The use of the term "apartheid" to describe the nature of the Israeli regime has already taken root in dialogue concerning the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Like the use of the term "occupation" before it, the word "apartheid" has penetrated the language used to discuss the future of Judea and Samaria almost unchallenged; either Israel lapses into South African-style racist apartheid, it says, or such a regime is already in place.
This assertion is a total distortion of the reality that prevailed in South Africa until 1994. Benjamin Pogrund, the South African-born journalist and author, is waging a war against the imbecilic comparison between the Israeli occupation and apartheid. Pogrund, who served as the deputy editor of the prominent South African newspaper The Rand Daily Mail, fought the injustices of apartheid. He was a close confidante of the late South African President Nelson Mandela and visited him when he was imprisoned for his efforts to end discrimination against blacks in the country. Last month, Pogrund was awarded South Africa's highest honor, the Order of Ikhamanga, by South African President Cyril Ramaphosa for his efforts to end apartheid.
In his capacity as a journalist, Pogrund fought against the racist regime in his home country. He moved to Israel years ago, and at the age of 89, is now fighting the phenomenon that sees Israel identified with apartheid. Beyond his many English-language articles that are read around the world, he has published a book, hundreds of pages long, titled "Drawing Fire," which focuses on the factual validity of the comparison between occupation and apartheid.
Without absolving Israel of blame for the injustices suffered by the Palestinian population, Pogrund disproves the claim of South African-style forced racial segregation and institutionalized discrimination in all aspects of Israeli life. The blockades, the detentions and the additional restrictions on Palestinians are not Israel's ideological goals, Pogrund notes, and they will disappear when its rule over Judea and Samaria comes to an end.
As for Israel's Arab minority, Pogrund writes that the current reality, in which Arabs can vote and be elected to government, an Arab serves on the Supreme Court and Arab doctors work alongside Jewish doctors in Israeli hospitals, would be unthinkable in South Africa under apartheid.
In Israel, he concludes, there does not exist institutionalized racism that characterized the apartheid regime. Nevertheless, Pogrund is very concerned by two aspects that threaten to lead to a deterioration of the situation in Israel: the nation-state law, which he believes could perpetuate racism, and the confiscation of Palestinian assets. He is waiting with bated breath for the Supreme Court's rulings on these issues.
From conversations with Ramphosa's confidantes, Pogrund is of the opinion that the South African leader is uncomfortable with the decline in Israel-South Africa ties. But that is the line that the country's Foreign Minister Lindiwe Sisulu has adopted. At Sisulu's initiative, South Africa downgraded its embassy in Israel to a liaison office. This is also the prevailing atmosphere among members of the ruling party, the African National Congress, which supports the complete severing of ties with Israel. Pogrund believes that the steps taken by Sisulu only serve to detract from the "moral voice" South Africa once had, which echoed throughout the continent and beyond.
We would be wise to listen to what Pogrund has to say, especially since he has personal experience with apartheid and has served time in a South African prison. It is not for nothing that he recommends we proceed with caution.
