Early last year, South Africa’s foreign minister, Naledi Pandor, declared that South African citizens serving in the Israel Defense Forces would be arrested upon returning to the country. “We are ready. When you come home, we’re going to arrest you,” said Pandor at a Palestinian solidarity conference in Pretoria. This isn’t the first time this threat has been made. And while it might seem odd that a government would seek to prosecute its own citizens for serving in a foreign military, in the context of South African history—and South African solidarity with the Palestinian national movement—this rhetoric from the government isn’t surprising. The actual pretext for the law, and the realities of its application, are complex. The controversy, though, is telling, not just in regard to the South African government’s relationship with Israel but also in regard to the future of the Jewish community in the country.
The history of the Jews in South Africa is a long and complicated one, explains Adam Mendelsohn, a professor of historical studies at the University of Cape Town. Jews have been in South Africa since Dutch colonization in the 17th century, but major Jewish migration didn’t begin until the 19th century. Throughout its history, antisemitism in South Africa has varied in intensity. Post-apartheid, with the strong ideological commitment to multiculturalism espoused by the new government, and outreach to the Jewish community, the situation became more stable for South African Jewry. But in the ensuing decades, and particularly since October 7, actions taken by the government, including the normalization of openly hostile rhetoric against Israel and Zionists, has many wondering if there’s a future for Jews in the country.
Popular opinion on Israel in South Africa is somewhat hard to parse. A 2017 study by the Kaplan Center at the University of Cape Town found that, when it comes to Israel and Jews, the South African population is generally disinterested; South Africans are more parochially concerned with domestic issues rather than the doings of a small minority or the status of overseas conflicts. At the same time, on the fringes, there is much more of a fervent ideological focus, particularly when it comes to critics of Israel. Among left-wing political elites, news pertaining to the conflict is particularly salient, with many hailing the government’s actions against Israel at the International Court of Justice as a proud moment for the country.
The African National Congress, the ruling party in South Africa since the end of apartheid, has long been committed to Palestinian solidarity and, in turn, anti-Zionism (although the ANC’s official position is to support a two-state solution). The party’s ideological commitment to the Palestinian cause is genuine and historically deep, says Mendelsohn. Much of this comes from Cold War era leftist political thought, in particular anticolonialism, which fosters a sense of kinship with the Palestinians and their national movement.
In addition to Pandor’s comments and the case brought to the ICJ, as well as recent diplomatic overtures to the Iranian regime, multiple prominent members of the ANC have made hostile statements about Israel in recent months. South Africa’s president, Cyril Ramaphosa, has accused Israel of apartheid and genocide. The justice minister has made similar comments. The secretary general of the ANC has even gone so far as to suggest Israel is attempting to foment regime change in South Africa.
This most recent focus on the issue of Israel-Palestine could be a distraction from policy failures and political scandals the party has experienced over the recent decades—the ANC lost its majority for the first time since apartheid amid sky-high unemployment and an insurgent third party bid by the ANC’s previous president. The ANC is also a big tent party, one with different ideological commitments that pulls it in different directions and, “for a party which has really lost its way, the issue was a galvanizing element, something positive for them to agree on and to be excited by,” says Mendehlson.
It is in this context that the justice minister declared the government’s intention to prosecute South African citizens who serve in the IDF. But the legal precedent for this threat is much more complicated than simple ideological opposition to Israel and Zionism. “At least initially,” says Mendelsohn, “the focus was not on Jews going off to join the IDF, but obviously provides them a basis later for at least, for threatening action against Jews who do so.”
The South African constitution forbids citizens from serving in foreign militaries, and supplemental legislation passed in 1998 and 2006 reaffirmed and elaborated on this policy. Notably, these laws are not exclusively a South African phenomenon, having been legislated in other African countries for similar reasons. The actual moral and historical basis for such laws comes from this deep history of mercenary activity in Africa,” says Michelle Nel, a fellow at the Security Institute for Governance and Leadership in Africa at Stellenbosch University—and in particular from white South African soldiers and officers in the waning days of apartheid. Many, seeing the writing on the wall in the early 1990s, or finding themselves without work in the ensuing remaking of the military following the fall of the regime, opted to join private military corporations across the continent. The most famous of these groups, Executive Outcomes, operated extensively in the early and mid-1990s, particularly in conflicts in Angola and Sierra Leone.
The South African government, fueled by a historical antipathy to mercenaries activities, and to their own citizens’ employment by such groups, passed legislation in 1998 criminalizing participation in these mercenary outfits, leading to the dissolution of, in particular, Executive Outcomes. The 2006 law, notably, while signed, has not been implemented. Implicit in the threat of the prosecution of citizens serving in the IDF is the enforcement of the 2006 legislation.
These laws don’t just bar participation in foreign combat forces but are defined more broadly, says Nel, prohibiting any “foreign military assistance,” an expansive term that includes providing advice or the training of personnel, recruitment and procurement of equipment. And while it is possible to petition the government for permission to join foreign militaries, such requests, and exceptions, are rare.
The actual application of these laws has been rather sparse, explains Nel, who says that prosecutions are rare, and conviction even rarer. The burden of evidence is quite high, and both foreign militaries and private military corporations are reluctant to provide evidence that would result in the conviction of their members. More recently, groups associated with the BDS movement have tried to dox South Africans who have joined the IDF, supplying the government with evidence, particularly from social media, of their compatriots serving in the Israeli military. But, as of yet, this has not resulted in prosecutions, as social media posts would likely prove insufficient in securing convictions. And while the prospect of prosecution seems rather ephemeral right now, the spectre of the threat is concerning for the Jewish community, which has been unsettled by protests and political rhetoric, especially targeting Jewish institutions, since October 7.
But the significance of the threats by government officials to prosecute South African citizens serving in the IDF may be more about the status of antisemitism and the future of the Jewish community in South Africa than any specific legal applications. Like many nations, South Africa has had its ups and downs vis-a-vis antisemitism, with spikes in the 1930s and 1940s, and more recently the proliferation of anti-Jewish stereotypes. However, explains Milton Shain, emeritus professor of history at the University of Cape Town and a widely regarded expert on antisemitism in South Africa, “racism and antisemitism were condemned in the new and democratic South Africa. Indeed, the South African constitution celebrates religious and cultural diversity.”
More recently, pro-Palestinian and anti-Zionist activism, both within and outside the ANC, has many South African Jews concerned. “It would be fair to say that South Africa today has a ‘Zionist Problem’—often articulated in ugly and blatantly antisemitic ways,” says Shain. “The government seems oblivious to this and would deny any semblance of hostility towards Jews…in its lawfare against the Jewish State,” says Shain.
This is problematic for South African Jews, explains Mendelsohn, as Zionism remains “fundamental to South African Jewish identity.” According to the 2019 Jewish Community Survey of South Africa, 90 percent of South African Jews feel a strong or moderate attachment to Israel. Likewise, 69 percent of South African Jews identified as Zionists, and making aliyah has become increasingly common among South African Jews in recent years.
And the South African Jewish community has been shrinking, since the 1970s in fact. During apartheid, the spectre of political instability led many Jews to emigrate to more stable countries. Post-apartheid, issues of economic stagnation and political corruption have led many Jews to leave. Indeed, more South African Jews now live abroad (estimated at 59,700) than live in South Africa (52,000), with the United States, United Kingdom, Australia and Israel serving as popular destinations for immigrants.
“South Africa faces a lot of challenges going forward,” explains Reviva Hasson, a researcher at the University of Cape Town specializing in Jewish migration patterns, “and the people who are living here recognize that there’s a lot of instability in a developing country, so people have their eyes on the horizon, and many are looking for opportunities elsewhere.” As for post-October 7, data is less readily available. The ANC’s actions, says Hasson, “have left Jews feeling like the government cannot be relied on to look after Jews in South Africa.” How exactly that will affect people’s decision to emigrate is unclear.
As for the future of Jewry in South Africa, while there’s some cause for pessimism, there’s also room for optimism. Despite the challenges, South Africa offers a material quality of life—and Jewish life—that is not easily replicable elsewhere, for economic, cultural and political reasons. Likewise, for so many South African Jews, it’s difficult to imagine living anywhere else. “We’re living here,” says Hasson. “We have our kids here and we’re staying here in South Africa. So yes, we are hopeful.”