Renaming Sandton Drive in Johannesburg after a notorious terrorist and plane hijacker is the wrong ‘road’ for South Africa to take.
By Kenneth Mokgatlhe wa Kgwadi
More than 400 protesters embarked on a peaceful demonstration this week to voice their concerns over the proposed renaming of the iconic Sandton Drive in Johannesburg. The city is abuzz with debate, as the suggested new name – honoring Leila Khaled, a controversial figure linked to violent extremism, airline hijackings, and attacks targeting not only Jews but also Christians and the broader public – has ignited heated opposition.
So, who is Lela Khaled that the leadership of South Africa’s largest city and commercial centre want to honour? While an active leader of Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) in her youth, Khaled participated in the hijacking of two civilian airliners, TWA Flight 840 in 1969 (bound for Tel Aviv from Rome) and El Al flight 219 in 1970 (traveling from Amsterdam to New York City).
Is this the behavior that South Africa – which has the fifth highest crime rate in the world – today wants to promote?
With recollections of infamous images of Khaled brandishing a firearm and her finger on the ring of a grenade on the planes, what about the organization she so visually represented? Designated as a terrorist organization by the US for having carried out “large-scale international attacks in the 1960s and 1970s, including airline hijackings that killed more than 20 U.S. citizens,” the PFLP is also responsible for numerous terror attacks against Israeli civilians in Israel and the West Bank, including a bomb attack in 2019 that killed 17-year-old Israeli Rina Shnerb. In 2014, the PFLP claimed responsibility for a shooting and meat cleaver attack that claimed the lives of four worshippers in the Kehilat Bnei Torah synagogue, in the Har Nof neighborhood of Jerusalem, where today many former South African Jews reside.
Again, is this a terror organisation that South Africa wants to honour by renaming a prominent street after its most iconic member – Leila Khaled?
Johannesburg’s residents are rightly alarmed by the implications of this proposal. Their concerns go beyond personal preferences; they believe this change threatens to sow division and animosity among Johannesburg’s diverse population. They argue that the move is less about honoring ‘history’ and more about pursuing narrow political goals aimed at provoking international actors such as the United States, whose consulate sits on the very street in question. Where is the sensitivity or even political savvy in renaming a street where sits the US consulate after a terrorist, whose organization has murdered US citizens?
So no, the renaming is not about serving the interests of Joburg’s residents but rather fulfilling the agenda of a small group of politicians who seem intent on creating discord rather than fostering unity.
In a show of widespread public disapproval, residents, joined by activists and politicians, have submitted a petition signed by an overwhelming 30,000 people through the platform Dear South Africa. This collective effort underscores a critical point: renaming Sandton Drive to honor Leila Khaled undermines the values of national unity, reconciliation, and diversity that South Africa has strived to cultivate since 1994.
There is a general consensus that redressing names associated with our colonial and apartheid past is understandable. Streets, monuments, and other public symbols that evoke painful memories of oppression should be reconsidered in order to foster healing and inclusivity. Since 1994, government entities have made significant progress in renaming public places that once glorified figures responsible for atrocities.
However, Sandton Drive does not fit the category. The name does not carry the burden of colonial or apartheid history. On the contrary, it is associated with development, modernity, and the affluence of Sandton, often referred to as Africa’s richest square mile. Changing this name would achieve little in terms of addressing historical injustices and would instead erase a symbol of Johannesburg’s progress and global standing.
The question of relevance looms large in this debate. What connection does Leila Khaled have to South Africa’s history, struggle, or development? The answer, quite simply, is none. Renaming a street in her honor would not only mislead future generations but also distort the narrative of our own heroes and heroines.
We owe it to our children to celebrate individuals who have genuinely contributed to South Africa’s journey toward freedom and prosperity. Streets and public spaces should bear the names of those whose legacies inspire unity, resilience, and pride. Leila Khaled’s legacy is deeply polarizing and controversial, making her an unsuitable candidate for such an honor.
South Africa is far from running out of deserving icons to celebrate. Johannesburg alone has produced extraordinary individuals in fields such as sports, arts and culture, academia, business, and activism. Why not honor these luminaries, whose contributions have shaped the city and the nation?
For example, Joburg’s rich history could be celebrated by honoring the likes of anti-apartheid icons, groundbreaking artists, or successful entrepreneurs. Recognizing our own achievements reinforces national pride and inspires future generations to strive for excellence. The decision to prioritize a foreign figure with no tangible ties to our struggle undermines this effort and sends the wrong message.
Amid the furor over Sandton Drive’s name, it is important to highlight the pressing issues facing Johannesburg. The city is grappling with a water crisis so severe that it has captured international media attention. Unemployment, especially among youth, is skyrocketing. Public infrastructure is deteriorating, crime levels are alarmingly high, and basic services remain out of reach for many residents.
Instead of addressing these urgent challenges, city officials seem preoccupied with symbolic gestures that offer no tangible benefit to the people of Johannesburg. This renaming proposal appears to be less about honoring heritage and more about engaging in ideological battles that have no bearing on the daily lives of ordinary citizens.
Johannesburg’s leaders must heed the voices of the 30,000 residents who have expressed their opposition. The protests against this name change are a reminder that citizens expect their government to focus on their most pressing needs.
People in Johannesburg want safe streets, functional public infrastructure, and access to basic services like water and electricity. They want solutions to unemployment, opportunities for growth, and a city that prioritizes their well-being over international political posturing.
The proposed renaming of Sandton Drive is not just a question of nomenclature; it is a reflection of misplaced priorities and a disregard for the voices of the people. The city must abandon this divisive motion and redirect its efforts toward building a Johannesburg that works for everyone.
To move forward, leaders should establish a transparent and inclusive process for naming public spaces, one that genuinely reflects the city’s diversity and shared history. This process must prioritize local figures and achievements, ensuring that every name chosen strengthens our collective identity rather than fracturing it.
Johannesburg is a city of contrasts and complexities, a melting pot of cultures and histories. Its leadership must strive to preserve and celebrate this diversity rather than undermine it with decisions that alienate and divide. Changing Sandton Drive’s name is not the way to honor our past or secure our future. Instead, let us focus on the real issues at hand and work together to create a city that truly represents the best of South Africa.
And most important of all for South Africa that has a horrendous crime and particularly murder rate, not to rename a major city street that honours terrorism and plane hijackings!
About the writer:
Kenneth Mokgatlhe wa Kgwadi is a political writer and researcher based at Ben Gurion University of the Negev, Israel.
While the mission of Lay of the Land (LotL) is to provide a wide and diverse perspective of affairs in Israel, the Middle East and the Jewish world, the opinions, beliefs and viewpoints expressed by its various writers are not necessarily ones of the owners and management of LOTL but of the writers themselves. LotL endeavours to the best of its ability to credit the use of all known photographs to the photographer and/or owner of such photographs (0&EO).
