On the 7th and 8th February, the Guardian published a lengthy two part feature comparing Israel to Apartheid South Africa, written by the ‘award winning’ Middle East correspondent Chris McGreal. The first titled 'Worlds Apart' and the second titled 'Brothers in arms –Israel’s secret pact with Pretoria.'

The false and unfounded portrayal of Israel as an ‘apartheid state’ is certainly not a new phenomenon, but one that has been revived and promoted as part of a deliberate campaign and strategy to demonize and delegitimize Israel. Certainly at the 2001 UN World Conference Against Racism held in Durban, the comparison was once again put at the forefront of political debate on the Middle East. Those who urge a worldwide boycott of Israel use this comparison in order to rally the same forces that used the international divestment sanction as a major factor in bringing the white supremacy regime in South Africa to an end. While Israel must be accountable for her transgressions, comparing Israel to South Africa and labeling all Zionists as racist is an oversimplification of the truth and is extremely unconstructive – it merely serves as a convenient vehicle for those who are deeply hostile to the idea of Israel.

The second part of Chris McGreal’s article goes beyond de-legitimizing Israel, singling out South African Jews as supporters and beneficiaries of the apartheid regime. This article will critically examine McGreal’s assertion that "…for years the bulk of South Africa’s Jews not only failed to challenge the apartheid system but benefited and thrived under its protection…" Although he acknowledges that Jews ‘featured prominently in the liberation movements,’ the emphasis of his article implies a tacit support for the apartheid regime amongst the Jewish community. He writes, "…many South African Jews not only came to feel secure under the new order but comfortable with it. Some found echoes of Israel’s struggle in the revival of Afrikaner nationalism." He even made a point of noting that prominent Jews involved in the anti-apartheid movement were secular or unaffiliated Jews.

He chooses to open the article with an example of a Jewish Holocaust survivor who moved to South Africa and 'vigorously defended the apartheid as a necessary bulwark against black domination,' despite admitting that she was 'unusual among Jewish South Africans in her open enthusiasm for apartheid and for her membership of the NP.' In fact most Jews had actually voted against the apartheid National Party, casting their votes for either the Progressive Party or the United Party.

It is true that during the apartheid many Jewish South Africans chose to focus mainly on Jewish issues and remained distant from the struggle until relatively late. However at the same time they were also ‘over represented’ in the struggle against the apartheid regime, prompting the leading activist against the apartheid, Nelson Mandela to state, “I found Jews to be more broadminded than most whites on issues of race and politics, perhaps because they themselves have historically been victims of prejudice."

Wikipedia highlights that when 156 political leaders were arrested on December 5, 1956, more than half of the whites arrested were Jewish and were charged with high treason. And, all of the whites initially charged in the 1963 Rivonia Trial were Jewish. To mention a few, Jewish attorney Arthur Chaskalson was part of Mandela’s defense counsel and went on to establish the Legal Resources Center, an organisation dedicated to the pursuit of justice and human rights in South Africa. Furthermore, many Jewish anti-apartheid activists were the victims of the state security force. Jewish university students, in particular, vehemently opposed the apartheid movement and a large proportion of Jews were also involved in organizations such as The Springbrook Legion, The Torch Commando, and the Black Sash. Other Jews dedicated their lives to teaching and training black citizens in South Africa. Ian Bernhardt, for example, lived in Johannesburg and led the Union of South African Artists in which he helped teach and protect black artists.

McGreal also criticises the South African Board of Deputies for failing to stand up against the apartheid arguing their neutral position was taken so as not to endanger the Jewish Community. He failed to mention the fact that South Africa’s National Congress of the Jewish Board of Deputies passed a resolution urging "all concerned [people] and, in particular, members of our community to cooperate in securing the immediate amelioration and ultimate removal of all unjust discriminatory laws and practices based on race, creed, or colour."

Many anti-Zionists like McGreal make a point of separating Judaism from Zionism in order to avoid accusations of anti-Semitism. I agree that it is perfectly possible to be an anti-Zionist without being anti-Semitic; however McGreal illustrates how easy it is to cross this line. Although I do not agree with comparisons made between Israel and South Africa, such comparisons are not anti-Semitic. What confuses me is why McGreal has dragged the South African Jewish community into the debate. Is he implying that support for the apartheid amongst South African Jews is further evidence of Israel’s resemblance to apartheid South Africa? If this is the case was support amongst the Christian population of South Africa evidence that say England or America can be compared to the apartheid. Of course such comparisons are absurd.

I can only conclude that McGreal’s article is both ideologically selective and an insult to the memories of those Jews who dedicated and risked their lives to campaigning against the apartheid. He irresponsibly used examples from the South African Jewish community to promote his own political views of Israel when in reality the two are not connected in any way. Consequently I find his article an attack against Jews as well as an attack against Israel.

Nancy Tenenbaum