SA’s new anti-Israel bloc – an ‘insignificant’ grouping

Even after Israel committed to a ceasefire with Hamas, South Africa continues its single-minded pursuit of the Jewish state. In its latest move, South Africa joined eight countries in forming a global bloc, The Hague Group, for the sole purpose of attacking and isolating Israel.

The group said it would co-ordinate “legal, economic, and diplomatic measures to hold Israel accountable”. Ignoring human rights abuses and wars in their own backyards, representatives of the governments of Belize, Bolivia, Colombia, Cuba, Honduras, Malaysia, Namibia, Senegal, and South Africa flew to The Hague for some pomp and ceremony as they launched the group on 31 January. Hamas expressed its approval.

At The Hague, Alvin Botes, South Africa’s deputy minister of the Department of International Relations and Cooperation (DIRCO), said that Israel was “an apartheid state” and that “Israel continues to sow destruction as it seeks to further depopulate Palestinian territories”. He also said Israel’s presence “in Palestine” was “unlawful”.

“This is just another act of grandstanding by our government in a desperate attempt to get global credibility,” said South African Jewish Board of Deputies National Director Wendy Kahn. “South Africa’s ongoing effort to demonise Israel has made no contribution to ending the horrific conflict over the past 16 months. It’s only the commitment of the United States [US], Egypt, and Qatar that have brought about the ceasefire, including the pivotal return of hostages.”

Representing South Africa at the launch were Botes and DIRCO director-general Zane Dangor, who read out the inaugural joint statement. It said the group was “guided by the charter of the United Nations [UN], and the responsibility of all nations to uphold the inalienable rights, including the right to self-determination, that it enshrines for all peoples”.

It was clear that, according to the group, this right to self-determination was “enshrined for all peoples” except Jews. Dangor went on to say that The Hague Group was “determined to end the Israeli occupation of the state of Palestine”.

The group committed to upholding the International Criminal Court (ICC) arrest warrants issued against Israeli leaders; prevent the provision or transfer of arms, munitions, and equipment to Israel; and prevent the docking of vessels at their ports where there is a “risk of the vessel being used to carry military fuel and weaponry to Israel”.

In his speech, Botes stated that the group “marks a major step by states from the Global South to work collectively towards justice for the people of Palestine”. He said The Hague Group had agreed on a “programme of action to defend the institutions of global governance, including the ICC and the International Court of Justice from egregious attacks, due to these institutions having dared to hold Israel accountable”.

“South Africa will continue to do everything within its power to preserve the existence of the Palestinian people as a group … and realise their collective right to self-determination,” Botes said.

Minister of International Relations and Cooperation Ronald Lamola didn’t attend the launch, but commented that “The Hague Group’s formation sends a clear message: no nation is above the law, and no crime will go unanswered.”

However, Dr Ehud Eiran, associate professor at the School of Political Science at the University of Haifa, said the launch of The Hague Group had received little attention in Israel.

“Power plays are viewed as more consequential than a mechanism involving nine states,” Eiran said. “For example, the ceasefires achieved with Hezbollah and Hamas are perceived as the result of Israel’s military effectiveness, combined with US pressure.”

Local political analyst Daniel Silke agrees. “I don’t see this group of countries as that significant. I don’t think it’s going to carry much weight, and pressure from big players is going to be a lot more important. I think this is an attempt to ‘keep the flag flying’ as we move into the second phase of the ceasefire agreement.”

Silke finds it interesting that this group has separated itself from the BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa)-plus group. “It’s almost as though BRICS-plus or Global South groupings were unable to reach consensus on this issue.” Yet it provides South Africa with a “foreign policy leg to stand on, it gives ‘global fuel’ and elevates South Africa’s status”.

South African Zionist Federation spokesperson Rolene Marks said, “This is just the latest episode in the weaponisation of international law for conducting a global vendetta against Israel. It’s not the pursuit of international law we’re seeing, but rather ‘international lynch law’, a truly shameful perversion.

“That the group statement includes no mention of Hamas or terrorism, while the only reference to civilians pertains to Palestinian civilians, tells its own story,” she said. “Little wonder that Hamas enthusiastically welcomed the initiative.”

Foreign policy analyst Professor Glen Segell said, “instead of constructive engagement to assist all parties, the tone of this group is stirring up hate”. For example, its media statement “broadcasts inaccuracies, apportions blame at the wrong door, and fails to note efforts of Middle Eastern states and the US to find a solution for Gaza”.

Conflict resolution expert Professor Hussein Solomon said, “These countries aren’t heavy hitters. I don’t think they’re going to have any impact. I think South Africa must be extremely careful, because the US has issues with South Africa, including our Middle East stance. In addition, we have our own troops dying in the Democratic Republic of the Congo etcetera, but we seem more interested in a conflict 9 000km away.”

Like Silke, he finds it strange that this group wasn’t created as part of BRICS. “I don’t understand why there’s a need for this group, and I’m convinced it will have no impact whatsoever,” he said.

Marks notes that “far from being motivated by any genuine desire to resolve the conflict, what really unites these countries is a shared antipathy towards the West. Israel provides a convenient target, but this misuse of international bodies ultimately puts at risk all states compelled to defend themselves against terrorism.”

This group represents “yet another departure from the values upon which our country is founded,” Marks said. “It’s nevertheless noteworthy that no Arab-speaking states have joined the group.”