Don't call it apartheid 


By Tova Herzl 
July 17, 2008
Haaretz
Original Source: https://mail.hudsonny.org/exchweb/bin/redir.asp?URL=http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1002790.html \t _blank http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1002790.html

Every so often, when the comparison between Israel and the apartheid regime in South Africa is once again in the headlines, I am reminded of the racism conference in Durban in 2001. One incident at that conference, which became a milestone in the struggle to delegitimize Israel, remains engraved in my memory. 

In the last few weeks, during which Israel hosted a delegation of fair-minded people who were in the vanguard of the fight against apartheid, I was reminded of the sights and sounds of that incident: During a demonstration in the streets of Durban, protesters shouted Amandela intifada! Amandela is the Zulu word for power and was often used in demonstrations against the minority white regime. 

Since that conference, Israel's enemies have drawn a comparison between these two struggles, in order to argue that Israel - like apartheid - does not have the right to exist. Words and slogans have a power of their own. It is acknowledged that the phrasing of questions in public opinion polls influences the answer and can point the respondent in a certain direction. When one uses the word apartheid, which, in practice, means the superiority of one race and the inferiority of all others, it is clear that there can be no solution. The only place for regimes such as the apartheid regime in South Africa is the ash heap of history. If Israel's critics compare the Israeli regime to other phenomena, such as colonialism, the only reasonable conclusion is that the comparison is inaccurate at best or malevolent at worst - but they will also learn from history that there is a way out. When dealing with apartheid, there is no point in even trying. The die has been cast. 
	
There are several countries whose behavior is not approved of by someone or other. In some countries, Jews and Christians are not allowed to hold citizenship, and there are some regimes that prevent women from voting. Is this just? No. Is it apartheid? No. There are some situations where there is an insurmountable gulf between rich and poor, between the educated and the ignorant. If we were to exaggerate the case, there are some countries where it is perfectly acceptable for the state to favor those who support the regime, at the expense of its opponents. Is this hard to stomach? Yes. Is it apartheid? Obviously not. Even countries where there are bloody ethnic struggles are not compared to that most maligned of all regimes. Even if it were possible to find some similarities between a certain regime and the apartheid regime - and it is always possible to find at least one common element - the crux of the issue is different. Only when it comes to Israel and Israel's actions is this comparison used indiscriminately. 

Especially annoying is the way certain people view the roadblocks and the other symbols of Israeli rule, as if they were final proof of the similarity between Israel and South African apartheid. Did Israel erect these roadblocks for no good reason? Is this Israeli-Palestinian conflict devoid of context and history? Are the Palestinians the only ones who suffered? Are we the only ones who must shoulder the blame? Only a fool or an evil person fails to recognize the mistakes and the suffering on both sides. Those who insist on seeing the two situations as identical should be reminded that avoiding harming innocent white civilians was a cornerstone of the struggle for freedom among black South Africans. In addition, apart from some fringe elements, there was no ideology calling for whites to be driven into the sea or to be deported back to wherever they came from. 

When we host delegations from South Africa, or people who take an interest in what is going on here, one cannot help but feel sorrow at the suffering of the sick people waiting at the checkpoints and the cries of apartheid. Under these circumstances, there is no point in reminding people about the hundreds of thousands of black and colored children who died from malnutrition because the government decided they were not deserving of fresh water, electricity, roads, food or medicine. One can only compare the tools used by those opposing both regimes; one can compare their goals and then decide whether there is any justification to their behavior. 

Not everyone who uses the word apartheid to describe Israel believes that the Zionist enterprise should go the same way as the white minority regime in South Africa. Some want what is best for Israel, regret what Israel does and seek to warn us about the ramifications. But when they choose to use such a loaded expression, they provide additional ammunition to the worst of Israel's enemies. They do not provide them with guns and bullets, but with words to be used on the critical battlefield of international legitimacy. 

I grew up in South Arica and I returned there as Israeli ambassador. In my eyes, using the word apartheid to describe Israel also cheapens the memory of those who died at the hands of that evil regime. We must speak out about the use of such a sorry comparison. 

The writer was Israel's ambassador to South Africa.