Soccer Dad

Not apartheid

One of the common charges against Israel is that practices apartheid against the Palestinians. The charge is repugnant. The charge had a lot of currency in the 1980's at the height of the international campaign against apartheid. The Washington Post in a not so subtle move even re-assigned its South African correspondent to Jerusalem. (Allister Sparks who also reported for the Washington Post at that time is now one of the most vicious anti-Israel critics and a proponent of a one-state solution.)

And yet even after Israel withdrew from Gaza despite the risks that were unfortunately realized the charge is still made. Jimmy Carter titled his most recent book "Peace not Apartheid." Walt and Mearsheimer uncritically accepted Yasser Arafat's excuse for rejecting an agreement at Camp David in 2000 because it would have created Bantustans.

Charging Israel with apartheid isn't just any criticism. It is a criticism that says that Israel has no right to exist.

It's Almost Supernatural has simply and elegantly refuted the charge first by describing the nature of apartheid.

Legislation was passed to legally separate blacks from whites in all aspects of daily life. The separate public amenities act ruled that blacks and whites would receive separate public services. Blacks and whites were to have separate education, medical care, transport and beaches. The legislation even pervaded to the use of parks – blacks could not sit on the same benches as whites and they could not even use the same water fountains used by whites.

And later by showing how none of those elements apply to Israel. Read Part Hate. You must.

Also blogging this: Jack's Shack, Backspin. Deja Vu. Israel Matzav. Digital Irony.

Blogdigger tags: Israel, Apartheid.