In the month celebrating the birth of our beloved Prophet Muhammad (S), some strive to be obedient to his every utterance. Others yearn nostalgically for his leadership in a dangerous and fractured world. A few seek synergy with his divine mission and purpose. But the crucial question shouldbe: How can we move us from effusive loving to profound living of the Prophetic legacy so that we locate the words of the Prophet (S) within his personality, and in turn, contextualise his words and habits in the Sirah – his entire life trajectory – while always mindful that his Sirah is the product of the Sunnah – praxis – with the Quran as divine fountainhead.    

This is important for the Fiqhul Mu-amalat – the jurisprudence of contemporary engagement in the affairs of society, politics, economics, transactions, and the underpinnings of statecraft, nation-building and social cohesion. It is, therefore, a search for a methodology to access and animate the Prophetic legacy so that it speaks to us beyond the jurisprudence of worship – the Fiqhul Ibadah. Wecan rest with the dominant methodology of Taqlid or imitation in the performances of the various acts of worship andembrace the Prophetic advice: “Pray as you have seen me pray,” [Bukhari Bk10 H28] and enjoy it as it provides a signature and identity to the multitudes of Muslims across their diversities. 

But taqlid may be somewhat unsustainable in the realm of the worldly affairs of Muslims. The root of taqlid in the Arabic language is “qa-la-da” which means literally to place a collar or necklace around the neck or to straight-jacket, with the implications of limiting choice, and reducing pragmatism, and narrowing adaptability, especially in a world where the state of the Ummah (the global Muslim community) is parlous and characterised, by and large, by domination and authoritarianism where we are majorities; by suspicion and islamophobia where we are minorities; by technological consumption and intellectual stagnation; and deep sectarianism and ambiguity in our relationship with difference.

Luckys Advert

al qalam website water (1)

The conundrum lies in how to access the Prophetic leadership and thus respond to the Quranic injunction: “In the Messenger of Allah, there is for you an Uswatun Hasanah for those who place their hope in Allah, who are mindful of the last day, and who remember Allah abundantly.” [Q33:21]. ‘UswatunHasanah’ means excellent example, beautiful template, or the best of patterns. The key, therefore, to regaining the dynamism of the ummah beyond imitation and literalism, lies in grappling with how uswah – example, template or pattern -could lead to the dynamic and impactful followership of the Prophet (S) as envisaged in the Quran.

The ummah has historically been dynamic intellectually, scientifically, politically, and socially because it possessed ijtihadi tools for regenerating ideas and extending the frontiers of knowledge – through reading and writing; reasoning and analysising; synthesising and applying – for both the fiqhulibadat wa mu-amalat. These tools present themselves as qiyasand ijma – analogy and consensus. Simply put: If a new situation or challenge present themselves, an inclusive scholarship would look for an analogous precedent or a matter of some similarity on which to base a ruling for the new situation. 

This intellectual device involved discerning essence from form. Where essence asks what principle must be preservedand transposed in an inviolable state from the original to the novel; form asks what has changed in time and space and how will the essence give life to the new form and allow the faithful to be both true to history and circumstance. 

Unless we are able to move beyond taqlid or imitation in the realm of the contemporary world, we are going to reproduce anachronisms: we will have successful revolutions that remove dictators but falter because our models recreate literally the so-called Islamic State; and where we proclaim such states, they will be synonymous with misogyny, kleptocracy, theocracy, dynasty, and a totalising instinct.Could we not rather posit the idea of emulation of the Prophetic tradition and suggest from the Arabic language and practice the notions of muhakah and iqtida?

Muhakah generally refers to simulation – often used in the ICT world – meaning the transference or reproduction of a property or quality from one application or context to another. Iqtida, on the other hand refers to role-modelling, desiring the outcomes exemplified in another application or person, and following another’s pattern or template for success. Muhakahthus speaks to the transference of the principle or essence in another context, while iqtida is more closely aligned with the Quranic injunction to model ourselves on the Prophet Muhammad (S). Both show a way beyond taqlid or imitation and moves us towards emulation. 

Lake Glencairn

Screenshot 2026-09-18 073058

But for this to succeed in a dangerous world and in a fragile ummah, we must understand that the critical principles to be transferred are those consistent with the intents of Islam and the shariah – al maqasid al shariah, where the context has changed, but without the preservations or rights being compromised. The implications of emulation for statecraft, for example, mean that if we are not trying to imitate the form of the state (the khilafat) but can rather emulate the Prophetic intents and values in another form, then you could potentially have an inclusive, rights-based state underpinned by salaam (peace), amaan (security), shura (consultation), and hurriyyah(freedom). 

It may just be that an emulative approach towards the Prophetic tradition will shift us from the nostalgic love for the Prophet (S) to a strategic appreciation; from loving Muhammad (S) profusely to living his uswa seamlessly and successfully; and from being an ummah justifiably proud of our past to one confidently recreating a golden future from the Prophetic legacy. 

*Ebrahim Rasool is former ambassador to the U.S. and former Premier of the Western Cape 

The post From Loving to Living the Prophet (SAW) appeared first on Al-Qalam.

I have been sitting with this for weeks now, trying to find the right words. I am not sure they exist. My father returned to God a few long weeks ago. He was in hospital, weak, barely able to speak or move. His body was there, but the man I knew, the one with the loud laugh and incisive opinions. The one who gave me my love for human rights, poetry, art and nature. He was fading before my very eyes.

Then something happened. George Galloway sent him a get-well message. At first he thought it was a video call. He tried to say “Hello George.” My heart broke into a million pieces. I told him it was a recording. He watched, and then I held it up to his ears and played it twice so he could understand. He could barely speak. He was not even eating. But when he heard that voice, a smile, small and fragile, but real, crossed his face. He said: ‘Thank you, George’. The words did not come out properly, but I understood. And so I sent a message to George saying my father smiled and said, ‘Thank you’.

That moment, one of many etched in my memory, did not save him. But for those moments, I saw my father again. Not the patient. Not the diagnosis. I saw my dad who raised his fist when he was readmitted to say ‘I will fight this.’ He lost his battle a few weeks later. I am not ready to talk about the rest. The way he was treated in those final days – the cruelty, the neglect, the indignities – that story is a heavy stone in my chest. For now, I just want to say this: Rest in peace Dad. I love you. I miss you. And in the way I feel, I think, the way I stand up, the way I find light in the dark – I am you.

My father would want the People Power Tour to make a difference

Grief does not stop the villains running the world. Action does. The world needs us to show up. That is why I am writing this from a place of both deep sorrow and fierce determination. Because when we buried my father, I promised him that I would tell him when South Africa and Palestine are free. The fight for justice did not pause. The people of Palestine are still being bombed. The people of Sudan and Congo are still starving. And in our country, we have to fight greed, corruption and poverty.

George Galloway and Yvonne Ridley are coming to South Africa. And Durban…we need to get ready.

George, politician, podcaster and author, showed up for us during apartheid when it was not popular. He stood with the liberation movements when it cost him. He has shown up for Palestine for decades – banned, smeared, attacked, and still refusing to shut up on The Mother of All Talkshows (MOATS)

Journalist, author and activist Yvonne Ridley’s life is incredible. While on a story, she was captured by the Taliban, and after reading the Quran, embraced Islam. She was also kidnapped by Apartheid Israel. That tells you a lot about her. She spent the years calling out injustice, no matter who it upsets.

They are not coming to talk down to us. They are coming to work with us, to unite, organise and mobilise. Let’s remind each other that the power of the people is stronger than people in power, that consistent solidarity is a strategy that changes everything. It’s why I chose that theme: People Power.

Two Projects Close to My Heart

During their visit, we aim to launch two projects that are urgently needed: Ubuntu and Ihsaan: Our Story, Our Voice, Our Role.

The first is a documentary series called Ubuntu and Ihsaan. It tells the story of Muslims in South Africa. We have been here for centuries. Cape Malay. Indians. Anti-apartheid. Everyday South Africans trying to raise kids, pay bills and keep faith. Authentic and beautiful. This series captures that.

Ubuntu is that beautiful South African philosophy that we are human because of others. Ihsaan is an Arabic word that calls to excellence, compassion and contribution. Together, they capture who we are. This project is not just about looking back. It is about reminding ourselves what we are made of, and what we can do to serve South Africa, so we can help lead Africa and the Global South to liberation.

Zionism in Africa: The Research We Cannot Ignore

The second project is called Zionism in Africa (ZIA). A research initiative. And it is critical. Here is what people do not talk about enough. For decades, American Christian Zionist groups, backed by the Israeli government, have been flooding Africa with ideology, money, policy, and influence.

African leaders who speak up for Palestine often find their lives or partnerships with Israel threatened. Congo’s president was just in Israel, the same Israel pillaging Congo’s resources. We must understand the terrain. That is what ZIA will do. It will map out how Zionist ideology, political influence and economics has taken root in Africa, who is funding it, and how we disentangle to protect ourselves.

Durban Must Lead Again

We need to remember what happened here in 2001. It was powerful. Durban hosted the World Conference Against Racism. And the declaration was clear: Zionism is racism. That was not diplomacy. That was truth. Decades later, we still stand by that declaration. But standing by it is not enough.

We need to act. The Galloway-Ridley tour is part of that action. We are here to remind each other that we have power when we exercise multipronged strategies. March and boycott. Educate and lobby. Use the law and the arts. Don’t let Zio -Imperialism confuse, distract, divide and conquer us.

What Is Happening in Durban

The meaningful and strategic Durban leg of the People Power tour includes:

• A press conference on the politics of division and the role of independent media
• A fundraising dinner with panel discussions, poetry and an art exhibition
• A university event with young people, activists and academics

Each event is designed to connect global struggles with local action. The fight for Palestine is not foreign. It is connected to our history of apartheid, which Israel supported. It is connected to our own struggles for dignity and justice. After all, Israel did steal our anti-missile tank technology, uses South Africans to commit genocide, and is still taking coal from our country to kill children, women and men.

Full details and tickets are at www.GallowayRidley.co.za

Turning Pain into Power

My father is not here. I carry that loss every single day. But he raised me to make a difference. He raised me to show up, even when showing up hurts. So I will. For you Dad, for the rest of my life.

I will show up in Durban and at other legs of the national tour. I will welcome Galloway and Ridley, other special guests and you, The People. I will help launch these key projects. And I will keep telling the story of my father, Yunus Mohamed. The way he smiled with a raised fist during a 1994 freedom march, his incredible books, the way he hated Trump the misogynist, and the cruelty that ended his life.

For now, I ask you to show up too. Support the events. Support the projects. Stand with South Africa. Protect Palestine. Build the Global South. Stand with everyone who is suffering the weight of empire.

That is ubuntu. That is ihsaan. That is who we are. And that is what my father taught me. Amandla!

*Shabnam Palesa Mohamed is a daughter, activist, journalist, lawyer, strategist, and Durban convener for the People Power: Galloway-Ridley in South Africa Tour. She is the founder of Wage Peace International, trustee of Palestine House S.A, board member of Nanda Soobben Arts Foundation, and parliamentary advisor to The Association for Medical Health and Legal Practitioners in Africa.

The post My Father; George Galloway; and the power of people appeared first on Al-Qalam.

In the media, South Africa’s municipal crisis is routinely explained as a failure of leadership. The explanation centres around corruption, gangsterism and incompetence, and the language is overwhelmingly that of moralism.

There is truth in this. There are councilors who loot, officials who cannot do their jobs, considerable penetration by organised crime and political actors who treat public office as nothing but a route to private enrichment via public funds. All this must be noted and directly confronted.

But this account does not go far enough. Municipal collapse cannot be understood as only a failure of leadership or ethics. It also has to be located in deeper structural dynamics that shape what local government is, what it does, and what it is able to sustain. Without confronting these dynamics, calls for clean governance will remain necessary but insufficient.

The first of these dynamics is the political economy of patronage. Local government has become a key site for the distribution of resources in a society marked by mass unemployment and deep inequality. Municipal office offers not only a salary, but access to tenders, influence over hiring, and the ability to distribute opportunities.

In a context where millions of people are locked out of formal work, this power is intensely contested. The struggle for office is not just about politics. It is about survival. This is why, in some parts of the country, such as Durban, competition for positions as councillors results in regular assassinations.

Under these conditions, factionalism is not an aberration. It is produced by the system itself. Loyalty is organised through networks of distribution rather than shared political programmes. Decisions are shaped by the need to hold coalitions together. At the same time, municipalities become arenas of struggle between competing patronage networks, with the result that administrative capacity is subordinated to political survival.

Luckys Advert

al qalam website water (1)

The second dynamic is the depoliticisation of the public. With the notable exception of Abahlali baseMjondolo, the mass movements of the 1980s are long gone and for many people participation in governance does not extend beyond voting every few years. Even more people do not bother to vote. When a space is made for civil society, it is usually for NGOs rather than membership-based organisation. In these spaces, the technocratic language of governance has displaced the language of politics. Questions of power and distribution are recast as matters of management.

All this weakens the capacity of ordinary people to act collectively in defence of the public interest. It also creates space for anger to be mobilised in destructive ways. Where there are no effective democratic channels, resentment can be redirected in toxic ways by toxic actors.

We see this clearly in growing attempts at xenophobic mobilisation. It presents itself as a defence of local resources. In reality, it expresses a politics that cannot confront the structural causes of deprivation but happily scapegoats migrants instead.

The third dynamic is the erosion of collective institutions. Trade unions, civic organisations and other forms of collective life have historically played a central role in mediating between the state and society. They have organised demands, built solidarity and exercised pressure from below.

Today, many of these institutions are weakened. Union density has declined. Some unions are deeply corrupt and authoritarian, and a senior union leader is wholly captured by a donor. Civic structures are often fragmented or absent and there has been a systemic substitution of NGOs for membership-based organisations. Where people have tried to organise, they have, as with Abahlali baseMjondolo and a number of communities dealing with mining issues, faced serious repression, including assassinations.

The consequences of all this are serious. There are fewer mechanisms to discipline political elites and fewer spaces in which collective demands can be formed. The capacity to defend the public as a shared good is weakened, and politics becomes more individualised, more volatile, and more open to manipulation.

These dynamics reinforce each other. Patronage corrodes administration, depoliticisation weakens accountability and the erosion of collective institutions removes the social foundations on which democratic governance depends.

To be clear, none of this means that leadership and ethics do not matter. They do. There are municipalities that function better than others, and leadership is part of the explanation. But even the best leadership operates within structural constraints that cannot be overcome by integrity alone. Corrupt people and practices must be dealt with as an urgent priority, but the structural issues need to be confronted too.

Lake Glencairn

Screenshot 2026-09-18 073058

This means addressing the political economy of patronage. It requires tightening procurement, professionalising administration and limiting opportunities for rent-seeking. It also requires confronting the wider reality of unemployment and inequality that drives competition for access to the state. If we do not treat mass structural unemployment as a crisis, we will never resolve our political and social problems.

It is also necessary to repoliticise the public by rebuilding forms of participation that enable people to act collectively. In much of the country, spaces like ward committees have long been captured by toxic actors but it is possible to build outside these spaces. The public can only be effectively politicised from within, and this requires a new generation of activists like those that emerged in the 1970s and 1980s, including university-trained activists willing to work with ordinary people on the basis of mutual respect.

We also need to address the crisis in the trade union movement. Some unions have passed the point of no return with endemic corruption, death threats being used to contain dissent and the buying of internal elections. The unions and union leaders that sustain integrity – such as the General Industries Workers Union of South Africa (GIWUSA) and Zwelinzima Vavi – need to be supported and new credible unions built from the ground up. As with rebuilding community organising, this requires a new generation of committed activists, who can do the work that people like Jabu Ndlovu, Moses Mayekiso and many others did in the past. This also requires the commitment of university-trained activists who can do the kind of work that people like David Hemson, Neil Aggett and Jay Naidoo did in the 1970s and 1980s.

In a situation of mass unemployment, it is also imperative to connect the organised working class to the unemployed and the poor. It is an uncomfortable reality that many in the union movement look down on the poor and share the prejudices of the middle classes. Across the Global South, the urban poor have become key political actors and the fetish of the worker as the only legitimate political actor needs to be put aside.

The problems we face are ethical, but they are also political and – contrary to the assumptions of the media – moralism is not a sufficient response.

*Dr Buccus is editor of Al-Qalam and research fellow at the University of Johannesburg’s Institute for Advanced Study (JIAS).

The post Local government – going beyond morality appeared first on Al-Qalam.

Each August, as we commemorate Women’s Month, we focus on the need for water across Africa and Asia. When clean water is not available, it becomes the job of the women and girls in the household to find and collect water.  This results in girls not attending school, thereby disrupting learning.

A well or borehole located in a village or on a mountain means that girls can safely and quickly collect water in the morning, and then attend school. Their education, combined with the water, allows for economic activities such as farming, sewing and basic trade to occur.  Access to clean water means that the standard of living for everyone in the area is automatically improved, which sets communities on an upward trajectory.  All made possible with water.

Our teams are often asked about the difference between wells and boreholes. 

Wells are shallower, dug to a depth of about 15m, and water is collected with a manual bucket system.  In Africa, our boreholes include a manual hand pump, but are dug much deeper than wells, and serve larger villages as well as their surrounding communities.

In Afghanistan, boreholes have electric taps, mainly powered by solar energy, to ensure that communities are not dependent on the unreliable electricity in the country.

The benefits of water go deeper…because girls can now attend school, they are less likely to become victims of child labour or child marriage.

 Throughout the month of August, AMA hosts events across the country, asking our communities to give towards the best of charities…the one that brings the greatest benefit for beneficiaries, while simultaneously bringing the greatest reward for the donor. Because behind every statistic is a story…a mother, a sister, a daughter…a life put on hold in order to find water. 

 Join our events and follow our social media pages for updates on the impact that your donations make, and contribute any amount, at any time, towards our water projects.

The post Advertorial: In Asia and Africa, AMA’s focus on water supply to end cycle of poverty appeared first on Al-Qalam.

Antisemitism – hatred of, prejudice towards, and discrimination against Jewish people – is real.  Jews were expelled from England in 1290; from France in 1306; from Germany from 1430; from Spain and Portugal by 1492; and after 1848  Jews fled the pogroms in Central Europe.  And no one should deny the twentieth-century genocide and holocaust wrought by fascism in Western Europe against the Jews. 

Even today, antisemitism is real. Indeed, Jews suffer antisemitic incidents ranging from slurs, online targeting, assaults, and terror.  Antisemitism is a real member of the family of bigotry, the persistent and pernicious hatred and intolerance of people who are different.  And so, in a world of revived supremacism and chauvinistic nationalisms, and increasing prejudice and discrimination, antisemitism takes it place alongside racism, misogyny, xenophobia, islamophobia, homophobia, and all other siblings in the family of bigotry.

An evolving definition

But as antisemitism remains real, its definition and application are evolving and changes in definition have accelerated with the onset of the twenty-first century.  Antisemitism in the Middle Ages remained, in definition, quite stable; its drivers were theological (like accusations of the deicide of Jesus) and economic, which could be solved through conversion or expulsion. The definition adopted a race dimension in the twentieth century as the Nazi regime prioritised ethnic origin rather than mere religious beliefs.  After the horrors of the holocaust were uncovered, the recoil from Western Civilisation tended towards inclusion in the definition of antisemitism any criticism of Jews, whether in questioning the holocaust or being remotely critical of the Zionist vision and solution. 

Resistance, brutality, and an all-encompassing antisemitism

However, the onset of the twenty-first century saw two parallel trends:  Intensified Palestinian resistance with brutal Israeli responses, accompanied by a more expansive, all-encompassing definition and application of antisemitism. Triggered by Ariel Sharon’s show of strength at the Aqsa Mosque after the scuppering of the Camp David Summit, the second Intifada (2000-2005) saw an Israeli response of assassination of Palestinian leaders, Operation Defensive Shield that occupied West Bank Cities, and the construction of a security barrier.  Following Hamas’ electoral victory in 2006, Israel blockaded Gaza in 2007, and maintains this till today, eliciting various attempts to break the blockade.  Between 2008 and 2014, three Gaza wars were conducted by Israel: “Cast Lead”, “Pillar of Defence” and “Protective Edge,” using airstrikes, missile attacks and ground invasions to destroy lives, livelihoods and infrastructure in a futile chicken-and-egg puzzle of what came first:  Hamas rockets or Israeli atrocity?  Ongoing hostility climaxed in 2021 as Palestinians rose to repel the planned Israeli evictions from Sheikh Jarrah in East Jerusalem, the raids on the Aqsa Mosque, and the incursions into, and settlements onto, the Palestinian territories of the West Bank, which today almost total 192 “officially sanctioned”, and about 350 “unauthorised” settlements by Israelis on Palestinian lands. Across these settlements, more than 780 000 Israelis are now entrenched.  This is the powder keg that was lit on 7 October 2023: the prelude to the genocide. 

Luckys Advert

al qalam website water (1)

New Antisemitism – Conflating Jew, Zionist and Israeli

Shadowing this cauldron of resistance and brutal suppression is the weaponisation of antisemitism. In 2000, the Stockholm Declaration saw the need to promote Holocaust education, remembrance, and research because “humanity remains scarred by antisemitism and xenophobia, establishing that the international community shares a solemn responsibility to fight these evils.”  This further gets tightened by the European Union in 2005 as a framework for a Working Definition of Antisemitism and now includes “rhetorical and physical manifestations” against anything Jewish.  This builds towards the formal adoption in 2016 by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) which evolves towards “Israel-Related Contexts” such as singling Israel out for criticism as applying “double-standards”; or opposition to Israel as “denying Jews self-determination”; with examples of antisemitism, in some cases, equating or conflating “Jews as a people, or Israel as a State”; or questioning whether Jews are “more loyal to Israel” than their national state.

The clinchers, however, are that it is anti-Semitic to draw “comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis…” and “holding Jews collectively responsible for actions of the state or Israel.”  Ostensibly this is meant to blunt “third wave Antisemitism” because “…antisemitism is growing among those who use their hatred of Zionism and Israel as a proxy for their hatred of Jews.” (AIJAC Fact Sheet, 19 August 2021).

Weaponisation – Anti-Genocide is Antisemitism!

Such conflation of Jew, Zionist, and Israel is merely the precursor to the weaponisation of antisemitism, which becomes particularly evident in the aftermath of October 7, 2023, and the genocide it occasioned.  This period of genocide (2024-5) sees the chronicling of “cases of antisemitism” with the main prosecutors being the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) based in the USA, and the Community Security Trust (CST) in the UK.  Both agree that antisemitism had reached historic heights globally, especially because they now use the ‘weaponised’ definition.  By this application, their research fields in the West are anti-genocide protests on university campuses, the incidences of online and digital ‘harassment’ of Jews, as well as physical targeting of Jews and their institutions.

The ADL and the CSK on Third Wave Antisemitism

The ADL report (05/20/2024) on ‘Global Anti-Semitic Incidents in the Wake of Hamas’ War on Israel’, include the following as anti-Semitic: ‘Free Palestine’ or ‘Free Gaza’ graffiti; the allegation that Israel treats Palestinians as sub-humans; the accusation that Israelis or Zionists are ‘murderers’ or ‘child killers’; the demand that ‘genociders should get out of our neighbourhood’; or to be confronted with the question ‘do you support the IDF?’. The CST Report on Anti-Semitic Incidents in 2025 is a lot more detailed.  It totals 3700 such incidents in the UK.  Of this, 55% are related to the Palestine-Israel conflict, of which 1766 (48%) are “Anti-Zionist”, with “Zionist” deemed to be a proxy for ‘Jew’.  Furthermore, 1541 (42%) of these incidents are ‘online antisemitism’ of which 70% are related to ‘events in the Middle east’.  In total 2821 incidents (76%) constitute political or ideological discourses.

What both the ADL and CST reports illustrate is that such reaction to the political, geo-political, military and ideological events – and indeed the occupation, settlements and genocide – are now firmly under the “Third Wave Antisemitism” and no longer simply outrage at the death of 70 000 Gazans, the destruction of infrastructure and livelihoods, the increasing occupation of the West Bank, and the sustained incursion into Lebanon.  This has become the weaponisation of antisemitism to shield Israel from moral judgement and legal accountability, and to shield Zionism, as a political ideology, from scrutiny, when, in its name, destruction is actual and devastating.

Lake Glencairn

Screenshot 2026-09-18 073058

Antisemitism Now – Shield and Sword!

Albert Camus, in his work, The Rebel, argues that the twentieth century shows what occurs when political movements abandon moral constraints in the name of history, progress, revolution, because every genuine rebellion contains within itself a limit, a point beyond which the rebel, in destroying what it opposes, replicates it.  Indeed, the weaponisation of antisemitism is not just to shield Zionism from its excesses.  It is also a sword!  Since dubiously achieving its apotheosis – the state of Israel in 1948 – Zionism has progressively shrugged off its limits:  it has occupied beyond its mandate; it has resourced itself beyond its needs;  it has settled to create immutable facts on the ground;  it has muted and maimed journalists to hide its shame;  it has lobbied to exploit Western guilt;  it has killed and assassinated to quell resistance; and ultimately, it is in the throes of a genocide.

Zygmunt Bauman, in Modernity and the Holocaust, notes:  “…it was not illiterate savages, but graduates of the finest education systems in the West who designed the gas chambers used to burn millions …. in Germany.”  In fact, today the Muslim world – portrayed as the ‘savages’ by the ‘most moral and civilised Israelis’ – can look back at the history of antisemitism and rightfully claim that when the ‘civilised’ expelled Jews from Europe, we welcomed you in Istanbul, Morocco, and indeed Palestine! No wonder Dr Israel Shahak, who lived through the Warsaw Ghetto, survived the Bergen-Belsen Concentration Camp, joined the IDF after moving to Palestine, and later was active in the Israel League for Human and Civil Rights, says today: “The Nazi’s made me afraid to be a Jew, and the Israelis make me ashamed to be a Jew”.

It should never be that the current genocide – with the growing and legitimate outrage globally – should be a fig leaf for real antisemitism to find a new lease on life, where bigoted slurs, caricature, conspiracy, vandalism, terror, and Nazi fantasies continue to be directed at Jews as Jews. We cannot replicate what we oppose. But we must oppose genocide in the name of Zionism and Israel, while fervently redeeming the divine and the human in Jews and Judaism!

*Ebrahim Rasool is the former ambassador to the United States and former Premier of the Western Cape.

The post Weaponizing antisemitism is blunting the fight against it appeared first on Al-Qalam.

Across the world, the right has increasingly made xenophobia one of its central mobilising strategies. Migrants are blamed for unemployment, pressure on public services, crime, social breakdown and the failures of government. In many countries, particularly in Europe, this anti-migrant politics has become tightly entwined with Islamophobia. Migration is presented not only as an economic or administrative problem but as a threat to national culture, religious identity and civilisation itself.

South Africa’s anti-migrant politics is now following this path. The xenophobic project led by March and March and supported by other authoritarian and far-right forces is beginning to combine hostility towards migrants with hostility towards Muslims. The language has shifted from claims about migrants taking jobs and places in schools and hospitals to warnings about a Muslim “takeover”, Muslim “dominance”, an “Islamic invasion” and the introduction of Sharia law.

Jacinta Ngobese-Zuma, the leader of March and March, recently asked on social media whether South Africans were wrong to oppose Muslim organisations that shelter or provide humanitarian support to migrants displaced by xenophobic violence. She claimed that foreign Muslims were seeking “dominance” in South Africa.

Speaking to the BBC, Ngobese-Zuma said that South Africa was undergoing a “very serious religious takeover”. Muslims comprise only around 1.5% to 2% of the population. The idea that such a small minority is taking over the country is plainly absurd. But the lack of any factual basis for Ngobese-Zuma’s claim does not make it politically insignificant. Far-right politics has never depended on an accurate description of reality. It works by identifying a vulnerable group, exaggerating its power and portraying its ordinary presence in society as a coordinated threat.

Luckys Advert

al qalam website water (1)

Nkosikhona Ndabandaba, also known as Phakelumthakathi and closely associated with the same xenophobic mobilisation, has taken this language further. Responding to an image warning of an “Islamic invasion” and the introduction of Sharia law, he reportedly wrote: “Never ever, especially the terrorists!”

In the standard move of the right around the world, migrants, Muslims and terrorists are collapsed into one category. Muslim religious identity becomes grounds for suspicion, and the presence of foreign Muslims is portrayed as a security threat. This is a significant and alarming development in South African far-right politics. The migrant is no longer accused only of competing for jobs, using hospitals or operating small businesses. The migrant is now also presented as the carrier of a hostile religion and an agent of cultural conquest.

The expansion of the target is already visible. Xenophobic mobilisation is usually justified by saying that it is directed only against undocumented migrants. In practice, documented migrants, refugees, asylum seekers, foreign-owned businesses and South Africans who defend them are also threatened. The turn towards Islamophobia widens the target again. Muslim organisations, business owners, charities and South African Muslims who defend migrants can now be portrayed as part of the alleged takeover.

A recent post by the Pakistan South Africa Association described a visit to a church in Delmas, where it distributed food and grocery hampers to families in need. The initiative was explicitly interfaith and humanitarian. Yet some of the responses accused the association of trying to buy influence, gain control of the country or conceal predatory intentions. An ordinary act of solidarity was treated as proof of conspiracy.

The same suspicion is directed at Muslim organisations that defend migrants from unlawful arrest, exclusion or intimidation. When Muslim organisations call for due process or support migrant-owned businesses, their intervention is not treated as a constitutional position. It is presented as Muslims protecting “illegal foreigners” in pursuit of a larger religious agenda.

The argument is structured so that Muslims cannot answer it. If Muslim organisations remain silent, they can be accused of refusing to contribute to South African society. If they provide food, shelter or legal support, their assistance is described as an attempt to buy influence or impose religious dominance.

Lake Glencairn

Screenshot 2026-09-18 073058

The xenophobic and Islamophobic narratives strengthen each other. Xenophobia constructs the border as being under attack. Islamophobia constructs the nation’s culture and religion as being under attack. Ethnic nationalism adds a further claim that a particular community is losing control over territory, institutions and political authority. Together, these narratives allow a movement that emerged around resentment over jobs and public services to appeal to fears about identity, religion and national survival.

Democracy requires that questions of citizenship and legal status be decided through lawful procedures rather than by political movements, mobs or social-media campaigns. It protects freedom of religion and the right of civil-society organisations to offer humanitarian and legal support.

March and March’s politics increasingly challenge these principles. It claims the authority to decide who belongs, who may enter a hospital or school, who may run a business and which organisations may assist people under threat. Its leaders present migrants as people whose rights can be suspended and Muslims as a community whose motives are inherently suspect.

The growing danger of far-right populism extends beyond migrants and Muslims. Journalists, progressive lawyers, left learning trade unionists and radical grassroots activists are all coming under increasing attack. March and March has actively sought to delegitimise constitutional and humanitarian opposition to xenophobia.

The threat to South Africa does not come from Muslims or migrants. It comes from a far-right politics that turns the poverty, institutional collapse and kleptocratic politics that drive and justify public anger into hostility towards minorities, while leaving the political and economic forces responsible for the crisis untouched.

*Dr Buccus is an academic, political analyst and editor of Al-Qalam.

The post Xenophobia’s Islamophobic turn worrying appeared first on Al-Qalam.

Business Day has published a letter of complaint regarding Halal certification, which, apart from being contradictory, is deliberately conflated with what the writer refers to as “consumer awareness and transparency”. 

In addition to his attempt at mischief-making by hoping to provoke the ire of Christians through injecting a controversy on the Halal industry in South Africa, it will not be far removed to conclude that he does so in pursuit of Israel’s Islamophobic agenda.

That he represents an agency linked to the settler colonial regime which faces serious charges of committing genocide in Gaza, Daniel Jacobi and his outfit known as “South African Friends of Israel”, it does not surprise us that he would do so. 

Published on 6 August 2026, and titled “Religious certification’s role in consumer choice”, it is riddled with contradictions. 

For instance, his question about why Halal certified products have become the “default standard in so many supply chains” is explained and answered by himself. 

“Businesses are free to seek certification where there is consumer demand or export markets require it. For many manufacturers, halal certification is a commercial decision that opens access to local and international markets”, is his explanation. 

Indeed, if it is understood in such logical terms, underlined by the fact that Halal certification is purely a dietary requirement, not a bogey of any sort, nor associated with what Israeli-inspired Hasbara (propaganda) peddles as “Islamist terrorism”, why then is it necessary to politicize it as Jacobi does? 

We are confident that the overwhelming majority of South Africa’s consumers respect and accept Halal as a matter of dietary choice, health standards, and consumer transparency rather than an ideological symbol. 

It is common wisdom that the guidelines for Halal certification share similar imperatives for Kosher certification. These are, amongst others, hygiene, cleanliness, ethical treatment of animals and quality control. 

Crucially, these practices ensure food safety, which benefits all consumers regardless of faith. 

While these facts are indisputable, Jacobi’s dispute lies elsewhere. It is to politicise an Islamic imperative, which he unashamedly does by injecting red herrings. 

His fake concerns must be rejected with contempt. 

Jacobi is the same person who, on the appointment of former Minister Naledi Pandor as chair of the Nelson Mandela Foundation (NMF), publicly alleged that it has been hijacked by “radicals”. 

He also led a group of South African members of parliament and religious leaders on a highly controversial trip to Israel during 2025.

Jacobi confirmed that the trip was made and described it as “a mission to discover historic facts to Israel.”

The confirmation took place after the Good Party raised questions about its “secret mission.”

At the time, Rebecca Davis (Daily Maverick) critiqued it by claiming that it seemed to have been “a very one-sided ‘fact-finding mission’”.

She correctly assessed that any of the nine South African MPs who visited Israel on a recent “fact-finding mission” will testify to the media that “there was no evidence of apartheid and, to the contrary, Israel is a vibrant progressive multi-racial and multi-ethnic society, in which the rights of all citizens are protected and upheld by the rule of law”.

Her conclusion was based on the claim of the group that organised the trip in its press statement: “All delegates observed that, and will confirm with South African media, that there was no evidence of apartheid and, to the contrary, Israel is a vibrant progressive multi-racial and multi-ethnic society, in which the rights of all citizens are protected and upheld by the rule of law.”

By all accounts, it is evident that Jacobi and his pro-Israeli aligned group are invested in promoting and defending the Zionist-apartheid regime. 

The issue of Halal thus becomes a convenient decoy to raise the ire of South African consumers against Muslims at a time the country is confronted with social issues related to foreign migrants, xenophobia and Islamophobia. 

*Iqbal Jassat is an Executive Member of the Media Review Network (MRN)

The post Targeting of Halal certification by Israeli-aligned lobby smacks of islamophobia appeared first on Al-Qalam.

Across various parts of the country, self-appointed groups are entering businesses, questioning employers, inspecting workplaces, identifying foreign workers, and demanding to know who is legally employed. 

Regardless of the names these organisations give themselves, one question rises above all others: who has authorised them to enforce the law?

There is no denying that illegal immigration is a legitimate national concern. Every sovereign nation has the right, and indeed the duty, to protect its borders, regulate immigration, and ensure that those living and working within its territory comply with the law. South Africans are equally entitled to expect that these laws are enforced fairly and consistently.

Yet the responsibility for doing so has always rested with the state. The ANC government since 1994 has failed to adequately secure the country’s borders and enforce immigration laws. This has fuelled public frustration and a growing sense that the government has neglected one of its most fundamental responsibilities.

That failure is not an invitation for private citizens to become law enforcement officers. Border security, immigration enforcement, and the lawful deportation of undocumented foreign nationals are constitutional functions of the state. When government fails to act decisively, it creates a vacuum, and vacuums are often filled by self-appointed groups.

This is precisely where South Africa now finds itself. The grievances expressed by many of these groups are understandable. Citizens are concerned about unemployment, pressure on public services, crime, and the perception that immigration laws are not being enforced. These concerns deserve to be heard. But legitimate concerns cannot justify illegitimate methods.

When private groups enter businesses without lawful authority, interrogate workers, intimidate employers, and conduct what amount to their own immigration inspections, they move beyond civic activism into an area that threatens the rule of law.

The Constitution was never intended to permit citizens to appoint themselves as immigration officials or police officers. Our democracy depends upon due process, lawful authority, and equal protection under the law. 

Once those principles begin to erode, the consequences become increasingly difficult to contain.

Today it may be businesses employing foreign nationals; tomorrow it could be farms. The next day it could be factories, schools, shopping centres, or any institution targeted by whichever group believes it has the authority to intervene.

History shows that vigilantism rarely remains confined to its original purpose. Once groups become accustomed to exercising power without legal accountability, that power often expands.

An equally serious concern follows naturally. If businesses become accustomed to groups arriving unannounced and demanding access, what prevents future groups from demanding payment instead? 

What stops criminal syndicates from presenting themselves as community organisations? How long before intimidation evolves into organised extortion?

These are not hypothetical fears. They are risks that emerge whenever lawful authority is gradually replaced by informal power.

The silence from the government has only intensified public concern. Many South Africans are asking: Where is President Cyril Ramaphosa? During periods of heightened public tension, citizens reasonably expect visible leadership, clear communication, and decisive action. 

When that leadership appears absent, uncertainty grows, confidence weakens, and speculation inevitably fills the void.

Government now carries a dual responsibility. First, it must urgently restore public confidence by strengthening border security, improving immigration administration, enforcing existing laws, and lawfully deporting those who have no legal right to remain in the country. 

Secondly, it must make it unmistakably clear that no private group, regardless of its motives, may assume the powers of the state or take the law into its own hands.

South Africa’s Constitution protects the rights of businesses as well as individuals. Inspections and enforcement actions must be carried out by authorised officials acting within the law, not by self-appointed groups demanding access to private premises.

The Freedom Charter envisioned a South Africa founded upon justice, equality, dignity, and the rule of law. Our constitutional democracy cannot allow parallel systems of enforcement to emerge simply because public frustration has reached breaking point.

South Africa stands at a defining moment. If we excuse vigilantism because we agree with its immediate objective, we may one day discover that the same methods are being used for very different purposes. 

The issue before us is larger than immigration. It is about whether we remain a constitutional democracy governed by law, or gradually become a society where organised groups exercise authority simply because they can.

Government must take responsibility for the conditions that have contributed to this moment. It must address the legitimate concerns of its citizens through effective governance, economic growth, secure borders, and the consistent application of the law. 

But it must do so within the framework of the Constitution, because once the rule of law gives way to the rule of the crowd, everyone, citizen and non-citizen alike, ultimately becomes less secure.

The choice South Africa makes now will shape not only its immigration policy, but the future character of its democracy.

The post South Africa finds itself at a deeply troubling crossroad appeared first on Al-Qalam.

“The dismissal of Karim Khan as the ICC prosecutor is perhaps the most significant event in the 24-year-long institutional history of the ICC,” says Sergey Vasiliev, professor of international law at Open University in the Netherlands, “and the greatest setback to the Court’s efforts to pursue justice in situations implicating major powers and their allies not party to the Court, including the US, Israel, and Russia.” 

There cannot be any doubt that the credibility of international justice is measured not by how it treats the weak, but by what happens when it is manipulated by the rich and powerful. 

A close scrutiny of the Israeli-led campaign surrounding ICC Prosecutor Karim Khan exposes a familiar pattern. Institutions celebrated as guardians of the rules-based international order become targets of political pressure the moment they threaten the interests of states that enjoy Western protection.

Regrettably, absent from much of the media coverage is the chronology that transformed Khan from a respected international prosecutor into a political liability. 

The same can be argued about the absence of the global South to ensure an impartial probe, even at this late hour to determine what apparently is driven by a highly-charged Zionist political agenda. 

For years, the International Criminal Court was embraced when it pursued African leaders, Balkan figures and, more recently, Russian officials. 

That consensus fractured after Khan sought arrest warrants against Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defence Minister Yoav Gallant over alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity in Gaza.

From that moment, the court itself became the subject of sustained political attacks.

The allegations of workplace misconduct against Khan deserve to be investigated independently and fairly. No public official should be immune from scrutiny. 

Equally, those allegations cannot be used to erase the wider political context. Both realities can exist simultaneously. An investigation into personal conduct does not negate the documented efforts by governments and lobbying networks to obstruct the ICC’s Palestine investigation. 

Reducing the entire issue to Khan’s personal conduct conveniently diverts attention from the institution he represents and the cases it is pursuing.

The beneficiaries of this narrative are clear. Governments determined to shield Israel from international accountability have consistently challenged the legitimacy of the court whenever its investigations touched Israeli officials. 

Political leaders, influential lobbying organisations and sections of the Western media have increasingly portrayed the ICC as overreaching, despite previously defending its authority in other conflicts. 

The objective is larger than one prosecutor. It is to weaken the credibility of any institution capable of holding powerful allies to the same legal standards imposed on others.

This pattern is neither new nor unique. International law has repeatedly encountered fierce resistance whenever it challenges geopolitical interests. 

From Iraq to Afghanistan, from Libya to Palestine, the principle remains remarkably consistent. 

However, what we face is that accountability is welcomed only when directed at adversaries but resisted when it reaches allies. 

Double standards and hypocrisy is a blatant trademark for Western imperialism. 

The language of a rules-based international order becomes conditional, dependent not on law but on political convenience.

Media coverage has largely reinforced this selective framing. To any independent observer able to read between the lines, it is pretty clear that headlines have focused on Khan as an individual while giving far less attention to the sustained political campaign against the ICC itself. 

The real issue has never been Karim Khan alone. It is whether international law can survive when its reach extends beyond the politically expendable and touches those protected by geopolitical power. 

Hence the question: Does the legitimacy of the ICC depend on the identity of those it investigates? 

In pointing out the backdrop,  Sergey Vasiliev says is “US sanctions against ICC senior officials and its campaign to dismantle the institution, as well as the Israeli government’s long-term interference and its most recent efforts to exert influence on States Parties to oust Khan”. 

Vasiliev finds himself “truly worried about the future of the Court and whether States Parties will be willing and able genuinely to protect its independence and ensure its recovery after this ‘decapitation’,“ as he calls it.

*Iqbal Jassat is an Executive Member of the Media Review Network.

The post Karim Khan and the ICC – Victimisation implicates Israel, US and Western allies appeared first on Al-Qalam.

What we are witnessing in South Africa is not simply xenophobia, a general fear of foreigners. It is Afrophobia: hostility directed specifically at black African migrants from north of the Limpopo River, while white foreigners from Europe are often welcomed, celebrated, or viewed entirely differently. This selective hostility exposes something far more painful than economic anxiety: it is the symptom of a deep wound in our collective psyche, a self-hatred implanted by centuries of colonialism and apartheid, that we now turn outward onto those who most resemble us.

This is why Afrophobia cannot be explained away as nativism or economic concern dressed up in civic language. It is anti-black racism directed at fellow Africans, the internalisation of colonial and apartheid hierarchies of race and worth, now replayed by the very people those hierarchies were designed to crush. And to understand it, we must be willing to look into a mirror we have long refused to face.

What the mirror reveals, psychologists call self-projection: the unconscious process by which we take the parts of ourselves we have been taught to despise and cast them onto others, attacking in them what we cannot bear in ourselves. Three and a half centuries of colonialism and apartheid did not merely dispossess black South Africans of land, labour and dignity. They waged a sustained assault on black self-worth itself. Generations were told, in law and in liturgy, in classroom and in workplace, that blackness meant inferiority, backwardness, criminality. Steve Biko understood this when he wrote that the most potent weapon in the hands of the oppressor is the mind of the oppressed. Frantz Fanon had diagnosed it decades earlier: the colonised subject, saturated in the coloniser’s contempt, comes to see himself through the coloniser’s eyes. This is self-hatred in its purest form, and self-hatred, left unhealed, does not stay inside. It seeks a target.

Luckys Advert

al qalam website water (1)

And the target it finds is close to home. The poison of internalised contempt does not evaporate with a new flag and a new constitution. It settles into the subconscious and waits. So when a wounded people encounters a stranger who looks like them, darker, perhaps, poorer, speaking an unfamiliar African tongue, the stranger becomes a screen onto which all that internalised shame is projected The Zimbabwean labourer, the Mozambican mechanic, the Malawian mu`adh-dhin and the Somalian shopkeeper: are attacked not because they are foreign, but because they are black and foreign. They embody, in the distorted mirror of the colonised mind, everything we were taught to hate about ourselves. The violence directed at them is, at its root, violence against our own reflection.

Once we understand this, the puzzle of selective hostility solves itself. This is why the European, American, and Asian migrant walks unmolested through our streets while the African migrant’s shop burns. Whiteness was installed at the summit of the colonial hierarchy of worth, and that hierarchy still governs the subconscious, even of those it crushed. To defer to the fair-skinned foreigner while brutalising the dark-skinned one is no coincidence. It is the colonial order reproducing itself through the hands of its former victims. Can black people internalise racism and despise their own blackness without even knowing it? The evidence burns in our townships.

Lake Glencairn

Screenshot 2026-09-18 073058

If the diagnosis is self-hatred, then for Muslims the cure begins with Divine revelation. The Qur’an, in Surah al-Rum (30:22), proclaims that “among the signs of Allah are the creation of the heavens and the earth and the diversity of our languages and our skin colours”. Our different tongues and our different shades of skin are not accidents to be ranked, nor flaws to be despised; they are ayat, Divine signs. To celebrate this diversity is to affirm a sign of Allah in creation. To despise the darkness of another’s skin, or, through projection, the darkness of one’s own, is to turn in contempt from a sign of Allah in the universe. The Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, sealed this teaching in his final sermon when he proclaimed: no Arab has superiority over a non-Arab, nor white over black, except in God-consciousness (taqwa).

Healing, however, begins with honesty. We must find the courage to name Afrophobia for what it is: self-hatred turned outward. And then we must undertake the harder, slower work, decolonising our minds, reclaiming the dignity of our blackness as a sign of Allah, and rebuilding the Pan-African solidarity that carried us to freedom. The black stranger at our door is not our enemy. He or she is our brother and sister, and our mirror. Until we can look into that mirror without flinching, the fires will keep burning. When at last we can, we will see reflected there what Steve Biko declared in defiance and what Allah had proclaimed in revelation long before: Black is Beautiful, for black skin is among the signs of Allah, and every sign of Allah is beautiful.

The post Black is beautiful: Afrophobia is self-hatred turned outward appeared first on Al-Qalam.