SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
south africa
As Trump Returns, Lessons From the Anti-Apartheid Movement Under Reagan
For those of us engaged in solidarity with Palestinian struggles for liberation and return, or in any movement for peace and justice, we should take note that an all-powerful conservative president is not all that powerful after all.
Dec 01, 2024
The Biden administration’s insistence to continue arming Israel despite it carrying out what a growing consensus of scholars and human rights organizations are calling a genocide in Gaza has been one of the greatest moral failures in modern American history. While the Biden administration’s approach to the situation has been disastrous, there are legitimate fears that Donald Trump’s second term in office may prove even worse for Palestinian survival, much less liberation.
In the wake of these traumatizing times, it is worth looking back at the South African anti-apartheid movement during a similar moment in American history for some hope and guidance.
Ronald Reagan was elected to a second presidential term in 1984 by a landslide. With a platform focused on economic austerity, hawkish cold war politics, and repressive domestic policies important to the religious right, Reagan won every state but Minnesota and nearly 60% of the popular vote. Reagan’s position on South African apartheid was steeped in racism and an approach called “constructive engagement,” by which the American government worked with instead of against the apartheid regime to slowly reform its policies. As the president’s Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs throughout his two terms in office, Chester Crocker, put it, “all Reagan knows about Southern Africa is that he is on the side of the whites.” Nobel Laureate Desmond Tutu, who more often focused on the positive qualities of even his bitterest enemies, was blunter: “[Ronald Reagan] is a racist, pure and simple.”
And yet it was during Reagan’s second term in office that the anti-apartheid movement in America made its most significant gains. For more than three decades, a loose, multi-racial coalition of faith-based, labor, student, and peace organizations worked in solidarity with their South African brethren to try to help end the country’s legally sanctioned system of white supremacy. After the African National Congress in 1958 called upon the world to put economic pressure on the apartheid regime, many in this American coalition used boycotts, shareholder resolutions, direct action, divestment, and advocacy for sanctions to force US corporations to leave South Africa. By the early 1980s, the movement had successfully pushed a few religious institutions, labor unions, universities, and local and state governments to divest from some companies operating in South Africa. Kodak stopped doing business with the South African government after a years-long boycott campaign. And the United Nations had issued an arms embargo. But the United States was finding all sorts of ways around the arms embargo, and most major institutions in America were still thoroughly invested in banks and other companies that were directly or indirectly supporting the apartheid regime.
Despite Reagan’s renewed presidency, the anti-apartheid movement set its eyes during his second term on more divestment and the biggest prize of all: U.S. sanctions on South Africa. Congress passed a sanctions bill in 1985, but Reagan vetoed it. Feeling the pressure from the movement and from many in the Democratic-controlled Congress to do something, Reagan responded by issuing a set of limited sanctions by executive order. But as Tutu described them, they were “not even a flea bite” on the monstrous apartheid regime. The anti-apartheid movement pressed on, as clergy, labor leaders, students, and other activists engaged with each member of Congress, urging them to pass a more comprehensive sanctions bill. Meanwhile, thanks to equally dogged campaigns, many of the biggest institutional investors were beginning to divest. The Episcopal Church, the United Church of Christ, the United Methodist Church, the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), Harvard University, Columbia University, TIAA-CREF, and the New York City Pension fund, among other institutions, all divested, in 1985, from at least some companies involved in South Africa. Responding to the threat of divestment, fifty multinational corporations ended their business activity in South Africa that year, including PepsiCo, General Electric, American Express, Motorola, and Boeing. When Chase Manhattan Bank, long a target of the anti-apartheid campaign, suddenly froze the apartheid regime’s line of credit and demanded it repay its outstanding loans, the South African economy began to collapse.
By September 1985, the South African government announced that it was freezing its repayment of foreign debt until the following year as a means of slowing down foreign withdrawal from the country.
Momentum was building in 1986, ahead of midterm Congressional elections, for a more comprehensive sanctions bill. Congress, again, passed sweeping sanctions against South Africa, and Reagan, again, vetoed the bill. But this time, with deeper relationships between activists and Congresspeople, and elections looming in a matter of weeks, a bipartisan Senate and House garnered the necessary supermajority to override the president’s veto. The sanctions bill, while still a compromised version of what many opponents of apartheid were calling for, significantly curtailed US trade with South Africa. Other industrialized nations had their own sanctions in place. Beset by this foreign economic pressure and increasing agitation from Black South African freedom fighters within and just outside its borders, the apartheid government could see the writing on the wall.
A little over a year after Reagan left office, amidst the one and only term of his former vice president, George H.W. Bush, South African President F.W. de Klerk announced that all political prisoners, including Nelson Mandela, would be released, anti-apartheid political parties would be unbanned, and free democratic elections would soon take place.
Somehow, an international coalition of activists, working in solidarity with the African National Congress, managed to help end apartheid, despite the best efforts of one of its most powerful foreign enablers to stop them.
For those of us engaged in solidarity with Palestinian struggles for liberation and return, or in any movement for peace and justice, we should take note that an all-powerful conservative president is not all that powerful after all. We must press on, waging struggles with the power that we have, as workers, consumers, members of institutions with sizable investments, and as voting citizens, who can remove a person from office as quickly as we can put them in if they do not earn our votes.
Indeed, drawing explicitly upon the South African example, Palestinian civil society is still calling upon us to use this power to employ boycotts, divestment, and sanctions until Palestinians have a full slate of human rights. In the shadow of tens of thousands of dead Palestinians and millions struggling to live on, the urgency to force the American and Israeli governments, and the businesses that support them, to end this bloodshed couldn’t be greater. And while the context is different, and the struggle may be more difficult, one of the lessons that the South African anti-apartheid movement gives us is that we can do this, regardless of who might be in the White House.
Keep ReadingShow Less
South Africa Files 750 Pages of 'Overwhelming' Evidence in ICJ Genocide Case Against Israel
"The glaring genocide in Gaza is there for all who are not blinded by prejudice to see."
Oct 28, 2024
South Africa filed 750 pages of "overwhelming" proof that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza to the International Court of Justice in The Hague, Netherlands on Monday, the deadline for submitting final evidence in the ongoing trial.
South African Ambassador to the Netherlands Vusi Madonsela delivered the legal document—known as a memorial—to the ICJ headquarters in the Dutch city. Under the court's rules, the contents of the memorial cannot be made public at this time.
According to a statement from the office of South African President Cyril Ramaphosa, the memorial is a "comprehensive presentation of the overwhelming evidence of genocide in Gaza."
The office said the document "contains evidence which shows how the government of Israel has violated the Genocide Convention by promoting the destruction of Palestinians living in Gaza, physically killing them with an assortment of destructive weapons, depriving them access to humanitarian assistance, causing conditions of life which are aimed at their physical destruction, and ignoring and defying several provisional measures of the International Court of Justice, and using starvation as a weapon of war and to further Israel's aims to depopulate Gaza through mass death and forced displacement of Palestinians."
"The evidence will show that undergirding Israel's genocidal acts is the special intent to commit genocide, a failure by Israel to prevent incitement to genocide, to prevent genocide itself, and its failure to punish those inciting and committing acts of genocide," Ramaphosa's office added.
South Africa's filing comes amid Israel's ongoing 387-day assault on Gaza, which according to Palestinian and international agencies has killed at least 43,020 people—most of them women and children. At least 101,110 others have been wounded and over 10,000 Gazans are missing and believed dead and buried beneath the rubble of hundreds of thousands of bombed homes and other structures. Millions more Palestinians have been forcibly displaced, starved, or sickened by Israel's invasion and "complete siege" of Gaza.
The filing also comes one week after senior members of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's far-right Cabinet and national lawmakers spoke at a conference advocating the ethnic cleansing and recolonization of Gaza.
Ramaphosa's office lamented that "Israel has been granted unprecedented impunity to breach international law and norms for as long as the United Nations Charter has been in existence."
"Israel's continued shredding of international law has imperiled the institutions of global governance that were established to hold all states accountable," the presidency's statement asserted. "The glaring genocide in Gaza is there for all who are not blinded by prejudice to see."
Ramaphosa's statement continues:
The Palestinian struggle against imperialism, Israeli apartheid, and settler colonialism is the daily reality of the Palestinian people. Since 1948, they have faced various forms of colonization, often backed by historical colonial powers and, more recently, by states intent on shaping a world order in their interests. The global fight against settler colonialism persists in some parts of the world, including in occupied Palestine, both in Gaza and the West Bank. The international community cannot stand idly by while innocent civilians—including women, children, hospital workers, humanitarian aid workers, and journalists—are killed for simply being. That is a world we cannot accept.
"We reiterate our appeal for an immediate cease-fire in Palestine, in Lebanon, and entire region, and the start of a political process to ensure a just and lasting peace," Ramaphosa's office added.
South Africa also thanked the more than 30 countries and regional blocs, including the African Union and Arab League, that are supporting its case.
It could take years for the ICJ to deliver judgment in the case. In July, the tribunal issued a nonbinding advisory opinion that Israel's occupation of Palestine—including the West Bank, Eastern Jerusalem, Gaza, and Syrian Golan Heights—is an illegal form of apartheid that must end "as rapidly as possible."
South Africa's filing came on the same day that Francesca Albanese, the U.N. special rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the occupied Palestinian territories, published a report on Israeli "genocide as colonial erasure" in Palestine.
Israel vehemently denies it is committing genocide in Gaza, a position shared by the Biden administration, the country's main benefactor.
Palestine advocates welcomed Monday's filing, with Council on American-Islamic Relations national executive director Nihad Awad thanking South African leaders "for helping expose the far-right Israeli government's genocide and genocidal intent in Gaza to the world community."
"This detailed submission also further exposes the Biden administration's criminal complicity with Israel's genocide in Gaza," Awad added. "President [Joe] Biden should end his complicity with genocide by stopping arms deliveries to Israel and forcing an immediate cease-fire."
The Biden administration and Congress have provided Israel with tens of billions of dollars worth of armed aid and diplomatic cover to continue its war.
Francis Boyle, a professor of international law at the University of Illinois College of Law, noted that "Israel has violated three prior orders from the court" and "has also violated the decision on Rafah of May."
"Just after that decision, Biden put out his ridiculous statement that Israel had agreed to a cease-fire, which it obviously didn't," he continued. "The Biden administration's phony 'cease-fire negotiations' maneuvers have simply bought Israel more time to commit more crimes, including its recent annihilation of northern Gaza."
"Given Israel's lack of respect for decisions of the court, it becomes imperative that these decisions have teeth," Boyle added. "The U.S. veto at the U.N. Security Council has prevented that body from doing its job. So, the U.N. General Assembly should utilize its Uniting for Peace procedure to take control of the situation and recommend an arms embargo and economic sanctions against Israel as well as other measures. That's what was done to apartheid South Africa because of its illegal occupation of Namibia."
Keep ReadingShow Less
UN Experts Warn Israel Risks 'Pariah' Status Over Gaza Genocide
One expert even asked if Israel's United Nations membership should be reconsidered given the country "seems to have zero respect" for the world body.
Sep 16, 2024
United Nations human rights experts warned Monday that Israel risks becoming an international "pariah" over its ongoing assault on Gaza—for which it is on trial for genocide at the world body's International Court of Justice.
The special rapporteurs—who are appointed by the U.N. but do not speak on its behalf—condemned Israel's human rights violations against Palestinians, as well as its blatant disregard for international law and multiple rulings from the ICJ.
These include an advisory opinion that the 57-year Israeli occupation of Palestine is an illegal form of apartheid that must immediately end, and orders for Israeli forces to avoid genocidal actions in Gaza and to immediately halt the Rafah offensive.
George Katrougalos, the U.N. special rapporteur on the promotion of democratic and equitable international order and a former Greek foreign minister, said during a press conference that the "first obligation" for harmonious relations between nations "is for everybody to respect the United Nations rules."
"This is not happening in the case of Israel," Katrougalos noted.
The United Nations agency for Palestinian relief says that around 200 of its staff members have been killed in more than 450 Israeli attacks on agency facilities since October. More than 500 Palestinians have been killed while seeking shelter under the U.N. flag.
Overall, more than 146,000 Palestinians have been killed or wounded by Israeli forces since October. Almost all of Gaza's 2.3 million people have been forcibly displaced, and Israel's "complete siege" has caused widespread starvation—sometimes deadly—and sickness throughout the coastal enclave.
Comparing the international community's reaction to Russia's ongoing invasion of Ukraine and Israel's war on Gaza, Katrougalos stressed that "we cannot anymore stand this kind of double standards and hypocrisy."
"I trust that the progressive and democratic citizens of Israel would not let their country become a pariah like South Africa [had] become during the times of apartheid," he added. South Africa is leading the genocide case against Israel at the ICJ.
Francesca Albanese, the U.N. special rapporteur on the rights situation in the occupied Palestinian territory, said that "I think it's unavoidable for Israel to become a pariah in the face of its continuous, relentless, vilifying assault of the United Nations, on top of millions of Palestinians."
"Shockingly, in the face of the abyss reached in the OPT... most member states remained inactive at best, or [are] actively aiding and assisting Israel's criminal conduct," she continued.
"Should there be a consideration of its membership as part of this organization, which Israel seems to have zero respect for?" Albanese added.
Pedro Arrojo-Agudo, the U.N. special rapporteur on the rights to safe drinking water and sanitation, warned that "we are blowing up the United Nations if we don't react" to Israel's human rights violations.
Arrojo-Agudo added that, as with starvation, Israel is using deprivation of water as a "weapon" and disavowed Israel's claim that Hamas—which led the October 7 attack on Israel—has "completely mismanaged water in Gaza."
The special rapporteurs' remarks came as representatives of U.N. member states gathered in New York for this year's annual General Assembly. General debate sessions are set for next week.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular