JORDAN MOSHE
In her final address as president to the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) on 28 October in New York, she called Israel out for violations of human rights and acting in bad faith, failing to mention any violations on the part of any other party.
She also berated the UNSC’s five permanent members – China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom and the United States – for failing to champion the plight of Palestinians.
Political analyst Phumlani Majozi says Pandor’s statements highlight South Africa’s bias against Israel in the conflict. “What has always struck me is that in biased countries like South Africa, and many others that are anti-Israel, there exists a tendency to overlook Palestine’s failures on key fundamentals.”
South African Zionist Federation chairperson Rowan Polovin says the minister’s harangue against Israel was not aimed at bettering the lives of the Palestinians or promoting peace in the region. Instead, it was designed to single out, isolate and berate the Jewish state among the nations.
“South Africa places all blame, responsibility and burden on Israel for the failure to achieve peace with the Palestinians,” he says. “The minister’s speech negated all agency and moral duty on the part of the Palestinians, and abandoned history and context in order to promote a partisan position.”
In her address, Pandor claimed Israel was guilty of “violence directed at the people of Gaza and the West Bank through occupation and aggression”. She suggested that the UN’s moves towards securing peace have been undermined through “unilateral decisions aimed at predetermining the outcome of the negotiations”. She said: “That points to bad faith and can never secure peace.”
Pandor slammed the council for failing to act regarding Palestine, calling its failure to end the Israeli occupation “a profound stain” on the mission and objectives of the UN.
“The council has a duty to the people of Palestine clearly articulated in the founding charter,” she stated, “and it is vital for dedicated attention to be directed at finally achieving the outcomes stated in manifold United Nations resolutions.”
In lambasting the UNSC’s permanent members, she claimed that they had failed to implement their own resolutions. She was specifically speaking about resolution 2334 of 2016, which declared Israel’s settlement activity in the West Bank and East Jerusalem a “flagrant violation” of international law with “no legal validity”.
Pandor identified strongly with the Palestinian cause and pledged South Africa’s support for their struggle. “South Africa believes it is always possible to find solutions to seemingly intractable challenges. Our own struggles were advanced by United Nations action and determination to end a crime against humanity. We need similar vigorous international solidarity, indignation and commitment for Palestine.”
She continued: “We, as South Africa, are gravely concerned by the continued disregard for the long-standing Middle East peace process through the systematic foreclosing of the final status issues, particularly with regard to the borders, the return of refugees, the status of Jerusalem and the ever-expanding illegal settlements.”
She reiterated that South Africa supports a two-state solution and an agreed peace process aimed at ensuring two co-existing, viable states, saying this would benefit the entire region. Pandor recommended that the council insist on regular written reports on the implementation of its decision in the region, conduct field visits in the occupied territories, and take further action “against the continued violations of human rights”.
According to the Afro-Palestine Newswire Service, her statements were reportedly hailed by Hamas spokesperson Basem Naim. He said: “We agree fully with her diagnosis regarding the failure of the international community in general, and the Security Council in particular, to protect Palestinian rights and force Israel to respect and implement resolutions.”
Majozi, however, said: “[It is a] decades-long conflict that has become more and more complex over time. I have always argued that both sides have their faults on the matter. That needs to be said loudly.”
He believes if “biased countries like South Africa” didn’t overlook Palestinians’ failings too, they might “help speed up the negotiation process and eventually arrive at a peaceful resolution with Israel”.
Indeed, previous negotiations have failed even when Israel offered land for peace. This includes the offer in 2000 to withdraw from 97% of the West Bank and dismantle 63 isolated settlements, and the disengagement from Gaza in 2005.
Polovin believes that South Africa’s presidency of the UNSC had offered a unique and rare opportunity for the country to lead in the international arena, but that it squandered the moment. “Pandor used the platform at the UNSC open debate on the situation in the Middle East to repeat tired, unfounded and cliched arguments against Israel, he says. “In so doing, South Africa missed the chance to focus on the real issues and fault lines of the Middle East, and failed millions of people across the region suffering decades of oppression, violence and conflict, radicalism, dictatorships, and totalitarian regimes.”
He called upon the South African government to moderate its foreign policy towards Israel and find ways to impact positively on the conflict, saying that it is the kind of international political leadership that the country needs.
The South African Jewish Board of Deputies echoed the sentiment, saying that South Africa cannot hope to assist when full blame is being apportioned to only one side.
“We believe that our country indeed has a role to play in assisting with the process of finding solutions, using the lessons of our own country’s experience in peaceful conflict resolution,” said national director Wendy Kahn.
“However, we can only offer assistance when we have the trust of both parties, including the Israelis. Many of the minister’s remarks are overtly one-sided, precluding any responsibility on the part of the Palestinian leadership to also be part of the peace-building process.”
She encouraged Pandor to urge the UNSC to emulate the South African model of facilitating dialogue and negotiation as a path to peace-building, instead of issuing its regular barrage of anti-Israel resolutions. “We welcome South Africa’s continued support for a two-state solution,” said Kahn, “but impress on our government the need to engage constructively and even-handedly with both parties in order to attain this objective.”
The SA Jewish Report contacted Pandor’s office a number of times over more than a week for comment but had not received a response by the time of going to print.
