Solidarity with Palestine at the World Cup in 2022. The world must stand against apartheid in all its forms, including against Palestinians. Photo: Supplied
The recent stances taken by the United Kingdom, Canada and France, albeit belatedly, regarding Israel’s actions in Gaza and the occupied Palestinian territories should be welcomed as an overdue, yet necessary, shift in global diplomatic discourse.
These declarations represent a small, yet meaningful, turning point in the international community’s reaction to what prominent human rights organisations have long labelled as an apartheid system.
For South Africans, this matter transcends politics, touching on profound moral and historical dimensions. Having suffered under the harsh legacy of apartheid, South Africans are in a unique position to empathise with the Palestinian people’s oppression and to express their support. The global community cannot continue to overlook the suffering of Palestinians living under occupation. Apartheid, regardless of where it occurs, is a crime against humanity.
In this undertaking, I would like to examine the historical similarities between apartheid-era South Africa and contemporary Palestine, highlighting the significance of South African solidarity and suggesting possible solutions to the conflict. But it is important to first unpack the apartheid historical context of both South Africa and Palestine to shed more light on why these two countries should stand by each other and have strong diplomatic relations.
Historical Parallels: Apartheid South Africa and Occupied Palestine
To begin with, the term “apartheid” should not be taken lightly. It carries profound historical, legal and emotional weight. In international law, apartheid is defined by the 1973 International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid as inhumane acts committed for the purpose of establishing and maintaining domination by one racial group over another.
South Africans lived through such a regime, where race determined every aspect of one’s life: where you could live, work, go to school and whom you could marry. This system was enforced through draconian laws, forced removals, passbooks and a militarised state apparatus.
Similarly, Palestinians today live under the regime of segregation and control. In the West Bank, there exists a dual legal framework implemented by the Israeli government: one system applies to Israeli settlers, while a different one governs Palestinians. Israeli settlers are governed by civil law and benefit from well-supported infrastructure, whereas Palestinians are governed by military law, encounter movement limitations and live under the constant threat of demolition or eviction.
Meanwhile, Gaza has been subjected to a stifling blockade for over 15 years, effectively transforming the area into what numerous human rights organisations have termed an open-air prison. In 2022, both Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch published reports asserting that Israeli actions in the occupied territories amount to apartheid.
These concerns extend beyond mere territorial disputes or security concerns as they involve systemic control and entrenched discrimination. As South Africans, we recognise this language. We have witnessed the strategies of divide and conquer; collective punishment; suppression of political voices and the use of security narratives to legitimise oppression. These are the very tactics once employed by the apartheid regime in Pretoria.
South Africa’s moral responsibility and legacy of solidarity
South Africa bears a distinct moral responsibility to denounce apartheid in all its manifestations, wherever they might occur. During our own fight for freedom, the support of the international community was crucial. Nations, organisations, religious institutions and individuals worldwide backed the movement for boycotts, divestments and sanctions against the apartheid government.
The global indignation and moral conviction contributed significantly to our democratic transition in 1994. Palestinians have consistently looked to the South African experience as a source of hope. The ANC, the South African Council of Churches and figures such as the late Archbishop Desmond Tutu, have long been vocal in their support for Palestinian rights. Tutu once famously remarked, “If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor.”
South Africa’s foreign policy after apartheid has frequently been guided by this ethical framework. At the United Nations, South Africa has regularly supported Palestinian self-determination through its votes. In South Africa, civil society remains engaged, with groups like the South African Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions Coalition advocating for peaceful opposition to Israeli policies until international law is respected.
While the situations are not identical, the similarities are significant enough to warrant action. As South Africans, we must amplify the voices advocating for justice. Remaining silent or neutral in the face of such suffering betrays our own history and principles.
The role of the international community: A call for moral consistency
The tepid response of many Western powers to the crisis in Palestine has long been a source of frustration for the Global South. While nations are quick to condemn violations of international law in one context, there has been a notable reluctance to hold Israel accountable for its actions. This double standard undermines the credibility of international institutions and erodes the foundations of a rules-based international order.
That is why the recent shift in rhetoric by countries such as the UK, France and Canada is important. It signals a growing recognition that the international community can no longer turn a blind eye. Words must now translate into action: through arms embargoes, economic sanctions and diplomatic pressure — tools that were effectively used against the South African government in the 1980s.
I am also of the view that the International Criminal Court must also be allowed to do its work without political interference. War crimes, the use of collective punishment and the illegal annexation of land must be investigated and prosecuted, where evidence warrants it. These are not radical demands, they are the minimum requirements of international law.
Toward a just and inclusive solution
The path to peace must be based on justice, equality and dignity for all. Any solution that does not recognise the full rights of the Palestinian people — whether in the form of a viable two-state solution or a democratic, binational state — will not endure. The goal must be an end to occupation, equal rights for all people between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea and a just resolution for Palestinian refugees.
One potential model is a federated or confederal solution, in which Israelis and Palestinians share sovereignty over the land while maintaining distinct national identities. This would require mutual recognition, compromise and international guarantees — but it is not impossible.
The South African experience teaches us that even the most entrenched systems of oppression can be dismantled when there is moral courage, principled leadership and sustained public pressure. Crucially, such a solution must be inclusive. It must ensure that both Palestinians and Israelis live in safety and dignity, free from fear, occupation and discrimination. The struggle is not against Jews or Israelis, it is against policies that deny rights and perpetuate suffering. Justice must be indivisible.
History will judge us by where we stood in moments of great moral crisis. As South Africans, we have the benefit of hindsight and the burden of memory. We know what it means to be dehumanised, displaced and silenced. We also know the power of international solidarity and the possibility of reconciliation after conflict.
Most importantly, the world must act to end apartheid in all its forms, including in Palestine. We must call for accountability, support peaceful resistance and work toward a just and lasting solution that respects the humanity of all. Anything less is a betrayal of the very principles upon which our own freedom was built.
Sifiso Sonjica is an ANC member in Ward 13 Mtubabtuba, KwaZulu-Natal. He writes in his personal capacity.