Israeli expulsion could have dire implications, says GNU parties

The fallout from South Africa’s decision to expel Israel’s chargé d’affaires continues to intensify, drawing sharp criticism from multiple opposition parties and raising concerns about economic and diplomatic repercussions. 

It has also prompted warnings about the impact on South Africans requiring consular support in Israel. 

The government’s decision triggered a reciprocal expulsion by Israel of South Africa’s chargé d’affaires in Ramallah, Shaun Byneveldt. 

Democratic Alliance (DA) federal leader John Steenhuisen has called for an urgent Government of National Unity (GNU) lekgotla to reassess South Africa’s foreign policy direction, saying the African National Congress (ANC) can’t be allowed to continue using international relations as a tool for political posturing. 

Department of International Relations and Cooperation (Dirco) spokesperson Chrispin Phiri said the decision followed what his department described as repeated violations of diplomatic protocol, including the use of official Israeli social media platforms to post remarks viewed as insulting towards President Cyril Ramaphosa, as well as a failure to notify the department of visits by senior Israeli officials. 

“No self-respecting, serious state would tolerate what the Israeli embassy had conducted, and we cannot tolerate at any point our president being insulted,” he said. 

One of the social media posts that could have been construed as potentially insulting when it was published on the official Embassy of Israel South Africa X account was put out on 13 November 2025. In response to a BBC World News post quoting Ramaphosa as saying that “boycott politics doesn’t work”, the embassy wrote, “A rare moment of wisdom and diplomatic clarity from President Ramaphosa. We totally agree.” 

Phiri further alleged that senior Israeli officials had entered South Africa without informing Dirco in advance, as required by the Foreign Services Act. 

“The Foreign Services Act of South Africa is clear,” he said. “Any embassy in South Africa that engages or requires an official visit of a senior official of their capital would be required to inform Dirco so that we can implement what we call a bilateral arrangement,” he told Radio 702 on Monday, 2 February. 

Phiri said Dirco was assessing the impact of the decision on South Africa’s diplomatic presence, including its services in Ramallah, and was considering its options for facilitating a new ambassador to “Palestine”. 

“If Israel was interested in correcting the conduct of Mr Seidman, it would also be facilitating a new chargé d’affaires to South Africa,” he said in a radio interview. 

Beyond the diplomatic standoff, there are serious concerns about the implications for South African citizens living in or travelling to Israel. The South African Jewish Board of Deputies (SAJBD) warned that consular access for South Africans in Israel had already been compromised over the past two years and could deteriorate further. 

SAJBD National Chairperson Wendy Kahn said the organisation had been assisting South Africans to access consular services, often stepping in where state support was lacking. 

She said the situation became pronounced during the Iranian missile strikes on Israel in July last year, when South African citizens in the country were left without government assistance. “South African citizens were completely abandoned by our government,” Kahn said, pointing out that the SAJBD coordinated relief flights to help South Africans return home. 

She warned that this new situation could exacerbate the problem further, and promised that the SAJBD would raise these concerns with the government while assisting community members facing consular challenges. 

“We continue to hold the view that the government, and Dirco’s obsession with isolating and punishing Israel, is out of touch with ordinary South Africans,” she said. “We call on the GNU and Israeli government to sit down and sort out this issue for the good of South Africa and South African Jewry.” 

The DA, the largest opposition party in the GNU, warned the government that it risked severe economic and diplomatic consequences. 

Member of Parliament Ryan Smith, DA spokesperson on International Relations and Cooperation, described the expulsion as a reckless escalation that undermined South Africa’s national interests. 

“Declaring a foreign diplomat persona non grata is among the most serious tools in a state’s diplomatic repertoire,” Smith said. “It’s typically reserved for espionage, security threats, or grave breaches of international law, not political disagreements conducted in the public sphere.” 

Smith criticised Dirco for failing to issue a formal démarche to the Israeli embassy, which he said would have been standard diplomatic protocol. 

He said the decision risked retaliatory measures, strained commercial ties, and reduced investor confidence at a time of low growth and high unemployment. 

The African Christian Democratic Party (ACDP) also condemned the expulsion, describing it as hypocritical and harmful, particularly to flood-affected communities in the Eastern Cape. 

“Is providing humanitarian aid to suffering South Africans the insult levelled against Mr Ramaphosa, or did Dirco respond because the president and the ANC have been exposed for failing to provide service delivery?” asked ACDP Deputy President Wayne Thring. 

“This response by the ANC will also further aggravate our relations with the United States and its trade partners, which we can ill-afford at this time,” Thring said. 

Freedom Front Plus leader Dr Corné Mulder said his party was stunned by the expulsion, and also warned that it could further strain relations with the US, Israel’s key ally, at a time when decisions about AGOA (African Growth and Opportunity Act) trade benefits remain unresolved. 

In contrast, Economic Freedom Fighters leader Julius Malema welcomed the decision, saying it reflected the kind of action his party supported.