attacked 'some minorities, the descendants of the people who crucified Christ, [who] seized the riches of the world'. Chávez stated that "[t]he world is for all of us, then, but it so happens that a minority, the descendants of the same ones that crucified Christ, the descendants of the same ones that kicked Bolívar out of here and also crucified him in their own way over there in Santa Marta, in Colombia. A minority has taken possession of all the wealth of the world."

Given these views it’s not surprising that Chavez is also a major ally of the Holocaust denying Iranian regime. As a reward for this friendship, on his birthday, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad presented Chávez with Iran's highest honor for "supporting Tehran in its nuclear standoff with the international community". Decorating Chávez with the "Higher Medal of the Islamic Republic of Iran", Ahmadinejad said, "Mr. Chávez is my brother, he is a friend of the Iranian nation and the people seeking freedom around the world. He works perpetually against the dominant system. He is a worker of God and servant of the people." Chávez in response pledged that Venezuela would "stay by Iran at any time and under any condition". He has stated subsequently that he "admired the Iranian president for 'his wisdom and strength.”

Now is not the time for South African Jewry to remain silent. We need to speak out loudly and firmly against our government’s warm embrace of this man. That South Africa has been so willing to sell its international reputation for a few gallons of cheap Venezuelan oil once again brings into question the ANC’s support for democracy. The closer we move towards the totalitarian bloc and away from the Western sphere of influence, the greater the risk that our hard fought for freedoms will go the ways of the poor Venezuelans.

Limmud: So much to choose from

Decidophobia is the scientific name for a fear of making choices. For those who suffer from it, it can be extremely debilitating. Looking at this year’s Limmud JHB program, you could be forgiven for thinking that maybe you have somehow developed this disorder. With over 70 speakers and 80 different events, it is not remotely possible for someone to get to see even a fraction of what they would like. Planning in advance will certainly help and the latest schedule is now available to assist you in this regard. To make things a little easier I have decided to point out some of my personal favorite sessions just in case you miss them.

Limmud in JHB begins on Saturday night 30th August after Shabbat comes out and runs over through the whole of Sunday. Here are my picks:

• In the first slot (20:45) my pick would definitely be the report back by members of the South Africa ‘Human Rights’ Delegation to Israel. We have devoted much space on this blog to their controversial tour and I think personally challenging them on the issues all of us have raised is very important.
• The (21:45) slot is a plenary with music and dancing
• The next day begins at 9:00. This is a really tough call. There is a very high powered session on the Jewish response to the xenophobic attacks which will dfinately be interesting but I would probably go with the session by Rufina Bernardetti daSilva Mausenbaum on her personal journey back to Judaism. I have had the opportunity to get to know Rufina and her story and the amazing work she does on trying to bring the decedents of Jews who were forced to convert to other religions(like herself) back to their Jewish roots. She is an extremely powerful and moving speaker.
• The 10:20 slot has a clear choice for me: Rudo Mathivha on the story of the Lemba. The Lemba are an African tribe in Venda who claim to have Jewish ancestry and customs. Rudo is the daughter of the late Lemba chief. This has always been a very controversial subject in the Jewish community but I have always felt that the benefits of engaging with these people are infinitely more valuable than just dismissing them.
• Next I would go and listen to an evacuee from Gush Kativ at 11:40. The session is poignantly entitled Homeless in the Homeland. But if that’s to heated for you, I would recommend maybe recommend checking out Taylor Krauss’s session on Rwanda and the Holocaust: Listening to the Testimony of Survivor. He has just spent months in Rwanda collecting the testimonies of genocide survivors ala Steven Spielberg.
• Then thank goodness it will be lunch (this is included in the cost of your ticket).
• After lunch one of my favorite presenters Josh Neuman of Heeb Magazine is speaking on the first ever Jewish swim suit calendar. Heeb is probably the most cutting-edge Jewish Magazine in the world. If you in to biting humour (and hear who are the hottest Jewish women of 5758 this is for you! For the more serious there is a panel with Albie Sachs and Gill Marcus on the relationship between Human Rights Activism and Jewish Identity?
• The 14:50 session with renowned Israeli author Gershom Gorenberg is not to be missed. Steve is currently reading his book on the history of the settlements and has recommended listening and engaging with him.
• By now I am sure we will all be exhausted but the session with Jack Bloom at 16:20 is a must. As head of the DA in Gauteng, Jack is one of the highest ranking South African Jews in politics. Ever the contrarian he is speaking about Good and Evil in the Middle East – Who is really racist, fascist and imperialist? Jack is an expert on the discriminatory measure of countries in the Arab world against Jews and other ethnic minorities. Knowing Jack, it will be hard hitting.
• The day’s intellectual events end with a unique panel discussion on the future of world Jewry. Participants including leading international scholars and local leaders on the topic. If you care about the future of the Jewish people be there to give your say.

Check out the schedule and see if you would recommend anything else for IAS readers.