I must add that when I read the ‘Independent’ article, I found that the content (and the quotes from the SA delegation) didn’t quite match the headline. But then that’s not exactly a first, is it?

Could you clarify the point you are trying to make in your post above?

Iun, “…South Africans, in particular ANC militants, are probably the most qualified people in the world to tell if a certain situation resembles Apartheid or not.”

These former militants may know about Apartheid but their comments don’t seem to show a knowledge of the Arab Israeli conflict. In any case, these “militants” too have their own biases and special interests.

Tom Friedman at the NY Times has some interesting things to say about South Africa today:

“But when it comes to pure, rancid moral corruption, no one can top South Africa’s president, Thabo Mbeki, and his stooge at the U.N., Dumisani Kumalo. They have done everything they can to prevent any meaningful U.N. pressure on the Mugabe dictatorship.

As The Times reported, America’s U.N. ambassador, Zalmay Khalilzad, “accused South Africa of protecting the ‘horrible regime in Zimbabwe,’ ” calling this particularly disturbing given that it was precisely international economic sanctions that brought down South Africa’s apartheid government, which had long oppressed that country’s blacks.

So let us now coin the Mbeki Rule: When whites persecute blacks, no amount of U.N. sanctions is too much. And when blacks persecute blacks, any amount of U.N. sanctions is too much.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/16/opinion/16friedman.html?_r=1&hp=&oref=slogin&pagewanted=print