Against scholasticide in Gaza:
The death toll in Gaza has passed 34,000 and 12,500 of the dead are children. Israeli air strikes have also struck Rafah, the most densely populated refugee camp in the world killing 13 people, including nine children. Among those killed are 5,479 students, 261 teachers, three university presidents, and 95 university professors. The United Nations has expressed grave concern over ongoing scholasticide in the region defining “the systemic obliteration of education through the arrest, detention or killing of teachers, students and staff, and the destruction of educational infrastructure”.
What is to be done to stop this genocidal war on Gaza and the accompanying decimation of education? What is the role of educational institutions, scholars and staff here in South Africa as we witness this scholasticide and educide? And, what is our role when we are confronted with knowledge about academic collaborations not only with individual academics with contractual research agreements with Israeli universities, but also with members of the Israel Defence Forces (IDF)? Conscientious people around the world are trying to find answers to the first question. The second has been on the minds of educationists and young people horrified by the educide in Gaza. Many of us at the University of Cape Town especially faced the last question — late last year — when an article was published identifying UCT as the African university with the biggest number of collaborations with Israeli academics.
The treatment of Palestinian people and the destruction of their country and way of life is arguably the longest, most persistent, visible and ongoing colonial occupation of our time. From the time of the Balfour Declaration, through to the 2023-24 ground invasion of Gaza, there have been more than 200 United Nations resolutions related to Palestine, most highlighting the plight of Palestinian refugees, the illegality of Israeli settlements in Gaza and West Bank; the war crimes committed by the IDFe and calls for peace and humanitarian aid. As we academics from multiple faculties, of different racial backgrounds and faiths grappled with this history, the unfolding atrocities in Gaza and new knowledge about ongoing research collaborations in our university, we turned to calls from Palestinian civil society, opinions of leading South African legal scholars and, of course, drew wisdom from South Africa’s own anti-apartheid struggle.
For two decades, Palestinian civil society has advocated for “a boycott of Israeli academic and cultural institutions for their deep and persistent complicity in Israel’s denial of Palestinian rights that are stipulated in International law”. Such an institutional boycott does not constitute cancelation of, non-cooperation with or discrimination against individuals due to views they might hold or identity (race, religion, caste, class, gender or citizenship) they might embody. It does however call for non-cooperation and even boycott in academic, research or development projects sponsored by Israel, complicit Israeli institutions, lobby groups or corporations.
When consulted on the matter in 2019, Professor John Dugard SC, legal luminary and leading member of South Africa’s team at International Court of Justice (ICJ) advised that in the context of Israel’s many war crimes and persistent violations of human rights, UCT would be acting in accordance with South African Constitution and law if it “distanced itself from these criminal acts,” and decided “not to enter into relations with Israeli universities”.
When consulted more recently in 2024 on the issue of collaborations with members of the IDF, Dugard noted that Israel continues to commit plausibly genocidal acts in Gaza. It has failed to carry out its obligations imposed by the ICJ. “It is difficult to imagine,” he writes, “a situation in which a university of any state, particularly of a state that has brought proceedings against a wrongdoing state could continue to have relations with researchers that serve in the army of a State found to be plausibly committing genocide.”
Dugard notes that the university is not legally obliged to sever its relations with such researchers but, in his words, “there is … a moral obligation which no self-respecting university can ignore”.
These moral obligations have guided us as we came together to put forward three resolutions in the wake of the war on Gaza. We were also guided by the historical imperative to “pay forward” the support that South Africans received from Palestine and other countries around the world during the struggle against apartheid. Recent research that rigorously details the direct and active complicity of Israeli universities in the country’s violent apartheid rule further informed our thinking.
Canada-based Israeli scholar Maya Wind writes, “Israeli university campuses were designed and built as anchors of Palestinian land expropriation and dispossession. They continue to put their facilities, resources, and departments in service of the Israeli state through producing expertise for military governance, training soldiers and security state personnel to hone their operations, and developing technologies and weapons used against Palestinians.”
Against this backdrop, the first resolution called for a boycott of all activities, agreements and projects involving Israeli academic institutions, research entities, lobby groups, corporations, foundations, academic forums and entities that accept funding from Israel.
The opposition to the motion came from some academics in the university senate particularly those looking to protect their own scientific interests. Filibustering in the senate, scare tactics and panic mongering through emails, and cyber harassment followed. Proposers of the motion were personally harassed.
Failing in these tactics, these academics called upon other academics to abstain from the vote on the motion lest they lose their research funding from countries such as the United States and European states that reject the boycott of and divestment from Israeli institutions. In doing so, these academics ignored legal opinion that emphasises the inapplicability of US laws to South African institutions, and failed to defend their own academic freedom — freedom to do the right thing, by refusing collaboration with Israeli institutions complicit in crimes against humanity.
The first motion was defeated by a narrow margin after a fraught and difficult meeting held on 8 March and voting in the following week, with these senators seeking to delay the passing of this motion at all costs.
Israel’s war on Gaza has amplified the need for academic freedom. In the current moment, scholasticide and educide in Palestine are the most violent infringements of academic freedom imaginable. Academic freedom is also under attack in leading universities of the Global North — from Harvard and Columbia Universities in the US to Cologne in Germany.
Defence of academic freedom is at the heart of the second resolution that we proposed. In Palestine, in a high profile-action, a world-renown scholar of trauma, state crimes, gender and genocide, Professor Shalhoub Kervokian, a citizen of Israel, was summarily dismissed by her university for speaking out against Israeli actions and the media distortions, reinstated after an apology and then promptly arrested for incitement by the Israeli police, in an action described by her lawyers as “an illegal arrest whose purpose is to intimidate any critical voices in the Israeli academy”.
In Germany, a university rector was detained at the German border and told he is not free to speak in Germany about his direct experience of treating casualties in Gaza. In South Africa, at UCT, one academic opposed to the boycott of Israeli universities equated citing the BBC regarding news information as evidence of anti-Semitism while another alleged that the very motion to refuse collaborations with the Israel Defence Forces is anti-Semitic.
Like the actions of many university administrations in the Global North, both statements made by UCT academics are informed by a definition of anti-Semitism put forward by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) which, in its illustrations, couples Jewish identity inextricably with the state of Israel, equating any criticism of the Israeli state with hatred of a people.
The second resolution we proposed thus sought to affirm the call for ceasefire and humanitarian aid in Gaza; condemn the destruction of the education sector in Gaza; and, critically, reject the IHRA definition of anti-Semitism which is driving infringements of academic freedom around the world.
The IHRA definition has been variously critiqued, including by Israeli and Jewish scholars of the history of the Holocaust, for weaponising anti-Zionism, and precluding the legitimacy of resistance to Israeli occupation. During debate the original proposal was enhanced through an amendment that offered instead the definition contained in the Jerusalem Declaration. Signed by scholars of Jewish history, including the chair of UCT’s Kaplan Center, the Jerusalem Declaration definition does not link anti-Zionism with anti-Semitism.
The third resolution returned to the problem of collaboration with Israeli institutions — specifically, the IDF. It asked UCT to publicly disassociate itself from IDF members and members of the Israeli military establishment.
The debate and voting on these two motions took place on 19 April. In contrast to the debates on the first motion weeks earlier, and despite attempts by a cluster of academics to prevent progress of the debate, both motions were passed.
Amendments were debated and agreed upon in a more measured and civil way, inordinate delays were avoided, and the two resolutions passed by wide margins to loud cheers and smiles in the senate. By passing these two motions, the UCT senate has resolved to act in accordance with the Constitution and law, resolved to uphold academic freedom and refused to maintain and foster relations with a force and establishment that is involved in genocidal actions. It has, in its own small way, sought to act against scholasticide in Gaza.
We fervently hope that mass death and atrocities in Gaza cease, humanitarian aid reaches those who need it, Israel and the rest of the world comes to recognise Palestinian people’s right to life, equality and dignity, and they get the chance to rebuild their world from the rubble that it has been reduced to.
First-time cruisers: Choosing the perfect cruise :
The Flight Centre Cruise team will ensure you can indulge your every desire
Setting off on your first cruise is an exciting adventure, but with so many options available, it can also feel a bit daunting. Whether you’re a food lover, a family traveller, or someone who wants icy adventures on chilly seas, there’s a cruise just for you. Here’s how you can choose the cruise that best matches your vacation style and interests.
For the foodies
For those who live to eat, the cruise world is your oyster. Gone are the days of cruise ships meaning boring buffets. These days, you can find food onboard that rivals top restaurants across the world. Sushi, steak, pasta — whatever you feel like, you can get it. And it’s all prepared by top-notch chefs. Some cruises even offer culinary workshops and wine tastings. Flight Centre’s Cruise team can guide you to ships renowned for their dining and help you pick a cruise that marries travelling and eating. Perhaps a gourmet cruise down the rivers of France and Italy, or a dining package which means you can enjoy the best onboard speciality restaurants?
For the night owls
If you thrive after dark, choose a cruise that shines with its nightlife offerings. Generally, you’ll find that large, modern ships often have a huge selection of after-dark offerings. Onboard you’ll find vibrant nightclubs, live music venues, DJs, themed parties, cocktail bars, casinos, cigar lounges and karaoke bars, to name but a few.
If nightlife is important to you, Flight Centre can help you find a cruise that comes alive when the sun goes down. Each ship and itinerary is different, but the experts can find something that works for you. For instance, Norwegian Cruise Line — famed for their “Freestyle Cruising” concept — are popular if you want to experiment with crazy cocktails and live music. But if your idea of nightlife is more ball gowns and champagne, you might prefer sailing the seas on Crystal or Seabourn.
For the relaxer
If your idea of sightseeing on vacation is seeing the rim of a pool and the inside of a book, then a cruise could be your dream holiday. The right itinerary will give you the perfect mix of port days, extended days at sea, spa time, poolside relaxation, yoga classes or whatever else you might crave. After all, everyone needs a bit of rest and rejuvenation when it comes to holiday time! Plus, you’ll want to make sure you pick a time and place to cruise that suits your needs — going poolside in Alaska isn’t much fun!
For families with kids
Cruising with kids has never been easier. Hitting the seven seas is a surefire way to make sure the kids have plenty of things to keep them occupied. Royal Caribbean International or Disney Cruise Line are always popular with families. They offer kids clubs, water park facilities, and activities and amenities that the little ones (and the not so little ones, if you have teenagers) will love, without sacrificing the adult appeal too. This way, everyone gets a fun cruise holiday … and the parents get a bit of a break too! Just don’t blame us if they want to stay on the ship forever and ever.
For the cooler weather cruisers
Cruises and sun might seem like peanut butter and jam, but nobody said that cruise ships have to mean bikinis and pina coladas. If you’re more drawn to the mystique of frosty landscapes and rugged natural beauty, we can help you find a cruise to cooler climate destinations like Alaska, Iceland or the Norwegian fjords. These cruises are perfect for nature lovers, offering breathtaking views of glaciers, wildlife and pristine landscapes. Because paradise doesn’t have to mean blue skies and beaches!
Book your dream cruise today
Whether you’re looking to indulge in fine dining, dance till dawn, relax deeply, have fun with the family, or explore icy natural wonders, we have the expertise to take you from booking to boarding. Start your adventure with the Flight Centre Cruise team and turn your first cruise into an unforgettable adventure.
Korner Talk: Pravin Gordhan is Dr Evil:
If he moved his right pinky finger to the corner of his mouth, Public Enterprises Minister Pravin Gordhan would resemble Dr Evil, the fictional character from the comedy movie series Austin Powers.
And it is not only the bald head, chubby cheeks and the sadistic scowl stationed on both Gordhan’s and Dr Evil’s faces that illuminates their lasting likeness.
Rather, it is that both men are renowned for hatching schemes to terrorise those around them — wreaking havoc on all and sundry with the riveting ruse that what they are doing is for the good of the people.
Nothing accentuated Gordhan’s reign of terrorising state-owned entities (SOE) more than his revelations last week that power utility Eskom, logistics firm Transnet and South African Airways had, together, lost a staggering R227 billion through corruption, fraud and bribery over the last five years — with him at the helm of the ministry overseeing the country’s parastatals.
Responding to a written question by Farhat Essack, DA MP and the party’s spokesperson on public enterprises, Gordhan did his best to put the proverbial lipstick on the dirty pig, admitting that Eskom alone accounted for more than R203.1 billion in losses, but that the government was remedying the crisis.
“In addressing the recommendations of the state capture commission, the department formed working groups with [the] Special Investigating Unit, state organs and other enforcement agencies to implement proclamations relating to maladministration concerning the affairs of SOCs [state-owned companies],” Gordhan wrote.
“This initiative resulted in the employment of a civil litigation strategy to recover funds associated with SOC losses sustained during the state capture era and other forms of administrative corruption.”
The state capture excuses the pathetic public enterprises minister has parroted during his tenure have been akin to his Mini-Me, a valuable accomplice to trot out every time he comes under fire for his failures.
To explain, Mini-Me was Dr Evil’s pint-sized sidekick, who had little dialogue in the Austin Powers movies but was always available to carry out his surrogate father’s insidious ideas.
The “I am fighting state capture” ruse has been Gordhan’s Mini-Me, masking the muddled ministerial years in charge.
For one, Transnet — which posted record profits in the billions of rand for successive years, including shipping a high of 76 million tonnes of coal in 2017 — announced a loss of more than R5.7 billion in September for the financial year ending 31 March 2023.
Yet whenever the public demanded accountability from him, pointing out that the economic levers have regressed with him in charge, Gordhan consistently brought out Mini-Me, saying those questioning him were proponents of state capture, with neither an explanation nor proof of his assertions.
“There are people amongst us, and perhaps outside as well, who perhaps don’t want these SOEs to find themselves on the right track, because they would like to explore the possibility of state capture version two,” Gordhan remarked, during a public lecture at Wits University’s School of Governance.
“You are the paid servants of the people I am talking about, people who want corruption to continue. All of you, you speak the same language. Now, just remember, you are not going to intimidate us,” he added, chastising the people calling out his lack of responsibility.
It is just as well, then, that the ANC has not revealed Gordhan among its veterans — such as former presidents Thabo Mbeki and Kgalema Motlanthe and former deputy president David Mabuza — crisscrossing the country trying to convince a confused electorate to give the governing party one more five-year chance to continue South Africa’s slide to failed statehood.
Mind you, Gordhan announced in March that he would retire from active politics after the 29 May elections.
Not that Gordhan would have honoured the call to campaign for the ANC — having a reputation as a man who would sooner iron his penis than do door-to-door stops for the 112-year-old organisation.
Just as well because the governing party has its work cut out for it during this election season, having to deal with its former president, Jacob “Nine Wasted Years” Zuma, launching a new political formation set to take a chunk of the ANC’s votes, especially in KwaZulu-Natal.
No sooner had the ANC announced that Zuma would be hauled to its national disciplinary committee (NDC) on 7 May for allegedly breaching its rules by campaigning for another party, than secretary general Fikile Mbalula postponed the hearing to after the elections.
Mbalula, on Sunday, said he feared that the disciplinary proceedings would be marred by violence after the uMKhonto weSizwe party, Zuma’s nascent stokvel, said it would send its members to Luthuli House — the ANC’s national headquarters in Johannesburg — to support its unelected leader at his hearing.
“We have informed the NDC to put this matter in abeyance because they don’t want something that happened in the past like when the DA came here and then there was violence,” Mbalula said, alluding to the 2017 fight between the ANC and DA during the official opposition’s march to Luthuli House.
Not that any of that will concern Gordhan, who, having put governance in abeyance, will cackle wickedly into the sunset after five years of no accountability.
Submit and get free exposure here: Showcase Your Business | Advertise Your Special Offers.
