This morning I heard that the ANC had removed the link to the end the occupation campaign from their website. I can however confirm that the link and the calls for support are still on the ANC website at this time of writing.
Should the link be removed tomorrow, it would be because the week of mass action against Israel has passed; not because the ANC position has changed.
The ANC has however, clarified their position that whilst they are supporting and promoting a campaign which calls for amongst other things, a boycott of Israeli goods - the ANC itself is not actually supporting a boycott of Israeli goods. (It doesn't make much sense to me either, but what matters most is that the campaign failed to convince the ANC to call for a boycott of Israeli goods.)
Someone who has made alot of sense is Inkatha Freedom Party leader Prince Mangosuthu Buthelezi. Buthelezi has stood up against our hypocritical approach to foreign conflicts and called for consistent and equitable responses to international disputes. Buthelezi believes that the recent pro-Palestinian motion by the ANC failed the tests of consistency and equity.
As I listened to the debate yesterday in Parliament on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, my mind went back to a 1985 meeting with the then Israeli Prime Minister and Nobel Peace Prize winner Mr Shimon Peres. He poignantly told me that we were "brothers in suffering", likening the travails of the Jewish people to those of the oppressed black majority in apartheid South Africa. I am concerned that in, rightly, seeking to draw attention to the plight of ordinary Palestinians, we have not been sufficiently sensitive to the parallel suffering of the Israeli people in the past and in the present. Today's conflict cannot be debated without reference to the events which led to the proclamation of the state of Israel in 1948. Nor can it be separated from the virulent rejection by the Arab League of the partitioning of Palestine and to the existence of the state of Israel. Let us never forget that the state of Israel came into being after the annihilation of six million Jews by the Nazis in World War II. The Holocaust is seared into the Jewish national psyche in a way that is difficult for us, foreigners, to comprehend. Yet an attempt to try and understand this is vital though, if we are to be so bold as to believe that we have a contribution to make in the region. Israel has existed in a state of near siege from the Israeli War of Independence to the Six Day War of 1967 and right through the horrific Yom Kippur War to the first Palestinian Intifada in the 1980s and beyond. As this week's parliamentary motion coincided with the 40th anniversary of the Six Day War, it is relevant to recall that the war was precipitated by the provocative mobilisation of Egyptian, Syrian, Jordanian, Iraqi and Saudi troops on Israel's borders. President Nasser of Egypt said that "our basic objective will be the destruction of Israel" on the 27th of May 1967. Her small size and proximity to Arab states, which have refused to make their peace with her, has also made Israel particularly vulnerable to air and missile attacks. During the Gulf War in 1991, Iraqi missiles thundered down on Tel Aviv, Ramat Gan and Haifa. The random acts of terror by suicide bombers strike fear into the hearts of ordinary Israelis. I enumerate this to illustrate that neither the Israelis nor Palestinians have a monopoly on tragedy. Both have suffered terribly. It is difficult to imagine the daily indignities of living in the occupied Palestinian territories with its system of required passes and strict segregation, the loathed wall, or the, sometimes, "shock and awe" tactics of the Israeli army. |
Read the rest here. Use this link to contact the IFP and thank them for the balance which they are able to bring to the debate on this tragic conflict.
I would actually ask all of you to consider voting for the IFP on at least one of the ballot papers at the 2009 elections!
Posted by: Gary | June 10, 2007 at 21:11
Brilliant letter. I think we must email him our thanks. He seems like one of the only few sane people left in parliament.
Posted by: mike | June 10, 2007 at 23:07
Fantastic submission by IFP leader (who wrote his speech?) As SA moves further away from a true multiparty democracy, the ANC will become more emboldened to display their inherent anti-Israel bias. With such strong communist foundations; growing Muslim and diminishing Jewish support, this trend is set to continue unabated. As long as Aziz Pahad, Ronnie Kasrils and radicals remain with the ANC, this position is only going to worsen.
Posted by: Brett | June 11, 2007 at 05:09
I am glad that we can praise a letter that mentions Palestinian issues that we typically argue about. It shows that all we seek is balance. We do not demand that politicians accept our narrative as gospel. Just that they see both narratives as legitimate.
"It is difficult to imagine the daily indignities of living in the occupied Palestinian territories with its system of required passes and strict segregation, the loathed wall, or the, sometimes, "shock and awe" tactics of the Israeli army."
Buthelezi speaks quite fondly of Arafat as well.
Posted by: Steve | June 11, 2007 at 08:32
Steve, aren't you being just a little naive reading into the ANC's statement what you want to hear: "the campaign failed to convince the ANC to call for a boycott of Israeli goods"?
The ANC is using classic Kasrilspeak/newspeak (Hat Tip George O), they're not supporting it, but they are.
The ANC, being the good (quiet diplomacy african) diplomats that they are, have come up with a statement that lets those pesky noisy but guilt-ridden (and wealthy) zionists believe the ANC is on their side so the ANC can carry on receiving bribes, I mean, BEE deals from the Jewish Community.
At the same time they can let Chippy, Mo and their cousins think that the ANC supports the boycott and get br.., I mean BEE deals there too.
In short, they're the quintessential prostitute, not only are they getting paid by both sides, but they're also not putting out for either.
Posted by: Hillel | June 11, 2007 at 10:22
Hillel, I completely agree with you. You put it so well.
On the one hand, they are supporting the campaign which calls for the boycott. And then, because they find it politically difficult to impose a boycott, they declare that they dont support the boycott.
They trying to have it both ways. Ultimately however, despite all the 'lapdogging' to the Palestinian pressure groups, they have not imposed a boycott. (Their resolution they passed does illustrate their true one sided stance - but that resolution doesn't hurt Israel.)
Maybe there are two divided camps on this issue within the ANC?
Some suggest that Mbeki uses Kasrils as an unofficial voice on Israel. Again, its a way of having it both ways. A voice to say things that are politically difficult to say combined with the ability to not officially say anything.
There are so many ways to read this..
But still, the aim of the campaign was to impose a boycott and to that end they failed.
Posted by: Steve | June 11, 2007 at 14:56
Steve, the campaign may have failed but it had nothing to do with the ANC's involvement and the fact that it did fail is really irrelevant since the key question is where does the ANC stand, and more importantly where do they face.
My strong feeling on statements like the one being referred to is that it generally reflects what everyone on the corporate world will recognise as "plausible deniability". It's not quite as strong as C.O.Y.A., but it's just vague enough that you can afterwards either take credit, or shuffle the blame.
My apologies if the "naive" comment came accross as personal, it wasn't intended that way. It was intended however to reflect the impression that you'd !ostensibly! swallowed what they had to say without question.
Keep up the good work!
Posted by: Hillel | June 11, 2007 at 16:03
Thanks Hillel, didn't take it personally at all.
Posted by: Steve | June 11, 2007 at 16:45
ANC website clearly states that THE ANC HAS NOT CALLED FOR A BOYCOTT OF
ISRAELI GOODS.
The purpose of this statement must be to distance The ANC from the position adopted by Jeenah and The PSC. Interesting that Kasrils's
parliament speech also doesn't mention the boycott. Perhaps Mbeki told him to shut the f... up?
Posted by: The Blacklisted Dictator | June 11, 2007 at 21:44