For an apology, at least one issued by a senior politician, it’s not half bad. None of the “misquoted” or “quoted out of context” nonsense we have become accustomed to being dished. Instead, in a carefully worded statement, Fatima Hajaig, the deputy minister of foreign affairs, has gone some way in undoing the damage caused by her recent anti-Semitic rant.
So let’s start with the good stuff.
First, Hajaig has clarified that her opposition to all forms of racism includes opposition to anti-Semitism in “all its manifestations and wherever it may occur”.
Second, as much as she deplores “unmitigated state violence directed against unarmed [Palestinian] civilians”, she deplores “indiscriminate attacks against Israeli unarmed civilians”.
Third, she supports a resolution to the “Palestine-Israel conflict” that is “based on justice and security for Israelis and Palestinians alike”.
Finally, she does “not believe that the cause of the Palestinians is served by anti-Jewish racism”.
So far, so good — all in line with official state policy.
But now for the bad …
First, the only unequivocal apology she offers is for the pain her statement “may have caused to the people of our country, and the Jewish community in particular” – not an apology for having made the offensive statements.
Second, despite any attempt to deny the contents of her racist outburst, she nevertheless refers to “some comments that … [she] was purported to have made”.
Third, the deputy minister appears to suggest that all Zionists attempt “to justify [Israeli] policies that have worsened the crisis in the Middle East”.
Finally, in stating that she “conflated Zionist pressure with Jewish influence”, Hajaig implies that Zionists control the US and other Western countries. Just replace “Jewish” with “Zionist” and you get my point:
“They in fact control [America]. No matter which government comes into power, whether Republican or Democratic, whether Barack Obama or George Bush. The control of America, just like the control of most Western countries is in the hands of Zionist money and if Zionist money controls their country then you cannot expect anything else.”
On balance, I guess the glass is about a tad more than half-full. What worries me, however, is the implicit view that all those who support the existence of the state of Israel — also known as Zionists — are uncritical supporters of the Israeli government and its policies, having disproportionate influence on — perhaps even directing — American foreign policy. This is simply not true, not supported by the evidence.
Consider, for example, Habonim Dror in South Africa, J-Street in the US and a number of left-leaning political parties in the Israeli Knesset — all Zionists, all deeply critical of many Israeli policies, and all committed to a resolution of the conflict “based on justice and security for Israelis and Palestinians alike”. But try as they might, none of them appears — to date — to have been able to exert significant influence on the US or other Western countries.
So where does that leave the honourable deputy minister’s apology? Given what we usually get from our leaders, I guess it’s about as good as it gets. I’m just not sure that it’s enough, at least not for me.
Agreed, its probably as good as it gets. Under the surface, the ugly sentiments remain, partly subliminal and actually unatoned. Moving on, it is for the aggrieved parties, Israelis and Palestinians and their allies to ensure and urgently agree a lasting resolution to their conflict.
Also see Doron Isaacs’ analysis at http://www.sashrip.org/node/31 and the Cabinet statement at http://www.info.gov.za/speeches/2009/09020416151001.htm . As far as I’m concerned, the President has held the Deputy Minister to account.
There’s a post to be created at ANC headquarters for Director-General of Weasel-Worded Apologies. Carl Niehaus is the front-runner.
David Saks is correct that the myth of Jewish control is founded on a fundamentally racist and anti-Semitic position. He is also to be praised for exposing Fatima Hajaig’s anti-Semitic comments. However, Saks is not really in a position to point fingers over racism, given his own record of promoting racist generalisations about the entire Palestinian people. Nor is it beneath him to resort to that trusty old device, comparisons with Nazism (except when Israel is being so compared, of course). In a recent post he argued that, “What is being instilled into the Palestinian population is sheer unadulterated Nazism, this time with an Islamist religious veneer rather than a racist Aryan one.” Such rhetorical overreach is not the mark of a trustworthy commentator. In fact, as SASHRIP has pointed out (see http://www.sashrip.org/Saks), the entire piece is a sustained and venomous racist rant. David Saks: by all means expose anti-Semitism and racism wherever it occurs, but clean up your own house too.
As to the Deputy Minister’s apology – it most certainly is not enough.
Eduard Grebe
Since when does denouncing racism make one a racist? Put another way, would it have been logical for someone who spoke out against the foul indoctrination of German youth under the Nazis to have been accused of anti-German racism?
Racism means falsely attributing fundamental negative character traits to an entire people – deploring the racist indoctrination and openly genocidal agenda that prevails within the Palestinian territories clearly doesn’t fall into this category. Had I written something along the lines that Palestinians had innate character traits that predisposed them to committing acts of violence, that, of course, would have been racist, but I wrote no such thing.
One all too often is confronted with the sneering claim that Jews continually ‘cry’ antisemitism to deflect criticism of their ‘persecution’ of the Palestinians. Well, sometimes that is true and sometimes not. But what we are seeing above is the epithet ‘racism’ being misused as a kind of all-purposes slur in order to discredit criticism of the Palestinians.
Anti-Jewish racism of the vilest kind is being instilled on a continual basis at all levels of Palestinian society. This is a fact. Example: “the extermination of Jews is good for the inhabitants of the world on a land, to which Allah gave his blessing for the sake of the inhabitants of the worlds”, in the Hamas organ Al-Risalah, April 23, 2007). It is not racist to speak out against this ghastly phenomenon.
In the ‘apology’ the Deputy Minister did not retract her statement on Jewish control by Jewish money.
She still left her assertion in place that it is true, together with the implied controlling influence of Jews upon U.S. foreign policy towards Israel.
It is both ironic and illogical to “not believe that the cause of the Palestinians is served by anti-Jewish racism” but maintain that the U.S. partisan support of Israel (as a continued obstruction to resolution of the conflict) is a consequence of foreign policy being influenced by Jews.
Being politically correct she deplores the violence all round and calls for a just resolution while remaining silent on the implication that Jews in America are to blame for all this.
This is political posturing, not an apology for anything other than ‘sorry but that’s the way I see it.’
It is pretty obvious that the Honourable Deputy Minister was forced into making her apology – one that she worded in such a way as to leave her blatant anti-Semitism intact. Judge this action together with her undiplomatic verbal abuse of the Israeli Ambassador. To accept her “forced apology” is letting the “Lady” off too lightly. Nothing less than sacking her from the Department of Foreign Affairs will satisfy me and I’m sure a large number of other, not so gullible people.
Nontheless one has to admire South Africa for speaking truth to power in their condemnation of the recent actions of the Israeli army in Gaza.
Very few nations have been as unequivocal as SA. For once they are on the right side of an international issue.
Neither the Portuguese nor Chinese communities got any apology for the racist comments against them by Cabinet members.
- In June 2008 Labour Minister Membathisi Mdladlana used racial stereotypes to attack the Chinese community in South Africa. The Pretoria High Court had ruled to include Chinese amongst those designated as disadvantaged by Apartheid. This is what Mdladlana said after the court decisions: “They can speak Chinese of course in their homes,” he said. “I have absolutely no difficulty with that. But when we visit them, they must also remember that they are now coloureds. What I know is that coloureds can’t speak Chinese.” He also said 90% of Chinese factories in South Africa mistreat their workers. He never apologised and defended himself in Parliament.
- In February 2001 Minister of Safety and Security Steve Tshwete wrote a letter comparing the Portuguese community with ganster organisations. This was in response to a letter by members of the Portuguese communiy complaining about crime. Tshwete reacted by lashing out at them. At the time Tony Leon said it was inconceivable that a minister could write such a letter, and the government could at the same time say it was building a nation. Leon said when he had first seen the letter he had thought it was a joke, and had ordered its authenticity be checked as he did not want to comment on something which might have been a “set-up”. It turned out to be real and Tshwete never apologised, despite being attacked by the opposition in Parliament.
The truth is that these incidents should make us feel WORSE, not better. I’m not suggesting they set a standard that is worth much. But at least it can give us a bit of perspective that anti-Jewish racism (antisemitism) is not unique, and also a bit of perspective that Hajaig’s climbing down and Motlanthe’s intervention is not nothing.
It would be good to see the Jewish Board of Deputies speaking out the next time there is anti-Chinese, anti-Portuguese or any other racism, and would be good if these communities spoke out against anti-Semitism.
Jonathan, agreed, Hajaig does not fully apologise and retract, and that is as good as it is going to get.
For a down to earth, grassroots look at Jewish people, see my On a first name basis http://www.thoughtleader.co.za/rodmackenzie/2009/02/06/my-take-on-%E2%80%9Cjews%E2%80%9D-and-other-labels/ right here on Thought Leadership