A growing concern around Zionism in South Africa is not only about its political reach, but the way criticism of it can be reframed as persecution allowing those facing scrutiny to position themselves as victims.
That question has resurfaced following a racist and Islamophobic confrontation in Norwood, Johannesburg, involving businessman Rodney Plett and Muslim motorist Abdur Rahmaan Aziz.
Speaking to One Nation Media (ONM), Sheikh Anwar Jhetam from the Media Review Network described the incident as “a symptom of a much larger problem” — what he called “the racist and inherently prejudiced philosophy and ideology that is known as Zionism.”
“Zionists very, very deliberately paint any critique against their philosophy, the actions of Zionists, or against the Zionist apartheid colonialist state of Israel to be anti-Semitism,” Jhetam told ONM.
“Now, this is a defence mechanism,” he added, arguing that it has enabled what he described as some of the “most heinous crimes of the 21st century”, including “the genocide that is taking place in Gaza.”
Jhetam’s comments follow a confrontation on 21 September involving Johannesburg content creator Abdur Rahmaan and businessman Rodney Plett. Rahmaan alleges that Plett used racist and Islamophobic language during the encounter, including threats against him, his family and Muslims. A video of the confrontation subsequently circulated online. Rahmaan has since opened a crimen injuria case at Norwood Police Station through his attorneys.
The South African Jewish Board of Deputies (SAJBD) condemned the conduct, saying:
“The South African Jewish Board of Deputies (SAJBD) is aware of a video circulating on social media, showing a Jewish man using offensive and racially abusive language. It is particularly unfortunate that this incident ended outside a Jewish place of worship, as this behaviour is the antithesis of what places of worship represent.
The SAJBD unequivocally condemns racist and hateful speech, irrespective of whom it is directed at, and this outrage is mirrored by our community. The behaviour of the man is offensive and unacceptable. What happened represents the individual alone. Norwood is a multicultural suburb, which includes Muslim, Christian, Jewish, and other communities. It is important that we do everything to de-escalate the friction between these communities and rather allow for a spirit of respectful co-existence.
The SAJBD remains committed to building a South African society based on the Constitutional values of dignity, equality and respect for all.”
The statement is unequivocal in its condemnation, but it also raises a question about accountability: beyond publicly distancing the individual from the wider community, what further action follows when conduct of this nature is alleged?
That question becomes particularly relevant as South Africa continues to debate the extent of Zionist political and ideological influence within the country.
Jhetam argued that the ideology remains deeply established locally.
“What we’re seeing, unfortunately, is that Zionism as a philosophy is alive and well in South Africa,” he said.
He pointed to the existence of the South African Zionist Federation and argued that South African Zionists have supported Israel financially and that some South Africans have served in the Israeli Defence Force. These are claims that require individual verification where specific people or alleged legal violations are concerned.
He concluded: “So we really have to ask questions about how far and deep is Zionist influence within the country.”
Plett’s own documented links to Chabad of Norwood add another layer to the public discussion. In 2018, the South African Jewish Report reported that Rodney and Anita Plett sponsored a Torah scroll and participated in its dedication before it was taken to Chabad of Norwood.
That association does not establish that Plett’s alleged conduct represents Chabad, its members or South African Jewry. Chabad of Norwood itself has condemned the alleged remarks, saying there is “no place for racism, prejudice or demeaning language” in its community and that it had reached out to Rahmaan.
But the wider question remains: when allegations of racism and Islamophobia collide with claims of victimhood and accusations of antisemitism, will accountability remain consistent — regardless of who is involved?
