Not so long ago, anybody who claimed that Israel was practicing “apartheid” against Palestinians – either in the Occupied Territories or inside Israel itself – ran the risk of being accused of antisemitism.
But public opinion seems to be changing according to a report based on a recent poll sponsored by Canadians for Justice and Peace in the Middle East (CJPME), carried out by Ekos Research Associates.
A number of factors seem to be behind this apparent evolution, according to Michael Bueckert, Vice President at CJPME and author of the report. It seems that a spate of reports by reputable human rights organizations including Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch and B’Tselem alleging Israeli apartheid to have penetrated the consciousness of Canadians.
Another factor might be the election of Israel’s most right wing government in history, a coalition that includes several ministers, like Itamar Ben Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich who are avowedly (even proudly racist.) The attempt to make Israel into a state governed along fundamentalist religious lines has provoked huge demonstrations in Israel, and brought Israel’s ethno-religious nature to the attention of the whole world, including many Canadians.
Nearly 30% of those responding to the survey did not know how to describe Israel, or chose not to answer the question. But amongst those who did express a view, half of Canadians aged 18-34 view Israel as a state with segregation similar to apartheid. Indeed, over 40% of all those under 55 hold this view.
Government trailing the evolution of public opinion
This evolution of public opinion is taking place DESPITE an almost complete boycott of the word “apartheid” in the mainstream press, and a refusal to deal seriously with the issue by the Canadian government. “Political leaders and journalists still tend to refer to Israel as a democracy, ignoring the terrible repression faced by Palestinians under Israeli control in the occupied Palestinian territories, the discrimination faced by Palestinian citizens of Israel, and the suppression of the rights of Palestinian refugees“, notes the CJPME report.
CTIP interviewed Michael Bueckert on what he sees as the significance of the findings.
Canada Talks Israel Palestine (CTIP) is the weekly newsletter of Peter Larson, Chair of the Ottawa Forum on Israel/Palestine (OFIP). It aims to promote a serious discussion in Canada about Canada’s response to the complicated and emotional Israel/Palestine issue with a focus on the truth, clear analysis and human rights for all. Readers with different points of view are invited to make comment.
Want to learn more about us? Go to Ottawa Forum on Israel/Palestine.ca
Canada Talks Israel/Palestine 
I would caution against reading too much into this poll. My reasons:
1) Those polled have little direct knowledge. I suspect that many of those polled have never observed or experienced either Israel’s system or South African apartheid. Few will have seen both. Apartheid was officially ended in South Africa about 30 years ago. Most who go to Israel as tourists are given a view of the country that hides much of what is wrong and glosses over the rest. (Mr. Larson’s tours are exceptions!). Those who go there to live start with a bias that is deep and strong; they do not see what they do not want to see.
2) The formulation seems flawed. The words “similar to” make the apartheid option fuzzy. Some of the categories overlap. Israel could be described as “a state with segregation similar to apartheid” and “a flawed democracy” and “a state with restricted minority rights” without any contradiction. All three are applicable. Only “a vibrant democracy” excludes others.
3) There are conflicting definitions of “apartheid”. There is an artificial definition that is considered the legal definition and a “usage definition” (definition given in most dictionaries) that reflects the popular use of the word. Dictionaries mention South Africa; the official definition is much broader and does not.
For the above reasons, I consider the poll flawed but that is not the worst problem. What concerns me is that this discussion is a distraction.
4) If you tell a pro Israel person that Israel is practicing “apartheid”, they always point out differences between Israel and the old South Africa. This turns the discussion into one about the meaning of a word, not the evil practices in Israel. You end up comparing two systems, not discussing the horrible effects of Israeli law and practice on non-Jews who live in Palestine.
We need to keep the unethical and harmful nature of what Israel does in the centre of the discussion and not bring South Africa up at all. If there had never been a South African apartheid there still would be an Israel and it would be just as wrong. We need to keep drawing attention to what is being done to Palestinians and not get stuck in academic comparisons. Using the term “apartheid” will not help the Palestinians.
Thank you Mr. Parnas. I always thought in the same way. The only comparison between South Africa’s apartheid to the Israeli one, is inside Israel. This is where there are similarities. Apartheid against Israeli Palestinians.
None of the Israeli practices in West Bank and Gaza, can be termed as S.A. apartheid.
Therefor as you say using the term apartheid, diminishes what is done to Palestinians for a hundred years and getting worse.
Israel is a European colonial racist project established illegally by force of bloody arms directed against an unarmed indigenous Semitic people, the Palestinians, beginning in Dec, 1947.
The UK under it’s Mandate (1922-48) refused to conduct a representation election to determine whether Jews from other parts of the world had the right to just move in & take over Palestine – WHICH THEY DID, beginning in Dec 1947 after the UN Security Council declined to approve a partition resolution.
The fastest, most peaceful next step should be (1) internationally supervised long-delayed representation election & (2) return to Palestine by the refugee Palestinian population, to reclaim their homes, fields, orchards & natural resources – ALL illegally taken from them.
Of course Israel is an Apartheid (word means separated) state. Both the White leaders of SA plus Mandela & Desmond Tutu agreed in that.
No Jews nor any other people on earth would accept the brutal, unapologetic, racist regime Israel forces upon the Palestinians.
The unanswered question: why do ZIONIST Jews see themselves as free to commit horrific criminal acts?
Hello Richard,
Thank you for your comments.
I think the answer to your question about Zionists lies in two elements.
Many Zionists feel that Jews are under permanent threat and are justified in taking draconian measures to protect themselves.
Secondly, they also tend to ignore or seriously underestimate the brutal nature of the Israeli regime in its treatment of the Palestinians.