/ 26 February 2004

The wall must fall

At first glance, Israel’s planned 700km wall and fence on its Eastern flank seems defensible, as it will undoubtedly reduce suicide bombings on Israeli territory. Under closer scrutiny, it emerges as a gross injustice that is justifiably condemned in much of the world, and even by some Israelis.

In their case at the International Court of Justice, the Palestinians significantly do not contest Israel’s right to build a security wall on Israeli land, that is in compliance with the 1967 border. But the route — condemned by former Israeli premier Shimon Peres as “politically pregnant” — in fact cuts into Palestinian land, destroying olive groves and dividing villagers from each other. Less than half the wall has so far been constructed, and worse is to come. Parts of the projected barrier intrude 25km into Palestinian territory. As protesters outside Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon’s home insisted this week the wall inflames so much anger that it will breed 10 new Palestinian guerrillas for every metre that goes up.

In effect, the wall involves an Israeli land-grab. This is consistent with the stance of Israel’s religious right, who believe God gave the children of Israel the whole of Judaea and Samaria. Sharon’s rather different perspective is that the security of Israel can only be guaranteed by further annexations and the creation of what are effectively urban bantustans for the Palestinians of the West Bank.

Even if the wall were confined entirely to Israel it represents a myopic, PW Botha-style security response to a political crisis, which virtually guarantees continuing conflict. The obvious parallel is with Botha’s electrification of South Africa’s northern border at the height of the anti-apartheid uprisings in the 1980s. What is notably missing from Israel’s efforts to defend itself are genuine moves towards peace through political negotiation and concession. The alleged evacuation of settlements from Gaza — “alleged” because some reports suggest they are being secretly extended — is a diversionary palliative that recalls Botha’s granting of limited suffrage to coloureds and Indians in South Africa. The real issue is the West Bank, and here Sharon is busy consolidating Israeli settlements.

What is particularly distressing is that the political discourse in Israel seems so retarded. There seems to be little recognition of the Palestinians’ right to land and self-government, and even suggestions that they are incapable of ruling themselves. Consider the racial slur in this week’s statement by Deputy Defence Minister Zeev Borim: “What is it about Islam and Palestinians — is it some cultural deprivation, is it some genetic defect? There is something that defies explanation in this continued murderousness.” Sies!

As the wielder of state power and the occupier, it is for Israel to make the first move. If he chose to, Sharon could contribute immeasurably to the achievement of peace by formally recognising the 1967 borders. Implicit in this would be a commitment to withdrawing all troops and settlers from occupied land. But before talks about peace can even begin, the wall must fall. 

Singing the same old tune

Here we are, two months into 2004, and we’re singing the same tune we have since 1999: our government exercises absolutely no leadership in the fight against HIV/Aids. Every inch of progress (and it must be measured in tortuous inches) has been won in street battles, propaganda wars and the courts.

This is how we got a national treatment plan, promised last August and finally delivered in November. Four months later, we are hardly out of the starting blocks. The government is way behind the schedules it set itself. This week activists were once more protesting against the delays. 

This is the same government that, in the space of three years, created an African Union from the moribund Organisation for African Unity, and formulated and began implementing the New Partnership for Africa’s Development. The lack of progress in the Aids war is clearly neither financial nor intellectual, nor is it about capacity.  

It is about an absence of political will at the centre. And with Aids increasingly an election issue, this is especially troubling. If so little leadership is being shown at election time, what will happen after the ballot?

This week the Mail & Guardian details how mixed messages from the national government play out on the ground. With a president who refers to HIV/Aids as “that matter” and a health minister who extols the virtues of garlic and onions while remaining silent on the life-saving benefits of Aids drugs, it’s no surprise the message is not getting through to provincial health authorities. 

Obtaining information about progress has been like pulling teeth, and when authorities did comment, it was in the language of bureaucracy and obstruction, not of treatment and concern. It does not have to be this way. Western Cape and Gauteng are ahead of the national schedule.

It is not enough for the government to glibly concede it will not meet its own targets, as it did this week. The least it can do is to supply drugs to those so ill that death is at their door.

A year on, will South Africans still be hearing the same old excuses for the failure to treat — the weakened public health care system, migrating health practitioners and lack of training? Will the M&G still be singing the sad old refrain about this chronic failure of our leaders?