THE ODYSSEY OF THE OCHBERG ORPHANS

THE LIFE AND TIMES OF ISAAC OCHBERG

An upcoming exhibition in South Africa will reveal through personal testimonies, an extraordinary life whose legacy is enshrined for eternity in the young lives he saved in Eastern Europe in 1921.
It’s an example for Jews today everywhere.

In December, 2026, the SA Jewish Museum in Cape Town, South Africa will host an exhibition on one of the finest and heroic chapters of the South African Jewish community – the life and times of Capetonian, Isaac Ochberg (1879-1938).

Entrepreneur, philanthropist, community leader and Zionist, Isaac Ochberg in 1921 mobilized communal Jewish support, obtained government permission through his friendship with Prime Minister Jan Smuts and then single-handedly, went into the most dangerous region in the world for Jews beset by war, pogroms, rampant antisemitism and a typhoid epidemic – to rescue Jewish orphans from certain death.

Even death did not stop Isaac Ochberg saving Jews.

Leaving the largest bequest in History to the JNF-KKL following his death in 1938, the proceeds were used to support higher education at universities in preparation for the future Jewish state (notably the Hebrew University of Jerusalem and the Weizmann Institute) and acquire the land that became kibbutz Dalia and kibbutz Galed, that would, following WWII, absorb the survivors of the Shoah. It is no wonder that there stands today in the Megiddo region, the Isaac Ochberg Park that has a ‘Hill of Names’ enshrining the names of all the orphan children he saved.

Today, thousands of their descendants are today spread around the globe and in preparation for the exhibition, the SA Jewish Museum is seeking to trace as many of them to document the never-ending enriching saga of Isaac Ochberg. For further information see details at the end of the article below on the Ochberg saga by French historian, Michel Levine.

David E. Kaplan
Chairman of the Isaac Ochberg Heritage Committee (Israel)
Editor of Lay of the Land

THE ODYSSEY OF THE OCHBERG ORPHANS

How one South African businessman in 1921 set out by himself, risking life and limb to save Jewish orphans in worn-torn Eastern Europe

By Michel Levine

What drove Isaac Ochberg, a respectable and prosperous South African businessman, in 1920 to undertake an adventurous expedition thousands of kilometers to the north, into a Europe plunged into the bloody turmoil of civil wars?

For him, things were undoubtedly simple: born Jewish in Ukraine, he had been fortunate enough to flee the hell that awaited him to live under different skies. This chance, he wanted to offer in turn to the most vulnerable children: the orphans.

Isaac Ochberg was born in 1878 in Russia, into a Jewish family of German origin with six children, in the small town of Uman (now Ukrainian) located in what was then known as the “Pale of Settlement”. Created by Empress Catherine II in 1791, this was a vast area stretching from the Baltic to the Black Sea, including Ukraine, Lithuania, Latvia, Moldova, Belarus, Crimea, and part of Poland. When Isaac Ochberg was born, the situation of the five million Jews living there was hardly enviable. Excluded from public service and higher education, they had gathered in certain city neighborhoods or in small towns called shtetls. Forbidden to own land, they survived by practicing small trades, commerce, crafts, tavern management, but also pawnbroking, this last activity arousing resentment among the Orthodox common people who had only emerged from serfdom in 1861.

**Man with a Mission**. Isaac Ochberg (1878-1937) Ukrainian-born South African businessman, Jewish community leader, savior of Jewish orphans in Eastern Europe and passionate supporter of a Jewish State in Palestine.

Young Isaac was three years old when the assassination of Tsar Alexander III triggered a series of pogroms that led to a massive exodus. About two million Jews emigrated between 1881 and 1914, mainly to the United States. But it was to South Africa, this land said to also offer a new El Dorado, that his father Aaron decided to emigrate.

He arrived in 1893 in a peaceful country, although sporadically shaken by wars between the Boers, descendants of Dutch settlers, and the British. South Africa was then open to significant immigration following the discovery of gold and diamonds in the Transvaal and welcoming to Jews, a small community of whom had been settled in Cape Town since 1841, living mainly from commerce and crafts while maintaining their distinctiveness. More interested in studying the Talmud than in financial success, Aaron nevertheless managed, after two years, to gather sufficient funds to bring Isaac, his eldest son aged sixteen, who risked being conscripted into the army at any moment for a duration of six long years during which he would be exposed to the worst harassment as a Jew. Upon his arrival in his new homeland, young Isaac demonstrated his talent. Inventive and resourceful, he soon abandoned the watchmaking apprenticeship his father had intended for him to launch into business – all sorts of businesses according to his capricious inspiration, ranging from scrap metal recovery to ship salvaging, passing through coffee sales, gold prospecting in the Transvaal, or creating Cape Town’s first cinema. During this period, he made a trip to Russia to visit his ailing mother and took the opportunity to be exempted from military service due to defective vision. He also met Pauline, a friend of his sisters, whom he married before returning to Cape Town with the entire family.

At forty, with an established fortune, father of five children, and an honorable British citizen (the country had been a dominion since 1910), Isaac Ochberg led the life of a notable. An executive member of the Council of Jewish Deputies, representing his country at the 16th World Zionist Conference in Zurich, he participated in managing organizations to help children and orphans in particular – in this capacity, he had participated in founding the Cape Jewish orphanage, of which he became President. It was undoubtedly this last function that led him to become acutely aware of the dramatic situation of Jewish orphans living in Eastern Europe.

**Key Coordinator**. 26-year-old Alexander Bobrow (above) was a key player in assembling the orphans making it easier for Ochberg logistically, accompanied – at the children’s crying insistence – the orphans and Ochberg on the ship to Cape Town planning on returning to Eastern Europe. He never did, and his daughter Liebe would later marry Aaron Klug who would receive the Nobel Prize for Chemistry in 1982.

At the end of the First World War, from 1917 onwards, Russia had been the theater of a civil war between the Bolshevik “Red” armies and the Tsarist “Whites,” the latter supported by contingents of French and British soldiers. The situation worsened in 1919 when the Second Polish Republic undertook a war of territorial reconquest against Soviet Russia. At the same time, Lithuania, Ukraine, and Belarus were the scene of independence uprisings. While these ideological and nationalist forces, mixed with bands of looters, fought each other, they attacked a common prey: the zhid (the kike). For the “Reds”, although the new regime had abolished Tsarist antisemitic laws and promoted Yiddish as the Jewish national language (while nevertheless proscribing Hebrew, deemed bourgeois and Zionist), this representative of capitalism, “stateless” and “reactionary”, remained a class enemy. For the Tsarist “Whites”, driven by ancestral hatred, he had become the “Judeo-Bolshevik” embodied in the person of the Jew Trotsky and held responsible for all the misfortunes of Holy Russia. As their supreme weapon, the “Whites” brandished the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, this forgery manufactured by the political police, the Cheka, which they would then spread in Western Europe during their flight. For the bands of starving peasants, encouraged to revolt by Tsarist forces, the greedy Jew was designated as the absolute culprit, the one who had “killed Christ” and engaged in ritual murders of Christian children, as an ancestral rumor maintained. This justified massacring him and his family and seizing his property. Of the five million Jews residing in the Pale of Settlement (officially abolished in 1917 by the Bolshevik government), more than one hundred thousand had perished, two hundred thousand survived wounded or disabled, and there were more than 150,000 orphans. A 1919 report by the great American Jewish charitable organization the Joint (American Jewish Joint Distribution Committee) testified:

“In Poland, suffering is intense. There are institutions for children deprived of a morsel of bread, hospitals unusable due to lack of doctors, nurses, and medicines, despite an enormous number of diseases. A large percentage of people have been kept alive thanks to soup consisting of water, potatoes, and a little salt.”

Many voices rose up around the world to denounce these crimes. In London and New York, in particular, meetings and demonstrations were organized in which Jewish veterans of the Great War participated prominently. Under pressure from the Committee of Jewish Delegations, the 1919 Paris Peace Conference ordered a vast inquiry whose reports led to launching an “Appeal to Humanity” signed by great names such as Anatole France, Henri Barbusse, Elie Faure, and Albert Thomas.

President Wilson expressed his distress:

“One of the things that troubles peace in the world is the persecution of the Jews.”

He ordered the creation of a commission led by Henry Morgenthau, future minister under President Roosevelt, to investigate the pogroms in Poland (this work could only be carried out in that country, as the new Soviet government had forbidden entry to its territory). This commission traveled through battlefields and mass graves and published upon its return an alarming report on the fate of Jewish minorities. A commission led by Sir Stuart M. Samuel, British Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, succeeded it, at the initiative of the representative council of Jews in the United Kingdom. This one in turn denounced the scandalous situation. But these accumulating reports were not followed by action because, lacking a state to represent them, Jews were considered a minority among others, deprived as such of any real political power.

In South Africa, during an extraordinary meeting of the South African Relief Fund, a Jewish organization to aid war victims, Isaac Ochberg proposed that the Cape Jewish Orphanage he had been directing for several years organize a mission to “rescue” endangered Jewish orphans who would then be brought to the country. Certainly, he was aware that this mission close to his heart could only save a very limited number of children, but these would be lives preserved. “Whoever saves one life saves the world,” Isaac argued, citing the Talmud to support his proposal. His project was accepted – it remained to obtain the endorsement of the authorities. Prime Minister Jan Smuts, his friend, submitted his project to the government. Good news: Although immigration was strictly limited at that time, the response was positive, with some reservations. Entry visas would be issued to the orphans, but according to very precise criteria: there would be no more than two hundred, not exceeding 16 years of age, they must be in good physical and moral health, have lost both parents, and finally brothers and sisters could not be separated to avoid emotional problems. All, finally, must express their will to participate in this journey. Heavy-hearted at the idea that he would have to select among these children and abandon some to their fate, Isaac accepted these conditions – we will see that he would interpret them in his own way… What saddened him most was this cut-off figure of 200. He discussed, negotiated, and obtained that after this trip, if things went well, the State would consider repeating the operation. As for financing, it was decided that the Jewish community would bear half the cost. This was a significant commitment, as it would have to assume the costs of the journey, the maintenance and care of the 200 children, and then, once they arrived in Africa, the costs of their accommodation in orphanages, some until they came of age if they were not fortunate enough to be adopted by families.

**Saga of Salvation**. South African Prime Minister Jan Smuts (top left) who granted Isaac Ochberg (top right) permission to bring into South Africa 200 rescued Jewish orphans from Eastern Europe. (centre) Isaac Ochberg disembarking with his rescued orphans who throughout their lives would refer to him as “Daddy Ochberg”. (Botton left and right) Passport photos of some of the 187 rescued orphans brought to South Africa.

Assisted by the South African Aid Fund for Jewish War Victims, Isaac then launched a campaign across the country, personally traveling through cities and villages to organize public meetings followed by fundraising collections. During this fundraising, critical voices were heard in the Jewish community:

– Would this expedition, conducted in countries at war, not endanger the children concerned?

– Would their arrival in the country not risk being experienced as a provocation by certain conservative Christian circles, the National Party in particular, when South Africa was experiencing an economic crisis?

Some suggested it would be wiser to send these foreign children to the Yishuv (the Jewish community in Palestine). Isaac remained deaf to what he considered submission to intolerance and continued his project.

Soon good news reached him: the fundraising campaign had raised sums far exceeding the expected figures. Dr. Jochelman, president of the federation of Ukrainian Jews in London, had let it be known that his organization was willing to house the orphans and handle their embarkation for South Africa.

On March 18, 1921, in Cape Town, Isaac Ochberg embraced his family, greeted the children of the orphanage, and amid a large gathering that came to encourage him and wish him a good journey, boarded the steamship that would take him to London.

Expected duration of the expedition: seven months.

TUMULTUOUS TRANSITION

Upon his arrival in the British capital, Isaac learned that the political situation in Eastern Europe had profoundly changed while he was sailing across the ocean. Russia and Poland had just signed a treaty in Riga that granted the latter numerous territories, the Kresy Wschodnie (“Eastern borderlands”) which included parts of Belarus, Lithuania, and Ukraine. This meant that all the cities constituting the stages of the planned journey were now under Polish administration and that the hard-won Soviet safe-conduct was now worthless.

Fortunately, the great explorer Fridtjof Nansen was passing through London. President of the League of Nations High Commission for Refugees, he had just created the first international identity document, the “Nansen passport”, a document which from 1922 would protect hundreds of thousands of wandering “displaced persons“, driven by conflicts and incessant border redrawings. During his meeting with the great man, Isaac explained his project to him. Nansen was enthusiastic. He managed to obtain from the new masters of Poland, whom he knew were concerned about international recognition, a safe-conduct authorizing Isaac to travel through the country with the benevolent assistance of local authorities. But as for the orphans, now Polish, how to obtain authorization to take them out of the country? Nansen obtained a commitment from Polish authorities that they would issue them special identity papers: “collective Nansen passports”.

On May 18, 1921, Isaac began his journey. Paris first, where Dr. Boris Borgen, head of the Joint, provided him with authorizations for the heads of orphanages under his organization so that they would entrust Isaac with the residents he had chosen. Next stop, Warsaw. In the capital of the Second Polish Republic that the Treaty of Versailles had brought back from its ashes in 1919, Isaac hoped to obtain help and assistance without too much illusion however – after all, he was just a Zhid (Slavic pejorative term for a Jew) who had appeared from nowhere…

In Warsaw, the ‘Jewish metropolis’ (Di Yidishe metropolye), the Joint officials, who managed most of the country’s orphanages, described to him the difficult relations they maintained with victorious Poland. Certainly, its government had ratified in 1920 the treaty annexed to that of Versailles concerning minorities, but nationalist parties accused Jews of having sided with the Bolsheviks during hostilities while the Catholic hierarchy continued to pursue them with its ancestral hatred. This hostility manifested itself through restrictions on credits to orphanages and rationing of their medical protection. Many of these establishments survived only thanks to the help of the Joint or local charitable organizations like Tzedakah Gedolah – which led some non-Jewish orphans to say:

“Those bastard zhids, they’re lucky to have other zhids to come to their aid.”

Isaac organized his journey. The large and small cities he would have to visit drew a vast triangle with 400-kilometer sides. First in the north, Brest-Litovsk, then Pinsk, then descent towards Sarny, Kowel, and Rovno to Lvov, finally return to Warsaw where all the chosen children would be gathered, whose state of health would have allowed them to contemplate the journey. Hence the necessity of adding a certain number of round trips to the route. Given the poor state of communications due to the war, he had planned to use trains that were still running, otherwise buses or trucks. He did not yet know that he would also have to use horse-drawn carts.

**Flourishing Future**. The last surviving Ochberg orphan Cissy Harris, who died at the age of 102 in Modi’in, Israel, is seen here planting a tree at the opening of the Isaac Ocberg Park in 2011 marking the 90 anniversary of the heroic rescue. She is supported by Maish Isaacson (left), chairman of Telfed and Bennie Penzik, whose both parents were orphans rescued by Ochberg.

CHILDREN OF MISFORTUNE

On August 24, the orphans had barely settled into the premises of the Shelter for Jewish Poor located in the East End when representatives of the British and international press appeared. Extracting children from a turbulent and dangerous Europe, often saving their lives, was a bold move that surprised them and that they were very eager to make known. Gathered in a room, the orphans were presented to journalists. They stood properly, under the flashes. Isaac, surrounded by officials, answered questions. He made it a duty to insist on the role played by charitable organizations and the support of the South African government. He also pleaded for other countries to take over and welcome other children.

Preparation for the journey to Cape Town was organized. It was a long trip and the children had to be in good physical shape and not be carriers of diseases that might contaminate other passengers. Medical examinations followed one another. Numerous cases of anemia were detected, which would not prevent embarkation, but also more serious conditions, which required hospitalizing some children. The latter would remain in London, which was a great heartbreak for them, but they could keep hope that soon a new voyage to Cape Town would come get them, or that other countries would decide to welcome them. Doctors and nurses were hired for the journey.

On September 2, children and companions took the train to Southampton where the steamship Edinburgh Castle awaited them.

Destination – Cape Town.

**Past Preserved**. Erin Kumin from Ra’anana, Israel, points to the plaque of her great-grandmother, Janie Odes, one of the orphans saved by Isaac Ochberg in 1921 at centenary event at the Ochberg Park on the 12 March 2021. (Photo D.E. Kaplan)

THE CROSSING

The children were at first afraid of this dark and vibrating mass, then got used to it. The large steamship offered them an enclosed space, a playground, where they loved to run, but under supervision, because their vitality led them to often bump into chimneys, ropes, and in narrow passages. At night, they laughed and cried too, fought with pillows. The sailors, of various nationalities, were very friendly – some told them stories about their country, incredible stories. As for the cooks, they were reluctant to prepare this complicated kosher food but complied with the instructions.

Nurses and doctors had their work cut out for them monitoring big and small ailments and seasickness. They drew their medicines from a large carefully arranged pharmacy. One of the children had mumps, which required special care during a stopover.

The companions organized games. On deck, the wind rushed into their clothes and made the little caps they had been given at departure fly, some flew away and came to float on the waves. The passengers, sometimes jostled, were mostly touched and moved by the story the children had lived through, and they applauded the ‘God Save the King’ that they sometimes sang, with a very particular accent.

**Field of Dreams**. Ochberg dreamt of a green fertile Israel such as this field with youngsters cycling at the Ochberg Park, Megiddo.(Courtesy Megiddo Regional Council)

THE PROMISED LAND

After a 17- day crossing, early in the morning, the children grouped on deck saw lights blinking on the horizon on a gray land planted with misty and dark mountains. The sailors pointed out the curiously flat summit, called Table Mountain. The boat approached and soon the children distinguished more precisely people who had come to welcome them carrying flowers and brandishing welcome banners in Yiddish. These people had white skin, others black, it really was Africa…

As the ship docked, the children broke into a song than was joined by people on the quay. Everyone knew the words, so moving in these circumstances:

“Hinei ma tov u’ma nayim Shevet achim gam Yachad” (“Behold, how good and how pleasant it is when brothers dwell together in unity! “). Greeted by the cheers of a crowd in tears, the children disembarked. “Until my last day,” Fanny Frier would write, a little girl who would later become president of the Cape orphanage, “I will never forget the first time we saw the lights of Cape Town, then the wonderful welcome we received when we disembarked, when half the city apparently awaited us on the quay.”

**‘Hill of Names’**. Visitors to the Isaac Ochberg Park in Megiddo, Israel look closely at the plaques of all the known names of the orphans Isaac Ochberg rescued and brought safely to South Africa.

NEW LAND, NEW LIFE

What would become of these little beings thus projected into this new world? Taken in and raised in the two orphanages Oranjia in Cape Town and Arcadia in Johannesburg and some, not many, would be adopted by families where they would live their childhood surrounded by attention and love. Then they would set out to conquer the vast world to experience the most diverse destinies. Almost all would have children, often numerous.

**Alive Because of One Man**. Descendants of Ochberg orphans from all over the world attend the inauguration of the Ochberg Park, Megiddo in 2011 are seen here at nearby Kibbutz Gal’ed, founded in 1945 by members of Habonim from Germany. The kibbutz was built on land purchased by the JNF-KKL from the Isaac Ochberg bequest. (Photo: D.E. Kaplan)

For years, their descendants, who now number several thousand, have ritually gathered to celebrate with emotion the anniversary of their arrival and the memory of Daddy Ochberg, the “man from Africa” who came to get them before the Shoah exterminated most of the other Jewish children who remained in Europe.

About the writer:

Michel Levine is a historian of Human Rights and the author of a work dedicated to the major cases of the League of Human Rights (Unclassified Cases. Unpublished Archives of the League of Human Rights, Paris, Fayard, 1973).
Further publications include a historical investigation on the repression of Algerian demonstrations in Paris in October 1961 (The October Ratonnades. A Collective Murder in Paris in 1961, Paris, Ramsay, 1985; reissue Jean- Claude Gawsewitch Publisher, 2001.)

*Feature Picture: Savior of Children. Isaac Ochberg (centre) with Jewish children at an orphanage in Eastern Europe.

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).

SOUTH AFRICA CLAIMS ISRAEL IS BEHIND ITS ‘AFROPHOBIA’ VIOLENCE

Beset by internal social strife, South Africa indulges in cheap scapegoating blaming Israel – Is anyone surprised?

By Marika Sboros

So, Israel, the world’s most overworked, overused and abused scapegoat, is the “hidden hand” behind South Africa’s latest xenophobia crisis.

Of course, it is. If you believe the latest conspiracy theory to emerge recently from the fever swamps of South African social media.

But has Israel really been orchestrating South Africa’s xenophobic violence – or “afrophobia”, as activists and academics in the refugee and migration space now call it?

**Protecting** **Africans from South Africans**. The South African police during a protest against illegal immigrants organised by March and March in Goodwood, a Cape Town suburb, on May 30, 2026. (Photo: Roger Bosch/AFP)

And if so, why and how would tiny Israel find time and inclination in its hectic military schedule despite fighting ongoing wars back home, including against the Iranian behemoth?

In retaliation, apparently, for South Africa taking Israel to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in December 2023, on a genocide in Gaza charge. Or so the theory holds.

Israel could be understandably miffed at South Africa lodging its ICJ case “urgently” within weeks of a genuine genocidal attack by Hamas on October 7, 2023. That urgency speedily dissipated, and South Africa’s case has proved ill-judged.

Its own lawyers recently requested and were granted an extraordinary 18-month extension. This means that its written submissions won’t be completed until 2029.

Israel’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs was unsparing on X:

“This case was never about the facts. It has always been a propaganda campaign by South Africa in the service of Hamas, masquerading as a legal process.”

One local Facebook “influencer” said the xenophobic violence would disappear “like the night when the sun rises” if South Africa dropped its ICJ case.

A pan-Africanist Facebook group claimed that Israelis were poised to swoop into South Africa, destabilise it from within by pushing Black Africans “to the margins” and to rebuild it “in their own image.” With a little help from friends in “Western powers” (aka the US).

That led critics to suggest that the conspiracy theory is aimed as much at US as Israeli “hidden hands”.

“HOME-GROWN’ HIDDEN HANDS

Yet accusing Israel of trying to destabilise South Africa from within describes precisely what years of ANC governance have actually done after more than 30 years since “liberation”. From within. By its own hand.

The hidden hand has always been home-grown.

If Soviet-Jewish writer and war correspondent Vasily Grossman were around, he’d say:

“Tell me what you accuse Jews of and I’ll tell you what you’re guilty of.”

It’s the closing line of a longer passage in his novel, Life and Fate, where he argues that antisemitism is never an end in itself. Rather, it is a mirror for the failings of individuals, social structures and state systems.

With those words and a novelist’s precision, Grossman captured what psychologists call “projection”. It is the mechanism by which people and institutions attribute to others the very impulses, failures and crimes they cannot face in themselves.

Their accusations are not random, say psychologists. They are often confessions.

Accuse Jews of controlling the world through money and fear, and you may be the one controlling through precisely those means. Or you may be helpfully deflecting attention from the real controllers.

A South African example of that projection is in a speech by Dr Imtiaz Sooliman, founder and CEO of Gift of the Givers, a local charity acknowledged globally for its humanitarian disaster-relief work.

On October 5, 2023, Sooliman addressed an anti-Israel rally in Cape Town beneath a banner declaring “We Are All Hamas”. He said, in his own words, that:

“…They (Zionists) run the world with fear. They control the world with money.”

He attempted to pre-empt accountability by saying antisemitism charges are just tools to silence criticism of Israel. However, while there is plenty to criticise in Israel’s government and its policies, genocide and apartheid are not part of that legitimate critique. As legal scholars across the world (not all of them Jews) say.

And antisemitic tropes are tropes, whatever political cover is thrown over them.

PROTOCOLS REVISITED

Sooliman’s language feeds into the core premise of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. That’s an enduring publication, which the Russian Tsarist secret police fabricated between 1898 and 1903. It purported to be the minutes of a secret meeting of Jewish leaders plotting world domination through control of global financial systems, governments and media.

The Times of London exposed it as a clumsy, plagiarised forgery in 1921. That did not dent its popularity. If anything, it became even more popular. Hitler cited it. Henry Ford distributed 500,000 copies of it across the US. It is still in print.

Sooliman’s declaration is one of the oldest tropes in the Jew-hater’s lexicon. It feeds off the original “blood libel” – the term for the claim that Jews kill Christian children to drink their blood in religious ritual. It dates back to the 12th century.

It is testimony to Jew hatred’s enduring power that both claims have retained their power into the 21st century. It is, after all, the world’s oldest hatred. (Call it “antisemitism”, if you prefer that 19th-century, pseudo-scientific euphemism coined by Jew-haters themselves to make their loathing sound respectable.)

Jew hatred has helped to make “Zionist” the anti-Israel lobby’s preferred code word for Jew. Lobbyists deploy Zionist as a swear word for Jew and a deliberate strategy to avoid detection of hate speech online. Social media platforms are slow to close the loophole because the distinction between legitimate criticism of Israeli government policy and antisemitic conspiracy theory dressed up as political commentary is notoriously difficult to police at scale.

Perhaps the most common and ironic example of projection in modern times is the ubiquitous accusation that Jews, aka “Zionists”, have committed genocide in Gaza. There can be no worse accusation to make against victims of actual genocide than to accuse them wrongly of being perpetrators of it.

That is projection in its most naked form.

DARK GLOBAL TRADITION

Hamas’s charter is explicitly genocidal towards Jews. Hamas political bureau member Ghazi Hamad declared on Lebanese TV on October 24, 2023, that October 7 was “just the first time and there will be a second, a third, a fourth” until Israel’s existence “finished”.

And while this is a South African story, it sits in a very long, very dark global tradition. It includes the latest mutation of Jew hatred with documentation over 900 years old.

Jew hatred has caused pogroms, mass expulsions of entire communities from countries Jews had lived in for generations, and the systematic murder of six million Jews.

The accusations change. The consequences for targets stay the same.

Post-October 7, Jews are being savagely attacked worldwide and killed just for being Jews. As the title of US author Dara Horn’s book bleakly notes, People Love Dead Jews.

October 7 is where nine centuries of Jew hatred, unchecked and unashamed, have ultimately led.

Yet October 7 denialism is rife. Some critics deny that Hamas committed atrocities on October 7.

They call it “resistance”;
They say that Israel “had it coming”;
that it was a “false flag” or “psyop” (psychological operation), in which Israel staged the massacre of its own civilians to gain sympathy and justify genocide on Palestinians in Gaza.

That is Holocaust denial in real time.

It raises the question of where this conspiracy theory linking Israel to xenophobic violence began.

Mzoxolo Mpolase, managing editor of Political Analysis South Africa, did some forensic work in an article on his website on May 27. He traces the conspiracy theory to a single January 2026 post in the Times of Israel’s open blog section, a platform for third-party contributors with no implied editorial endorsement.

WHERE IT ALL BEGAN

The author is a former South African, Grant Gochin, now based in California, USA, where he is a writer, financial advisor and serves as the Honorary Consul for the Republic of Togo in West Africa.

Gochin argued that African states are trapped by colonial borders and that South Africa should fragment into smaller sovereign entities. That was his opinion, nothing more, as Mpolase notes.

That’s where the chain of evidence ends, as Mpolase notes.

Gochin posits no funding channel, instruction or organisational relationship between Israel, its government’s policy and South Africa’s xenophobic or afrophobic protests.

Seth Mandel, writing in Commentary Magazine on June 11, 2026, identifies an “emerging, seemingly iron rule” about accusations against Israel that may help to explain the real dynamic behind the conspiracy theory.

“Pay attention to the when, and you’ll figure out the why.” He could have been channelling Grossman.

Mandel gives four notable items, including a column in The New York Times on May 11, with “wild accusations that Israel is training dogs to rape Palestinian inmates, along with uncorroborated allegations of state-sanctioned abuse.”

On May 12, a major commission released a two-year catalogue of evidence showing that Hamas used mass rape and sexual torture as a key weapon of its military strategy on October 7 and after.

That made the timing of the Times piece, in pre-empting the results of an actual investigation into Hamas, “suddenly clear”, as Mandel notes.

Grossman saw the mechanism in 1960. Mandel documented it in real time.

It is all the more disturbing, then, that South African government ministers at the highest levels and respected NGOs (non-governmental organisations) have enthusiastically helped to spread the hidden-hands conspiracy theory.

Foreign Minister Ronald Lamola gave the keynote address at a symposium co-hosted by DIRCO (Department of International Relations and Cooperation) and the South African Institute of International Affairs in Cape Town on May 25, 2026. He condemned the xenophobic violence strongly and took care not to mention Israel by name.

He undid that good work by saying that “with the current geo-political environment, and South Africa’s role in the international space, including our case at the ICJ, you cannot exclude state and non-state actors trying to erode the human-rights standing of South Africa.”

That was a dog whistle with a foghorn attached.

**Master Manipulator**. Giving the keynote address at a symposium co-hosted by DIRCO in Cape Town on May 25, 2026, South African Foreign Minister **Ronald Lamola** condemned the xenophobic violence taking place in his country and although not mentioning Israel by name, implied such by stating that with “our case at the ICJ,” against Israel, “*you cannot exclude state and non-state actors trying to erode the human-rights standing of South Africa*.”

PROPAGANDA TV CHANNEL

Prominent refugee and migration academics and activists in South Africa have amplified it. Chief among them is Julie Eccles, a public face of Kopanang Africa Against Xenophobia (KAAX).

KAAX is a broad, grassroots civil-society coalition that claims to advocate for pan-African solidarity and constitutional rights for everyone, regardless of nationality or legal status.

**Seeking Safety**. Far removed from Israel, a man sits with a blanket to keep warm as thousands of Malawians take refuge on June 20, 2026 in Sherwood Park outside Durban, South Africa. Around 12,000 people have passed through the camp in recent weeks, seeking safety amid intimidation campaigns by anti-migrant South African groups. (Photo: Per-Anders Pettersson/Getty Images)

Everyone except “Zionists”, apparently, in Eccles’s book.

She appeared on a Salaam Media panel on June 3, with Sharon Ekambaram, KAAX co-founder and head of Refugee and Migrant Rights at Lawyers for Human Rights, Prof Loren Landau, professor of migration and development at the University of the Witwatersrand in South Africa, and Oxford University in the UK, and Mthunzi Mdwaba, a controversial South African businessman and legal academic.

The panel’s topic was Xenophobia in South Africa: Is There a Hidden Hand Stirring the Chaos?

On live TV, Eccles named a “hidden hand”, Martin Moshal, who she described as “an Israeli billionaire” and “dyed-in-the-wool Zionist.” She said that he had donated “at least R40-million to Action SA”, a party that “doesn’t even have a seat in parliament,” and “talks openly” about turning South Africa into “whatever his vision is.”

She got most of that wrong. Whether by default or design, neither reflects well on her or KAAX.

Action SA has six seats in Parliament. Moshal is South African, born and raised in Durban, currently living in Sydney, Australia. He is a venture capitalist, a philanthropist, and the largest known donor to opposition parties in South Africa, including the DA (Democratic Alliance), Action SA, the IFP (Inkatha Freedom Party) and BOSA (Build One South Africa).

**Singing for Salvation**. While a man plays his guitar as thousands of Malawians take refuge on June 20, 2026 in Sherwood Park outside Durban, South Africa, certain leaders in South Africa try play a different tune pointing a finger of blame at Israel. (Photo: Anders Pettersson/Getty Images)

Eccles said none of that. Instead, she played by the anti-Israel lobby’s rule book of injecting Jewish figures as shadowy puppet masters into local disputes and manufacturing foreign conspiracies where no logical connection exists.

MORE DOG WHISTLES

Mdwaba declared himself “happy” that Eccles had “mentioned Israeli elements.” That was his loud dog whistle to scapegoat Israel as a hostile actor behind the xenophobic violence.

Landau, whose reputation at Wits and Oxford universities rests on rigorous, evidence-based analysis, could have challenged and corrected Eccles’ claims in seconds. He said nothing about her misrepresentations. Neither did Ekambaram.

Salaam Media, a Johannesburg-based media agency and radio station that claims to be committed to “humanitarian journalism”, could have included at least one dissenting voice on the panel. There were none. The question in the panel’s title was rhetorical, and the answer decided before the cameras rolled.

That is not journalism. It is propaganda.

The ANC’s support for the Palestinian cause is the main backdrop to the conspiracy theory. It remains rooted in its history of solidarity with anti-colonial liberation movements, regardless of how violently extreme.

The apartheid smear against Israel drives much of its rhetoric. Some South Africans who actually lived under apartheid recognise and reject it as a propaganda weapon. Israel is the only democracy in the Middle East. Its Arab citizens vote, sit in the Knesset and serve on the Supreme Court.

That is not apartheid.

And South Africa is no stranger to strains of afrophobic violence. Since “liberation” in 1994, there have been at least six major waves of such violence against Black African migrants. The worst came in May 2008, when 62 people died, some were left burning alive in the streets, and over 100,000 were displaced.

Since October 7, the response from some ministers, including President Cyril Ramaphosa, has been sartorial. They don a Palestinian scarf in public and ignore deepening potholes in the country’s literal and figurative roads.

The formula for scapegoating Jews has not changed globally in 900 years.

The accusation is always a confession. The charge is always a mirror. And the target is always the same.

US Representative Ritchie Torres put it bluntly on X in 2024, after Iran’s Supreme Leader praised American campus protesters against Israel:

“When … the world’s leading state sponsor of terrorism and antisemitism … praises you, you have become useful idiots on the wrong side of history.”

Show South Africa’s scapegoating, hidden-hand conspiracy theorists anything remotely close to a peace sign, and they will still see a clenched fist.

They may think they are on the right side of history by demonising Israel and Jews who support it. If they keep going – and they most likely will – their place is secure as useful idiots on history’s wrong side.

*Feature photo: Recuring violence against foreigners from across Africa is now the norm in South Africa. Seen here foreign nationals holding a placard during an anti-xenophobia march outside the City Hall of Durban on April 8, 2015 where the protestors marched against anti-immigrant violence, a week after hundreds were viciously attacked. (Photo credit should read RAJESH JANTILAL/AFP via Getty Images).

About the writer:

Marika Sboros is a South African freelance investigative journalist with decades of experience writing fulltime for the country’s top media titles on a wide range of topics. She started her career as a hard-news reporter in the newsroom of the now defunct Rand Daily Mail, a campaigning anti-government newspaper during the worst excesses of the apartheid era. She commutes between South Africa and the UK.

Follow Marika Sboros on X: @MarikaSboros
Subscribe on Substack: Marika Sboros

TRUMP, NETANYAHU, IRAN AND THE NOBEL PEACE PRIZE

Giving in to Iranian demands rather than achieve peace in the Middle East will instead facilitate perpetual war.

By Neville Berman

After publicly assuring the Iranian people, “Help is on the way”, Trump decided that America needed to do a deal with the world’s greatest exporter of terror and perennial liar about its nuclear program. Consequently, the Iranian regime has been given a lifeline.

Following the slaughter of tens of thousands of its own protesting citizens and Trump’s assurances, the US president has turned his back on the Iranian people who want democracy, freedom of expression, the rule of law, and human rights.

**Misleading Message**. “Help is on its way,” Trump tells Iranians as he urges them to keep protesting in January, 2026.

Initially, America held all the cards. The situation has now changed. The whole world is complaining about the increase in the price of petrol and gas. America does not want to be at war while it is co-hosting the soccer world cup. Once the tournament ends, campaigning for the midterm elections will take center stage. Americans are tired of fighting wars of choice in foreign lands thousands of miles away. Trump wants to end the war and be recognized as a peacemaker. In addition, Congress has not agreed to give Trump the green light to continue with the war.

The Iranian regime knows that it can rely on help from China and Russia. Russia is using thousands of drones supplied by Iran in its war against Ukraine, and Russia will veto any UN Security Council resolution calling for sanctions on Iran. They also know that China will buy billions of dollars of Iranian oil at a discount. The regime also knows that it has the backing of Qatar, and that it can rely on the Europeans to seek appeasement no matter the cost.

Twenty percent of the world’s oil exports flow through the Strait of Hormuz on Iran’s southern coastline. The Strait is an international waterway that should remain open and never be subject to tariffs. Nobody has to pay to use the English Channel and nobody should ever have to pay to use the Strait of Hormuz. Closing the Strait of Hormuz is against international law, but the Iranian regime knows that no Iranian has ever been charged by the International Criminal Court for committing any crime. The bottom line is that Iran is already planning a massive victory parade.

The Iranian regime is going for the jugular and when Pakistan was accepted as the venue for negotiations, it was a dead cert that America would bow to Iranian demands.

The world’s greatest superpower would no longer be calling the shots!

The Iranians are demanding :

the immediate lifting of American sanctions,
over $100 billion of frozen Iranian money in foreign banks to be released.
The right to impose fees on oil tankers passing through the “international waterway” of the Strait of Hormuz – amounting to an act of extortion.
$300 billion as compensation for war damage ignoring the war was caused by their own actions
removal of all US armed forces from the Middle East.

**Lost** **Lever**age. With Pakistan the venue for negotiations, the US lost its edge and was no longer calling the shots.

To make matters worse, America is not insisting on restrictions on the Iranian missile program, nor is it insisting that Iran end its support for their proxy terrorist forces in the Middle East. In regard to the Iranian nuclear program, Iran is once again committing to allow the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)to inspect its nuclear program and its stockpile of enriched uranium. Iran had agreed to this in the past, and then lied and lied, and prevented the IAEA from carrying out what was agreed to. No matter what is agreed to in a new deal, Iran will continue to lie about its nuclear program in the future. The deal gives the Iranians everything upfront, and in return the US gets a commitment from Iran to end its nuclear program at some stage in the future. The Iranian regime is laughing all the way to the bank. They also have no intention of ever abandoning their nuclear program. Trump has completely lost the plot of what should be happening.

For over a decade Netanyahu warned the world about the danger of a nuclear armed Iran. Finally, when it came down to attempting to destroy the underground nuclear facilities in Iran, the US and Israel operated with an unprecedented level of partnership, co-operation and intelligence sharing. Together they significantly reduced the threat of Iran’s nuclear program and its capacity to wage war.

The Iranians have spent decades and billions of dollars financing, training and supplying Hezbollah with an estimated 150,000 rockets aimed at Israel. Using incredible intelligence capabilities, and innovative tactics, Israel eliminated the leadership of Hezbollah, and greatly reduced its capacity to attack Israel. Hezbollah still has a stockpile of anti-tank missiles and drones that they continue to shoot into Israel. Israel has replied by attacking Hezbollah facilities in Lebanon. The IDF have discovered massive amounts of armaments stored in civilian houses and underground tunnels in Lebanon.

The Iranians are trying to save Hezbollah. They are demanding that any deal between Iran and America must include a ceasefire in Lebanon. What this signifies is that Iran does not consider Lebanon to be a sovereign independent country. What Trump should be demanding is that Hezbollah disarm, so that Lebanon and Israel can then conclude a peace treaty and live in peace with each other. The problem in Lebanon is Hezbollah, and not the actions of Israel. Surprisingly, Trump has taken the side of the Iranians and has demanded that Israel implement a ceasefire in Lebanon. Israel has refused. Trump has now turned against Netanyahu with a vengeance. Israel has been totally locked out of the negotiations with the Iranians and Trump has turned Netanyahu into a pariah in the White House.

**Money Talks**. The talks are becoming a battle to unlock the funds.

What is actually happening is that America has agreed to a framework deal to be signed immediately, and that negotiations will then be held for a maximum of 60 days, in order to conclude a Memorandum of Understanding that will result in a permanent peace between the United States and Iran.

The world is cheering. Gas prices are going down, and Iran has promised not to build or buy atomic weapons. At long last, peace in the Middle East seems to be possible. What can go wrong?

In his second term, Trump believes – having repeatedly expressed so – he is deserving of the Nobel Peace Prize even though he has declared that:

– the US needs to own Greenland and would either take it the easy way or the hard way

– the US needs to take control of Canada, Mexico, Cuba, Panama, Venezuela, and the Gaza Strip

– signaled a cut back of American support to NATO.

While none of the above are likely to help Trump in his quest for the Nobel Peace Prize, if he does manage to bring ‘peace’ – that is, some modicum of a cessation of hostilities to the region, he just might receive it. However, what Trump is negotiating with Iran will not bring genuine peace for it will empower the leadership to renew all its nefarious terrorist activities and revitalize the fanatical religious obsession set on eliminating the State of Israel. Over 80% of Shiite Muslims in the world are known as Twelvers. They believe that the 12^th Imam, Muhammad al-Mahdi, who disappeared in the 10^th century, will one day reappear and bring Islamic rule and justice to the world. The Imams in charge of Iran believe that Israel needs to be eliminated in order to hasten his return. The general view of the Iranian people is that Israel has nothing to do with the return of the 12^th Imam and that Iran and Israel should resume normal relations that existed before the revolution in 1979.

**Trump’s Holy Grail**. Speaking to reporters back in January 2026 at the White House, Donald Trump said he couldn’t “think of anybody in history that should get the Nobel Prize more than me.”

The deal that America is negotiating with Iran will ensure that perpetual war in the Middle East continues. Successive American administrations have never understood the Middle East, and the current administration is no exception.

There is another small minority viewpoint that holds that Trump is actually the most brilliant politician around, and that all his capricious behaviour is part of his master plan to ensure that America becomes great again. The theory is that Trump will get the Iranians to agree to a deal, and after that the Republican Party will win a majority in both the Senate and the House in the midterm elections. Iran will inevitably not keep to its commitments, and Trump will then get Congress to approve military action against the Iranian regime. He will once again partner with Israel, and together they will cause the Iranian regime to collapse and be overthrown. Netanyahu will be completely vindicated, and will be invited back to the White House to celebrate the fall of the Iranian regime. Hallelujah.

No matter what happens in Iran, and despite all the problems that Israel is facing, Israel will remain a democracy, and will continue to innovate and prosper. It will continue to ensure the rights of Christians, Muslims and members of various other religions to freely access and pray at their respective holy sites in Israel. It will continue to act as a light unto the nations of the world, and will play a positive role in improving the lives of tens of millions of people around the world. Millions of Jews have a yearning to live in the land promised by G-d to the seed of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. The population of Israel will continue to grow. Empires have come and gone, but Israel is here to stay. I would not want to live anywhere else. One last thought, Trump will never receive a Nobel Peace Prize.

About the writer:

Accountant Neville Berman had an illustrious sporting career in South Africa, being twice awarded the South African State Presidents Award for Sport and was a three times winner of the South African Maccabi Sportsman of the Year Award. In 1978 he immigrated to the USA to coach the United States men’s field hockey team, whereafter, in 1981 he immigrated to Israel where he practiced as an accountant and then for 20 years was the Admin Manager at the American International School in Even Yehuda, Israel. He is married with two children and one granddaughter.

FROM AN AILING KING SAUL TO A FAILING “KING BIBI” – TIME FOR CHANGE

Promises, platitudes and politics is all that is left on offer from Israel’s prime minister.

By David E. Kaplan

The story about the prophet Samuel informing King Saul that his kingdom was being taken away in favor of a more worthy successor, remains a pivotal moment in the biblical narrative about the wisdom of timeous political transition. (Samuel 15 and 16)

Some 3000 years later, this narrative could not be more instructive.

What if Samuel was with us today and like all Israelis on 16 June 2026, who turned on their local TV news channels to hear their prime minister address the nation on Trump’s MoU. (Memorandum of Understanding).

**‘Deal’ with the Devil**. In response to national anxiety over Trumps MoU, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu holds a press conference on the June 15, 2026, asserting that ‘we saved Israel from annihilation’ in war, admits he and Trump don’t always ‘see eye to eye,’ stresses troops will remain in south Lebanon and admits he does not know all the details of the deal. (Photo: Olivier Fitoussi/Pool)

After all, the issue is the number one existential issue facing the nation of Israel.

This is what the prime minister himself believes.

This is what he has been telling us and the world not for years but for decades. On this issue, he prides himself no less a prophet than Samuel.

So, what would Samuel have thought as he looked upon like all of us in disbelief?

What would he have wisely counseled while going about doing God’s work?

After so much war and suffering, did not the people of Israel deserve to hear at least some details from their prime minister to UNDERSTAND what was happening?

Bibi offered anything but UNDERSTANDING!

Well, not quite because we UNDERSTOOD that Bibi was as lost as all of us as the only relevant insight he could share on the MoU was that he did not know yet any details.

He let us know that we knew as much as he did.

Comforting!

As we prepared to watch Bibi’s carefully choreographed address, all were anxious having been subjected to the rumors that the agreement would:

– strengthen Hezbollah

– strengthen Iran and

– weaken Israel.

As we later learned, it did all three, virtually making Lebanon an Iranian protectorate. Bad enough for us in the center of the country but what of our fellow citizens in the north that as The Jerusalem Post editor solemnly writes would mean:

“…the difference between a family returning to Metula, Kiryat Shmona, Minara, Shlomi, or the Galilee, and another year of empty streets, shuttered businesses, improvised schooling and lives lived in suspension.”

Did the prime minister offer to them and the rest of his listening citizenry anything beyond, promises, platitudes and politics?

Like an ailing King Saul this was a failing “King Bibi” and that we, the modern citizens of Israel, needed fresh ideas and fresh leadership.

Displaying disdain for the concerns and anxieties of his people he hardly even addressed the MoU – the number one issue on all viewer’s minds and why they turned on their TVs to watch.

Desperate to hear some straight talk about what the burgeoning deal between the US and Iran would mean for us, all we got as most commentators agree was a superficial “campaign speech” using the platform to highlight Bibi’s military achievements and outlining future political goals.

Clearly, most pressing for Bibi was setting the record straight following a June 2026 interview, when U.S. President Donald Trump publicly questioned whether Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu intended to run in Israel’s upcoming fall elections, remarking “I wonder if Bibi even wants to continue.”

**Soaking in the Spotlight**. While Trump was enjoying his birthday week by parading his ‘Peace Deal’ with Iran at the G7 in France that sidelined Israel’s interests and concerns, Israel’s prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu found himself adrift having few credible answers to an exhausted and skeptical citizenry that will in months be deciding his political future.

Bibi assured his viewers that he will be running and that “I intend to win.”

Hardly what many wanted to hear!

In a De Gaulle mode of Je suis la France (“I am France”), Bibi believes he is indispensable to Israel – that he embodies the Jewish State.

Having endured two major conflicts with the Iranian regime, spending hours in shelters as Iranian ballistic missiles rained down indiscriminately in attempts to kill as many Israeli civilians as possible, with lives lost, homes destroyed, and nerves frayed, Israelis deserved more.

They did not get it.

Where we did get the truth was from Trump’s former partner- in-chief during his first term, VP Mike Pence who blasted the U.S.-Iran MoU, warning it contains no requirement for Iran to dismantle its nuclear or ballistic missile programs and no commitment to end support for terror groups like Hamas and Hezbollah.

All issues critical to Israel, Pence said the deal would immediately ease sanctions, unlock billions in frozen Iranian assets, and pave the way for hundreds of billions in reconstruction funding for Iran, calling it “the kind of appeasement” seen under previous administrations.

**Pense making Sense**. Apart from Bibi not “seeing eye to eye” with his buddy Trump, neither did former U.S. VP, Mike Pence, who called the US-Ian MoU “the kind of appeasement” seen under previous administrations.

Days later, having time to “digest”, many in Israel felt a need to belch as the final memorandum appeared even worse than the leaked version, strengthening Iran’s hold over Lebanon, ignoring Hezbollah’s disarmament and exposing a seismic gap between Trump’s declarations and the agreement he signed. This deal sounds little more than extortion – paying Iran off to open Hormuz!

While all this is going on and Israelis have made such sacrifices for their families, for their friends and for their country, thousands of Hareidi protestors are blocking highways, attacking Supreme Court Deputy President Justice Noam Sohlberg’s private residence all in support of draft dodgers. What would Samuel say listening to a representative of the Jerusalem Faction protest say:

“We will shut down the country, and anyone who thinks they have seen it all is in for surprises. The struggle is only at its beginning, and our next steps will be far more significant.”

**Irate Israelis**. Israeli citizens voice their discontent with the reports of the agreement signed between the US and Iran, which completely sidelined Israel.

And what is this governments response to this anti-Zionist conduct undermining and dividing the country?

Adding insult to injury, this government under this prime minister is advancing a proposed Basic Law that elevates Torah study to a foundational national value that will define long-term Torah study as equivalent to “meaningful service” in the IDF.

Shame, Shame, Shame.

What would Samuel of 3000 years ago say today?

He would say like most are feeling.

It is time for change.

‘ALL THE WORLD’S A STAGE’

A South African take on “As You Like It” is playing at the International Court of Justice at The Hague.

By Craig Snoyman

“Honestly m’lord, we know he was in the bank when the robbery took place, we believe he is one of the robbers. Grant us an urgent interdict preventing him from doing any further robberies. If he is the robber then we are stopping further robberies. If he is not the robber, well then, he is not suffering any harm. We’ll bring comprehensive evidence in to due course to show that he is actually the robber, we promise.”

This is not much different from the argument presented by South Africa when it arrived at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) on 29 December 2023. The South African government sought renewed international relevance by filing an urgent case against Israel. And so it was that South Africa arrived, breathless with urgency, armed with the faded moral aura of Mandela with robes billowing, waving documents and followed by an army of lawyers in its wake, that might bankrupt a small country. In front of the world’s cameras, it demanded that immediate relief for what it alleged was a genocide.

The application was marked urgent.

The request for provisional measures screamed emergency.

The world was told there was no time to waste.

**Hocus Pokus**. Teetering on the verge of bankruptcy, the ANC announced in early January 2024 that it had suddenly managed to stabilize its finances – no explanations given – and in the same week, approached the ICJ to ask that Israel’s actions in Gaza be classified as “genocide”. Under the shadow of Iran’s plotting over proceedings, supporters of the trump-up charge *outside the Western Cape High Court on 11 January 2024 in Cape Town, South Africa. (Photo: Gallo Images/Brenton Geach)*

And the court played its part. The world watched two days of oral argument — a mere fortnight after filing. The provisional measures order followed against the presumptive robber, sorry, make that prospective genocider. All very urgent. All very now. All very theatrical — but then the world is a stage.

South Africa’s initial application ran to 84 pages. Its memorial, filed in October 2024, ran to over 750 pages of text with more than 4,000 pages of exhibits and annexes. Having seen the general competence of the South African government, one cannot, even on the most generous assessment, believe that it was capable of producing 4,750 pages of material between the Hamas attack of 7 October 2023 and the filing date of 29 December 2023. The unanswered question that the South African government has still not been willing to answer in public is how long, exactly, was this ‘urgent‘ application in the making before the moment of urgency that supposedly required it? The leader of the South African legal team, John Dugard– the man who has spent at least the last 10 years agitating against Israel – probably knows the answer. The circumstantial evidence suggests that it was not a mere three months in creation.

“Urgency” allowed South Africa to leapfrog the queue and obtain interim relief before a final hearing. The premise of urgency was that the harm was occurring now, that it could not wait for the judicial mill to grind at its exceedingly slow pace. Any delay would cause irreparable damage to rights that deserve protection. Whether the other party is left carrying the stigma as a robber, or a genocider, is outweighed by the risk of potential harm.

On 26 January 2024, the International Court of Justice issued its Order on provisional measures. The court explicitly stated that its order was “not a ruling on whether Israel is in breach of the Genocide Convention.” The former President of the ICJ, Joan Donoghue — who had presided over the very hearings in question — explained that the court had not found that it was plausible that Israel was committing genocide. It had found that certain rights asserted by South Africa — not the right to be free from genocide as such, but rights under the Genocide Convention — were plausible enough to justify provisional protection from irreparable harm pending a full hearing.

**Corrupting the Court**. Despite former ICJ President Joan E. Donoghue clarifying to the BBC that the court did **NOT** conclude that there was a “plausible case” of genocide against Israel in Gaza, did not stop the global hysteria from propagating otherwise in order to besmirch the character of the State of Israel.

This finding detonated through global media like a diplomatic hand grenade. South Africa celebrated and its domestic commentators declared that the ICJ had found that Israel was ‘plausibly committing genocide.’ Legal academics issued breathless analyses confirming that the court believed genocide was occurring. I recall one very prominent South African law professor asking Natasha Hausdorff where she got her law degree, after Hausdorff had pointed out to her that the court had not found there was a plausible genocide.

The distinction is not technical wordplay. It is the difference between a court saying “we find it plausible that the party is a robber” and a court saying “we find it plausible that there are rights worth protecting while we decide whether the party is a robber.” The court followed the latter principle. South Africa’s government either did not read that part, or found it inconvenient. The world’s media, supplied with South Africa’s narrative and disinclined to examine ICJ jurisprudence on a Friday afternoon, ran with the finding that a genocide was plausible.

South Africa filed its memorial in October 2024: 750 pages of text, 4,000 pages of exhibits. Israel could and did raise preliminary objections to jurisdiction and admissibility, choosing not to raise the issues as a standalone exercise earlier, which would delay proceedings for six to twelve months while they are decided. Israel has raised these arguments in its counter-memorial, filed on 12 March 2026, requesting extensions from the court. South Africa opposed these extensions on the grounds that they “undermined the urgency of the proceedings.”

THE ‘PLOT’S’ (ANTI)CLIMAX

On 21 May 2026, a notice was published on the ICJ website which granted South Africa until 22 November 2027 to file its replying memorial, and set 22 May 2029 as the deadline for Israel’s rejoinder. The same country that stated extensions undermine the urgency of the proceedings asked for and was granted an extension of 18 months. If previous court procedure is followed then Oral Hearings, should probably occur in late 2029. A final judgment as to whether genocide actually occurred would only be expected sometime in 2030 or 2031.

If the matter was urgent enough to demand provisional measures within two weeks of filing, it is curious that when faced with Israel’s 1,000-page counter-memorial and its 4,000 pages of exhibits, South Africa now requires 18 months to formulate a reply. Perhaps South Africa’s founding memorial represented the entirety of the government’s awareness, and the subsequent 4,750-page memorial required far more critical analysis on a matter which is far more complex than it had initially led the world to believe. One wonders whether Pretoria’s legal team had war-gamed the scenario where the funding pipeline has dried up when further rounds of written pleadings and oral hearings still need to be attended to. Perhaps that accounts for the 18-month extension request. Perhaps the delay is not about complexity. Perhaps it is about waiting to see whether the financial climate improves, whether the government in Tehran survives and proves generous, or whether some other source of support emerges to defray the huge costs of this case.

**Murky Machinations**. Responding to allegations that the ANC received funding from Iran to finance the legal costs to charging Israel at the ICJ in the Hague of “genocide”, the Iranian Ambassador to South Africa, Mansour Shakib Mehr, refuted such allegations at a press conference saying that in any event, “the case was filed by the South African government” and “not filed by the ANC.” (Photo: Supplied)

Israel has carried the ‘genocide state’ label since 7 October 2023 — the date Hamas committed the largest massacre of Jews since the Second World War. This label was magnified by the January 2024 order, mischaracterised by governments, adopted by protest movements, and has been continuously repeated by worldwide legacy and social media for the last two and a half years.

No finding of genocide has been made.

The ICJ has not concluded that genocide occurred or is occurring. The court has issued provisional measures — temporary interdicts pending a full hearing — but has explicitly declined to rule on the merits. But Israel will continue to carry the ‘genocide state’ label until the finalisation of the case.

What will happen if, sometime around 2030, the ICJ finds for Israel on the preliminary objections alone, by holding that the court lacks jurisdiction, or that the application is inadmissible or that the genocide convention cannot be expanded into a general mechanism for adjudicating the legality of the use of force? Or my personal favourite: that no dispute exists because no “positively opposed views” had been found and there had been no exchanges, either publicly or privately, to establish a dispute. This would be a monumental screw-up on the part of South Africa, and Dugard did not address the issue particularly well in January 2024. The case would be dismissed without any finding on the merits. In the court of public opinion, Israel would not be found innocent of genocide, because the court would have examined whether genocide occurred. It would simply have been determined that South Africa had no standing, or that the court had no jurisdiction, or that the application was procedurally defective.

“WORDS, WORDS, WORDS”

The genocide label, however, will remain in circulation. The articles will not be retracted. The resolutions will not be rescinded. The protest chants will not be updated. Public opinion operates on narratives, and the narrative of a “genocide state,” “ICJ genocide case” “plausibly genocidal” will be further grist to the mill.

Israel would emerge from nine years of lawfare and worldwide accusations of genocide in the world’s highest court, having its reputation treated as collateral damage by a government in Pretoria that has neither the answers to confront it legally or to comply within the timeframes it originally demanded to prevent undermining the process.

**Rot in the Republic**. While the republic of South Africa’s government focuses on pursuing false charges of genocide against Israel, it fails abysmally in dealing with humanity issues at home like these foreign nationals sleeping on the street after fleeing their homes amid anti-immigrant protests in Durban, South Africa on June 9, 2026. While demonstrations across the country have escalated into violence, resulting in injuries and the deaths of foreign nationals, South Africa’s government prefers to focus on Gaza! (Photo: Reuters/Rogan Ward)

And what if Israel is successful on the merits? There is apparently an amicus curia brief (a report to aid the court by a non-party) by some of the world’s pre-eminent military experts, stating that Israel’s war in Gaza has been more protective of non-combatants in a warzone than any other war in the history of mankind. It makes no difference. For the duration of this case — which will extend into the 2030s, Israel has carried and will continue to carry a status in international community that one might describe as the legal equivalent of a skunk at a garden party. No formal finding of genocide. No conviction. A verdict of acquittal. But the association, repeated daily in global media, in university campuses, in governmental statements from hostile states have real-world effects on trade, on diplomatic relations, on the treatment of both Israeli nationals and Jews abroad.

South Africa will continue to play the role of the global avenger until a final verdict is delivered and possibly even beyond. And while it reads its lines and while its government officials talk of accountability and international law, they speak with the sincerity of men who have spent the better part of the last few years avoiding both.

About the writer:

Craig Snoyman is a practising advocate in South Africa.

FROM URGENCY TO DELAY: WHAT HAPPENED TO SOUTH AFRICA’S ICJ CASE?

South Africa exposes through ineptitude its true motivations behind its fabricated case against Israel.

By Kenneth Moeng Kgwadi

Nearly two months after Hamas launched its deadly surprise attack on the State of Israel, the ANC-led government brought a case against Israel before the United Nations’ International Court of Justice (ICJ), accusing it of violating the 1948 Genocide Convention. South Africa alleged that the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) were committing acts of genocide in Gaza.

The move was not entirely surprising, given that the ANC had refrained from unequivocally condemning the initial Hamas attack, during which approximately 1,195 people were killed, more than 5,400 were injured, and 251 others were abducted and taken into the dark and dangerous tunnel network beneath the Gaza Strip.

**What a Drag!** South Africa’s “genocide” case against Israel at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) is set to drag on for at least another three years after Pretoria requested an 18-month extension to file its response to Israel’s defence.

There have been allegations that Iran influenced and financially supported the ANC in pursuing legal action against Israel. While these claims remain contested, they have fueled debate about the motivations behind South Africa’s decision to bring the case before the International Court of Justice.

It is also noteworthy that none of the 22 Arab states spanning the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region took the lead in initiating similar legal proceedings against Israel. This raises legitimate questions about why South Africa, located thousands of kilometres from the conflict zone, assumed such a prominent role.

To make matters worse, Egypt, which shares a border with Gaza through the Rafah Border Crossing, maintained strict controls on the movement of Palestinians into its territory during much of the conflict. Given the geographic proximity and direct regional implications of the war, it would have seemed more logical for one or more neighbouring states to spearhead the legal challenge against Israel rather than a country situated at the southern tip of Africa.

The South African government’s recent request for an 18-month extension to submit its written response, or Memorial as it is formally known, demonstrates that there was no real sense of urgency from the outset, despite claims to the contrary when it initiated its legal campaign against Israel at the end of 2023. Common sense suggests that, had the matter truly been urgent, South Africa would have acted with greater speed and efficiency in assisting the ICJ by providing the necessary legal material and evidence required for the Court to make a determination.

**Pitfalls of the Plotters**. What began with pretentious haste by South Africa’s legal team has now slowed to a snail pace through ineptitude. Seen here in early days of the proceedings at the ICJ are Vusimuzi Madonsela, the South African ambassador to the Netherlands (right), with South Africa’s justice minister, Ronald Lamola. (Photo: Hollandse Hoogte/Rex/Shutterstock)

It is quite evident that the ANC-led government was misled by Iran and Hamas, who knew that the allegations levelled against Israel were fabricated and lacked any factual basis.

It is hypocritical for the ANC-led government to initiate a legal case and then become the very party requesting a delay in its own proceedings. There appears to be little logic in such a course of action. What, then:

– becomes of the claims that genocide was taking place in Gaza?

– Was this legal action not intended to halt what the government described as an ongoing genocide?

If the government already possessed the facts and evidence that prompted it to approach the ICJ, why would it require almost two years merely to submit a written Memorial? Such a delay would perhaps be more understandable if it had been requested by Israel, the respondent in the case, rather than by South Africa, the applicant.

So far, we have learned that this ICJ case has already cost taxpayers a staggering R130 million, and it is likely to require even more funding beyond 2029 should the government of the day choose to continue pursuing it. The prolonged delay risks rendering the case increasingly irrelevant, as geopolitical realities are constantly evolving and may ultimately diminish its significance in the years ahead. Israel is expected to hold elections before the end of this year, while South Africa is preparing for its own national elections in 2029. These political developments could significantly influence the nature of relations, or tensions, between the two countries.

‘BURDEN’ OF PROOF

What is clear is that the ICJ case carries not only a substantial financial burden but also far-reaching economic and diplomatic consequences, some of which South Africa has already begun to experience. Several individuals have effectively been shown the door after the United States declined to approve South Africa’s nominee for ambassador to Washington, D.C. Relations between Pretoria and Washington continue to deteriorate, with tensions further exacerbated by the United States’ Afrikaner refugee programme. At the same time, escalating tariffs threaten to affect ordinary South Africans who are already grappling with economic hardship.

**Unwelcome in the USA**. Not mincing his words in offending the US president, the newly appointed South African Ambassador to the U.S. Ebrahim Rasool was declared *persona non grata* and expelled in mid-March 2025.

South Africa would be better served by adhering to a policy of non-alignment, refraining from direct involvement in foreign conflicts while continuing to advocate for peace and dialogue, principles it has sought to champion since 1994. Becoming entangled in distant geopolitical disputes risks imposing severe economic costs on citizens who are already struggling to make ends meet. Major BRICS members such as China and India have generally avoided unnecessarily escalating tensions with the United States, recognising the significant economic and diplomatic consequences that can arise from such confrontations.

About the writer:

Kenneth Moeng Kgwadi is a political scientist, columnist and research fellow at the Middle East Africa Research Institute (MEARI).

TIME TO SHOOT, NOT TALK

Things I know and don’t know about a deal with the Islamic Republic.

By Jonathan Feldstein

Since barrages of missiles were fired at Israel Sunday night and again Monday morning this week, from the Islamic Republic of Iran and the Houthis in Yemen, there are some things that are clearer and some things that are less clear. One thing that is certainly clear is that this situation is unsustainable.

It seems clear that in a call to Prime Minister Netanyahu, President Trump insisted that Israel not respond to the Sunday evening barrage on the grounds that:

“The Iranian strikes didn’t hurt anybody,” and
“If Bibi strikes them back its just gonna keep going like the past 47 years, or the last 3000 years.”

I don’t know, I wasn’t alive 3000 years ago – but I do know that the Iran attack on Israel was because the Islamists know Trump is faking it about the “deal” that he’s been saying is close for months. You can imagine him in the role of Meg Ryan (Sally) at the deli in “When Harry Met Sally,” his performance earning complements from patrons at the next table, and Islamists around the world alike. “We are very close to a final deal with Iran; it’s going to be a good deal. I don’t want to blow it up because of what is happening now.”

Billy Crystal (Harry) and the rest of the world look on in disbelief.

**Take on Fake**. The most iconic fake scene in movies is sadly playing out live in geo-politics in the Gulf.

I know that the Islamic Republic attacked because they successfully linked themselves and a deal with the US to Hezbollah in Lebanon. So, when Israel attacked Hezbollah positions near Beirut, the Islamic Republic used it as a pretext to attack Israel, knowing that they would be goading Israel into a no-win situation as Trump truly believes he’s got a deal at hand. Ever the dealmaker, Trump, likely saw it as a draw, “Each of them had their fun. Israel had its strike and Iran had its strike. We don’t need another one.”

I also know that the Islamic Republic attacked because as a possible peace deal between Israel and Lebanon may be inching closer, it’s bad for their proxy Hezbollah, and terrorists will always use terror to influence from the outside. Indeed, it’s a common Islamic terrorist strategy, literally to try to blow up peace through missiles or suicide attacks.

I know they attacked because they knew by now that Trump thinks he’s so close that he won’t let anyone ruin his “deal”. But he’s been saying that he’s “close” for weeks and weeks. They know that he wants a deal more than they are (ever) prepared to make a deal, so they attacked, calling his bluff.

They attacked literally because Trump’s words about a deal have been the fuel for the missiles they fired. They want no deal, they just want to play Trump, and will use any pretext to attack or otherwise harm Israel. They attacked because their agenda is clear and they are singularly focused on playing the US and the West as they have for “the past 47 years” but probably not “the last 3000 years.”

If there had been any doubt as to whether President Trump was bluffing, and his weeks and weeks of chanting about making a deal with the Islamic Republic were part of some mass deception campaign, that doubt has been late to rest. It is clear that his notion of ending the war and the threat to America and the West by signing “the best deal ever” has never been more mistaken than ever.

Unfortunately, the Islamic Republic saw his hand and played him. They demanded that Lebanon be included, and when Israel responded to a violation of a cease-fire with Hezbollah (nearly 20 Israeli soldiers have been killed during the ceasefire), Iran was given freehand to launch barrages of ballistic missiles at Israel.

**Deal Breaker**. Historic opportunity is the last thing Hezbollah wanted and tried sabotaging it by firing missiles into northern Israel.

Unlike President Biden, who said “Don’t, don’t” to deter Iran and Hezbollah in 2023, this week, President Trump essentially said “Don’t” to Israel to prevent the appropriate and massive response that should have taken place. This week we know the Islamic Republic knows that Trump is more eager for a deal than actually defeating the Islamic Republic. They know that they can continue to play him before and after a deal if there is one.

I know that there can be no deal with the Islamic Republic and its proxies. I know that in the real estate deals Trump is used to, they end by one party paying for a project and the other selling the land or rights to do the project. It’s a simple transaction. I know that with the Islamic Republic and its proxies, any deal now will mean that we are paying later, and later.

Yes, maybe for 3000 years!

I know that for the past 100 days and more (but probably not 3000 years), anti-Israel agitators have used every deceitful trope anyway to make Israel look like the bad guy, somehow controlling Trump and US policy. Yet the latest escalation and tying Israel‘s hands has made it clear not only was this never true, but in fact, Trump has tied Israel hands.

I know that Israel did retaliate, hitting Iranian sites Monday morning, and that this possibly could give Israel face-saving cover to appease Trump more broadly, while respecting the alliance between Israel and the United States are allies. It does not make sense to cross the president unless absolutely necessary. But the Islamic Republic is not only not an ally, but a dangerous enemy seeking the destruction of the United States. I know that as much as Trump may think he’s “close” to a deal, the Islamic Republic will never do or agree to anything that is not in its long-term interest. Even if that is suicidal. I don’t know if Trump realizes that any deal with the Islamists is itself suicidal.

**Iran Deal “round the corner”**. Its unsure if anyone knows what’s “around the corner”!

I know that if there is a deal, the Islamic Republic will play along but, before the ink is dry, they will use their decades of practice (47 years to be precise, but not 3000) to undermine that.

I know that to the Islamic Republic and their proxies, as well as to US allies in the region who are trying to assess what Trump is doing, it is clear that he seems desperate to end the war, even at the expense of not achieving the declared goals set out at the beginning of hostilities. This is while insisting that the Islamic Republic never obtains nuclear weapons.

Annoyed, maybe even angered that his deal might be sidetracked, he commented:

“I would say an agreement would be signed on Monday, Tuesday or Wednesday of this coming week.”

But the Iranians see it as crying wolf, as they suit up in their wolf’s clothing, ready to use Trump’s eagerness to make a deal as a time to pounce. This they have done in closing the Strait of Hormuz, creating a global energy crisis that they are able to tighten under a ‘deal’ down the road.

**Blocked Artery**. Time to free the global economy from the grip of Iranian Islamic tyranny.

One hundred days after the US and Israel begin a war together to – eliminate Iran’s nuclear weapons program and ballistic missile capabilities

– its support for its terror proxies Hezbollah and Hamas, and

– create facts on the ground that could lead to the fall of the Islamic regime,

Israel was once again under attack and the Islamists clearly playing its hand while Trump was talking about a deal.

NOW I know it’s time to finish the job and win, not talk and talk about a deal.

About the writer:

Jonathan Feldstein - President of the US based non-profit Genesis123 Foundation whose mission is to build bridges between Jews and Christians – is a freelance writer whose articles appear in The Jerusalem Post, Times of Israel, Townhall, NorthJersey.com, Algemeiner Journal, The Jewish Press, major Christian websites and more.

KICKING THE GENOCIDE CAN FURTHER DOWN THE ROAD

The ICJ saga of SA vs Israel – an update.

By Lawrence Nowosenetz

The International Court of Justice (ICJ) has recently kicked the genocide case brought by South Africa against Israel further down the road. It has authorised the filing of a second round of written submissions (court pleadings). The first round of pleadings consisted of a memorial and counter memorial. The court was requested by South Africa last month that a second round of pleadings was required because of the complexity of the case and the volume of Israel’s counter-memorial with numerous annexures. Israel also filed objections to the court’s jurisdiction and the admissibility of South Africa’s application.

Article 49 (3) of the rules of the ICJ provides:

“The Reply and Rejoinder, whenever authorized by the Court, shall not merely repeat the parties’ contentions, but shall be directed to bringing out the issues that still divide them.

In a ruling dated 29 May 2026, the ICJ has given South Africa until 22 November 2027, to file its reply and Israel has until 22 May 22, 2029, to submit a rejoinder.

Dr Gilad Noam, a member of Israel’s legal team said in a post on X dated 31 May 2026:

“… it demonstrates that South Africa’s allegations are wholly unfounded and that this is a case that should never have been brought in the first place. This case constitutes a manifest misuse of the Genocide Convention and of the Court itself. Regardless of how long it may take, the only tenable outcome remains the dismissal of South Africa’s claims in their entirety.”

What is the significance of this extension of time limits and the filing of further documents and what does this mean for the future of the case?

Clearly Israel’s counter memorial, its statement of defence has seriously derailed the entire case of genocide brought by South Africa. This is not surprising. The memorial filed by South Africa was filled with tendentious and inaccurate material which cannot stand scrutiny.

**South Africa’s Basket Case**. Dr. Gilad Noam, Israel’s Deputy Attorney General at the ICJ Ruling in January 2024, recently posted on X that “*South Africa’s allegations are wholly unfounded and that this is a case that should never have been brought in the first place.”* (Photo: ICJ.)

Legal wisdom has it, that if you cannot make out a decent case in your founding papers, you will be most unlikely to fix it in reply. The odds are that the case against Israel was at its high point in December 2023 when it brought the application for provisional measures but since then it is on a downhill trajectory as it has to embark on damage control to try and rebut Israel’s counter memorial. No doubt it will seek to introduce new material based on events subsequent to filing its original memorial. This is a two-edged sword. Much of the hype and misinformation about starvation, bombardment, violence against civilians, children etc has now been extensively researched by Israel and it is in a far better position to critique the unreliable reports by UN agencies and humanitarian organisations based in Gaza, many based on Hamas and lacking verification and sound methodology. Israel will be afforded the opportunity to offer these critiques in its rejoinder as well as its own careful research. Some of the reports stripping away the genocide case against Israel have already been published, for example the report of 311 pages published in September 2025 by the Sadat Centre for Strategic Studies in association with Bar Ilan University (BESA) entitled:

“Debunking the Genocide Allegations: A Re-examination of the Israel-Hamas War from October 7, 2023 to June 1, 2025”.

Let’s rewind.

On 29 December 2023, South Africa filed an application in the ICJ claiming that Israel was in breach of the Genocide Convention seeking preliminary urgent measures from the court to prevent genocide. This was less than three months after the invasion and atrocities by Hamas in Israel on 7 October 2023. Yet South Africa was able to assemble a fully researched account of Israel’s previous conduct in Gaza in earlier wars and an up-to-date record of the new war.

This application follows a similar approach to the 2019 Rohingya genocide case brought in the ICJ by the Gambia on behalf of the Organisation for Islamic co-operation against Myanmar. On 23 January 2020, the ICJ issued an order for provisional measures ordering Myanmar to prevent genocidal acts against the Rohingya Muslims. Since then, two rounds of memorials were also filed and the case was heard in January 2026. Judgment is expected in about six months. A relatively smooth passage yet at least seven years will have passed before a final outcome.

In the Gaza case, the court issued a provisional ruling on 26 January 2024 which has been widely misunderstood and often wilfully misrepresented. South Africa hailed it as a success and a vindication of its genocide claims. The ruling went down 5 to 2, with judges Julia Sebutinde (Uganda) and Aharon Barak (Israel) dissenting. Former president of the ICJ, Joan Donoghue, clarified that the court decided the Palestinians had a “plausible right” to be protected from genocide and that South Africa had the right to present that claim in the court. She emphasised that, contrary to some reporting, the court did not make a ruling on whether the claim of genocide was plausible, but found that there was a risk of irreparable harm (my emphasis). A far cry from establishing actual genocide in any shape or form.

**Playing with Plausibility**. The words of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) have been subject to intense scrutiny since South Africa brought its case and has centred around the use of the word “plausible” in the ruling. Then-president of the International Court of Justice Joan Donoghue said the ruling had been misinterpreted.

For those unfamiliar with legal procedures, in proceedings for interim or provisional measures, the threshold of proof is not as high and easier to establish than in a final adjudication. A mere likelihood or plausible risk of harm suffices. In South Africa, this is called a prima facie case. However, in a final hearing, proof of genocide is far more onerous. Proof of genocidal intention is called dolus specialis (special intent) which amounts to evidence which allows no other conclusion. The normal standard of proof of criminal intent is beyond a reasonable doubt. Dolus specialis does not even allow any reasonable doubt. Genocide is the ultimate crime against humanity and this term has been carelessly and promiscuously bandied about in condemnation of Israel by many countries, activists and human rights groups alike without any respect for its true international legal meaning.

The case has progressed as follows:

On 28 March 2024, following a second request for additional measures, the ICJ issued an order for further emergency measures, that Israel must ensure basic food supplies, in order to allay famine and starvation allegedly facing Gaza.
On 24 May 2024 a further order was issued requiring Israel to cease operations in Rafah. The court was divided. The Israeli, German, Ugandan and Romanian judges interpreted the ruling as not requiring a ceasefire in Rafah, and allowing for defensive operations against Hamas including the rescue of hostages. Israel continued its operations as it interpreted the order likewise.
In April 2024, the ICJ requested filing of pleadings in the main case i.e. determination of violation of the Genocide Convention. South Africa submitted its memorial in October 2024, and after being granted an extension of time limits, Israel submitted its counter memorial in March 2026.

There is more.

Between May 2024 and December 2025 several countries joined South Africa against Israel including European countries Ireland and Belgium. Somewhat less countries have stated their support for Israel including the UK and the USA. Canada and Australia remained neutral. It bears mentioning that Ireland intends arguing for an expansion of the concept of ‘genocidal intent’ to include blocking by Israel the supply of food to Gaza. Someone seems to have missed the point that food could also enter Gaza through Egypt. No one is pointing fingers at Egypt.

The Presidency of South Africa issued a statement on 2 June 2026. It noted that a second round of pleadings is common in ICJ cases. It is indeed correct that in the Rohingya genocide case there was indeed a second round where the parties were afforded time limits of 6 months, but what the Presidency fails to explain is why South Africa requested 18 months to file its reply. According to the Presidency –“South Africa’s response is a simple one: self-defence is not a defence to genocide, there is none.”

In South African parlance this called a blaps or howler. Faux pax if you like. Why did the South African legal team plead complexity to the court in asking for a second round of pleadings and extended time limits if Mr Ramaphosa says South Africa’s case is simple.

The Presidency got it breathtakingly wrong. Israel’s case is not simply self defence. It is based on a firm foundation of lawful military action in compliance with humanitarian law and the law of war (jus in bellum) as well as absence of genocidal intent. Astute observers are asking whether South Africa’s case will hold up at all.

**Clear Distinction**. Following the misuse of the term for political propaganda against Israel, former president of the ICJ, Joan Donoghue, clarified in a BBC interview that the ICJ did **not** rule that the core claim of genocide was plausible but that the Palestinians in Gaza have “plausible rights to protection from genocide”. (Photo: Biography file, ICJ)

It is unlikely that the ICJ will hear the case any time soon, perhaps an outcome can be expected after 2030 if at all. By then a new government will have been elected in South Africa which might adopt a different foreign policy which is not aligned with the adversaries of Israel. Even if the case is unwisely pursued by South Africa, it will yield insuperable factual and legal hurdles which will ultimately be its nemesis.

About the writer:

Born in Pretoria Lawrence Nowosenetz obtained his BA at University of the Witwatersrand and LLB at the University of South Africa. He has been admitted as an Attorney in South Africa and as an advocate in South Africa. He practiced at the Pretoria and Johannesburg Bar and worked as a human rights and labour lawyer at the Legal Resources Centre a public interest law firm. Lawrence was Awarded a Fulbright Scholarship and completed professional internship in the USA. He was a a labour arbitrator and mediator, part time Senior Commissioner at the Commission for Conciliation Mediation and Arbitration (CCMA) as well as a panelist at Tokiso Dispute Settlement. He was a member of the South African Jewish Board of Deputies and Pretoria Chairman. He has also served as an Acting Judge of the High Court, South Africa. He now lives in Tel Aviv.

ONE OF THE SMALLEST COUNTRIES IN THE WORLD, ISRAEL CONSUMES THE BIGGEST CHUNK OF ARAB DAILY NEWS COVERAGE

Media Watch: Arab world is watching Israel like never before says Arab journalist.

Explaining this phenomenon is veteran Arab journalist and author Nazir Majli, widely known for his extensive career as a political correspondent covering Israel and the Middle East for the London-based daily Asharq Al-Awsat. He has served as the publication’s Israel bureau chief, offering analysis and breaking news across both Arabic and international media. Reported in Ynet, Majli questions how Irael seems impervious to the negative impact many of its actions are having on Arabs in the region who were growing to the idea – once an anathema – of closer ties with Israel following the Abraham Accords. He characterizes Israel by its conduct as “a subcontractor for Hamas,” for the self-inflicted harm damage it is causing.
Let Majli explain – it is well worth a read.

David E. Kaplan
Editor, Lay of the Land

ARAB WORLD WATCHING ISRAELI MEDIA LIKE NEVER BEFORE, BUT ISRAEL IS FAILING TO UNDERSTAND WHY

By Nazir Majli

No country draws the attention of the Arab world more than Israel. Perhaps it began as “know your enemy,” but it did not remain only that. Many Arabs wanted knowledge and answers. For years, they learned about Israel mainly from hostile Arab sources, mobilized media, propaganda and incitement. Many believed that distorted picture until they encountered another truth.

Israel’s achievements in science, technology, security, high-tech and the economy raised more questions and increased the demand for reliable information.

When that demand became real hunger, Arab media faced a major challenge. Major newspapers such as Asharq Al-Awsat and Al-Hayat began employing Arab citizens of Israel as correspondents in the early 1990s. Al Jazeera later joined, followed by Al Arabiya. Today, there is no influential Arab channel or newspaper without a correspondent in Israel. Even Hezbollah-linked Al Mayadeen has commissioned reports from Arab Israeli journalists.

Since Oct. 7, 2023, the Israeli voice has reached the Arab nation live and from the source. Netanyahu’s speeches and those of his ministers have been broadcast live with simultaneous Arabic translation and later quoted in news bulletins. Studio discussions were repeatedly interrupted for statements by Israeli leaders.

Even as Israeli planes bombed universities, schools, mosques and churches, even as thousands of women and children were killed and homes were destroyed in Gaza and in West Bank refugee camps, the voice and image of IDF spokesman Rear Adm. Daniel Hagari appeared on screens in Palestinian and Arab homes. Every appearance was broadcast and translated reliably for Arab audiences.

Rear Adm. Daniel Hagari, who before October 7, 2023 was an unfamiliar face in Saudi Arabia is seen here interviewed in June, 2024 by Al Arabiya. Al Arabiya, Saudi Arabia’s alternative to Al Jazeera and has no problem giving repeated airtime to Israel’s army spokesman.(Credit: Still from Al Arabiya IDF Spokesman)

At the same time, while Israel practiced military and self-censorship over IDF operations in Gaza and later Lebanon, and while broadcasters, reporters and commentators in Israeli studios often concealed the harsh consequences, Arab media made sure to carry the other voice — the Israeli one.

It was openness against opacity. Veteran Arab journalists remembered the 1960s, when Israel projected great self-confidence and often told the truth, while Arab media concealed it.

After 50 years of deeper and more authentic Arab familiarity with Israel, there is no longer one united Arab hostility toward Israel. There is an internal Arab conflict over Israel. The Abraham Accords were one of the clearest expressions of that change.

Hamas, inspired by Iran, attacked Israel in an effort to destroy that process. Israel’s harsh, unconventional and destructive response turned it, in effect, into a subcontractor for Hamas, helping it advance that goal and damaging the new Arab current that wanted normalization with Israel.

What had been seen as Israeli wisdom suffered a severe blow after Oct. 7.

The questions I now hear from Arab colleagues, influencers and policy figures have become much harder. Covering Israel for the Arab world has become more difficult. Israeli policy is seen as a gamble with everything on the table. Even those who hate Hamas, Iran and Hezbollah cannot digest Israel’s conduct throughout the war. Many believe this policy is helping the extremist axis.

Top Israeli journalists from Channel 2 are seen here on 3 June, 2026 on Iran’s PRESS TV.

Even friends of President Donald Trump, who strongly supports the Israeli government, do not understand how Netanyahu has placed everything in his hands.

They ask me:

“Don’t you think about the day after? Is there no responsible body analyzing reality, examining scenarios and drawing professional conclusions about the future? How is policy made in Israel? What are the considerations? How do Israelis understand the value of good neighbors? Even if there are military achievements, why not use them for a diplomatic horizon? The first rule of wars is to end them with political achievements. Is Israel waiting for Trump to do that work, too?”

A wealthy, educated woman from Gaza, now a refugee in Egypt and known for opposing Hamas, asked me in despair: “Don’t Israelis have children? Don’t they think about their future? Do you know that my grandson talks about revenge?”

A Syrian intellectual living in Canada, who celebrated the fall of the Assad family’s regime, canceled his plan to return to Syria with his family because of the uncertainty there.

Yonit Levi from Israel’s Channel 12 appears on UAE news channel. For decades, the appearance of Israeli speakers in Arab media was the stuff of science fiction. To the Arab mainstream press, Israel was a monolithic, distant entity, “the Zionist enemy”, whose voice was permitted only through the rigid filters of local propaganda and censorship. However, the last three decades have triggered a dramatic revolution, transforming Israelis from unseen adversaries into regular, and often fiery, participants in Arab public discourse.

“What do the Israelis want from Syria already?” he asked. “A country without an army, extending a hand for peace and ready to cooperate against terrorism — why is it met with such hostility from Israel?”

A senior Egyptian diplomat I met in Tel Aviv told me: “You know how much I hate Iran. But Israel has been exposed. For me, it is the second Iran in the region. What it did in Gaza conveys weakness more than strength. The arrogance of its leaders and the talk of turning Israel into the most powerful force in the region and the world express a sick internal weakness.”

Former Israeli army spokesman Daniel Hagari and Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar on Al Arabiya

A senior official in Abu Dhabi, once an enthusiastic supporter of the Abraham Accords, spoke of deep shock.

“What Hamas did was not only carry out a cursed, murderous attack,” he said. “It also pulled Israelis out of judgment and strategic thinking, dragging them into sacrificing future generations to a dark future.”

He recalled Netanyahu’s 2015 comment at the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee, when he was asked whether Israel would forever live by the sword and answered, “Yes.”

“Do Israelis understand what that means?” the Abu Dhabi official asked. “What leader promises his people wars for life?”

With pictures like this of Gaza-based Palestinian photographer Mahmud Hams documenting buildings destroyed in Israeli bombardment at the Bureij refugee camp in the central Gaza Strip on November 2, 2023, the writer questions if Israel realizes that such exposure in effect turns the Jewish state into “*a subcontractor for Hamas*,” damaging the “new Arab current that wanted normalization with Israel.” (Photo: AFP)

The Arab world is watching Israel more closely than ever. But attention is not support. Israel’s words are translated, its leaders are heard and its military briefings are broadcast. Yet everything Israel says is now weighed against what Arab audiences see.

The question is whether Israel understands what it is showing them.”

A FAILURE OF FOCUS

The ‘Palestine-Israel question’ has overshadowed the atrocities taking place across Africa.

By Kenneth Kgwadi

Most African countries reclaimed their political independence in the late 1950s, with Ghana becoming the first sub-Saharan African country to attain independence, paving the way for several others to follow suit. This ushered in not only joy and euphoria, but also the hope that black self-rule would prioritise the interests of their respective countries, their people, and the broader African continent. However, too many countries have fallen short of this aspiration.

It still does not make sense that the profound and visible atrocities taking place across Africa do not receive the same level of global attention afforded to the Palestinian cause. The suffering on the continent stretches back centuries, from the era of slavery to the present day. Many African countries continue to endure repression at the hands of those who were once regarded as liberators during the struggle for independence.

**Pan-African Optimism**. Ghana’s independence in 1957 proved a pivotal event signaling the shift away from colonialism on the African continent. Two years after Nkrumah in 1964 pushed a constitutional amendment that makinge Ghana a one-party state and himself the life president, he was overthrown in a military coup.

Thousands of Africans continue to lose their lives to radical Islamist extremism, poverty, crime, poorly managed health outbreaks, civil wars, and state persecution. Yet, despite the scale and persistence of these challenges, such injustices often fail to attract adequate international attention and sustained global concern.

A silent war is taking place on our doorstep in the province of Cabo Delgado, where people from all 17 districts have been displaced out of fear for their lives following the brutal killings perpetrated by Islamic State Mozambique. The group has been terrorising the country since 2017, leaving thousands dead and many more displaced.

**Horrendous Hypocrisy**. While South Africa feigns concern for the Palestinians in Gaza, it ignores virtually on its doorstep where Islamic State Mozambique (ISM) is responsible for a significant portion of the over 6,500 total fatalities recorded since the Cabo Delgado insurgency began in 2017. Monitoring groups estimate that the group has killed thousands — including at least 2,800 civilians — while displacing over 400,000 people across the region.

Yet the South African public remains largely detached from what is unfolding in Mozambique. At the same time, many complain about the growing influx of Mozambicans into South Africa, despite the fact that many of these migrants are fleeing violence and insecurity while seeking safety and economic opportunities to sustain themselves and their families. The humanitarian crisis in Cabo Delgado serves as a reminder that migration is often a consequence of conflict, instability, and the failure to address the root causes of human suffering in the region.

There is a compelling need to invest in political, strategic, and military interventions to address the crisis in Mozambique, as it directly affects South Africa in several ways. Mozambique is one of Africa’s countries with significant economic potential, yet it remains unable to fully realise that potential because of the ongoing conflict. With its relatively advanced defense capabilities and larger economy, South Africa is well positioned to play a meaningful role in helping to resolve the current tragedy in Mozambique. Such efforts would contribute to creating a more stable and conducive environment for economic development, which could in turn reduce migration pressures between the two countries. A prosperous Mozambique would also become a stronger economic partner, helping to stimulate regional growth and create much-needed employment opportunities.

**Playing Politics**. Mounting pressures and tensions closer to home, South Africa’s ANC leadership prefers to focus on falsely accusing Israel at international courts.

It remains concerning that South Africa often expends substantial political capital on issues and conflicts taking place thousands of kilometres away, while opportunities exist to use that same influence to improve the socio-political and security conditions of people on the African continent. Greater investment should be directed towards helping to rebuild, industrialise, and develop African countries in order to create a more prosperous and stable continent. Such an approach would contribute more directly to the advancement of African societies than engaging in avoidable diplomatic confrontations with Western nations, which offer limited tangible benefits to the socio-economic development of the continent.

About the writer:

Kenneth Kgwadi is a political scientist, columnist and research fellow at the Middle East Africa Research Institute (MEARI).

Category: International Relations

THE ODYSSEY OF THE OCHBERG ORPHANS

Like this:

SOUTH AFRICA CLAIMS ISRAEL IS BEHIND ITS ‘AFROPHOBIA’ VIOLENCE

Like this:

TRUMP, NETANYAHU, IRAN AND THE NOBEL PEACE PRIZE

Like this:

FROM AN AILING KING SAUL TO A FAILING “KING BIBI” – TIME FOR CHANGE

Like this:

‘ALL THE WORLD’S A STAGE’

Like this:

FROM URGENCY TO DELAY: WHAT HAPPENED TO SOUTH AFRICA’S ICJ CASE?

Like this:

TIME TO SHOOT, NOT TALK

Like this:

KICKING THE GENOCIDE CAN FURTHER DOWN THE ROAD

Like this:

ONE OF THE SMALLEST COUNTRIES IN THE WORLD, ISRAEL CONSUMES THE BIGGEST CHUNK OF ARAB DAILY NEWS COVERAGE

Like this:

A FAILURE OF FOCUS

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this: