Misplaced Pages

Part of a series on
Racial segregation
Overview Anti-miscegenation laws Crime of apartheid Allegations Caste Xenophobia Environmental / Institutional racism Ethnic nationalism Forced displacement Housing discrimination Exclusionary zoning Redlining
Historical examples Australia Canada Pass system Separate schools Indian hospitals Fascist Italy French colonial empire Code Noir Indigénat Greek–Turkish population exchange Jewish ghettos in Europe Pale of Settlement Partition of India Portugal & Spain Nazi Germany Nuremberg Laws Rhodesia South Africa Bantustans Pass laws United Kingdom United States Black Codes Jim Crow laws Separate but equal
Contemporary examples Anti-Romanyism Italy Romania Slovenia Roma walls Bosnia–Herzegovina Schools Cyprus Gulf states Saudi Arabia UAE South Asian labourers India Uthapuram Muslims Israel Palestinian enclaves Hafrada West Bank settlement law / barriers Malaysia Mauritania Morocco Myanmar Northern Ireland Sudan United States Academies Housing Schools Residential Xinjiang Yemen
Related Citizenship Statelessness Forced assimilation Gender apartheid Income inequality One-drop rule Race Ethnicity Racial discrimination
Category Commons
v t e

Allegations of apartheid have been made about various countries.

China

The privileging of the Han people in ethnic minority areas outside of China proper, such as the Uyghur-majority Xinjiang and the central government's policy of settlement in Tibet, and the alleged erosion of indigenous religion, language and culture through repressive measures (such as the Han Bingtuan militia in Xinjiang) and sinicization have been likened to "cultural genocide" and apartheid by some activists. With regards to Chinese settlements in Tibet, in 1991 the Dalai Lama declared:

The new Chinese settlers have created an alternate society: a Chinese apartheid which, denying Tibetans equal social and economic status in our own land, threatens to finally overwhelm and absorb us.

Additionally, the traditional residential system of hukou has been likened to apartheid due to its classification of 'rural' and 'urban' residency status, and is sometimes likened to a form of caste system. In recent years, the system has undergone reform, with an expansion of urban residency permits in order to accommodate more migrant workers.

Cuba

After the dissolution of the Soviet Union, Cuba faced major economic changes and tourism was regarded as the only stable sector of the Cuban economy, which became the subject of policy changes to enhance its development. Cuba legalized the use of the US dollar and created a dual currency system, one based on the dollar and the Cuban convertible peso with the other system based on the Cuban peso. Different institutions and businesses operated on only one side of the currency divide. The Cuban peso, used mostly by Cuban nationals, could not buy imported goods. The goal of the dual economy was to create one economic sphere designed to use foreign investment, while keeping it separate from the other economic sphere of domestic activities.

The dual economy involved various policies that divided Cuban nationals and foreigners. These systems dividing tourist facilities, currencies, and health care, have been informally termed "tourism apartheid", "dollar apartheid", and "medical apartheid".

India

The maltreatment of Dalits in India has been described by Anand Teltumbde, Gopal Guru and others as "India's hidden apartheid". A 2007 report by Human Rights Watch (HRW) also described the treatment of Dalits as akin to a "hidden apartheid", and that they "endure segregation in housing, schools, and access to public services". HRW noted that Prime Minister of India Manmohan Singh saw a parallel between the crime of apartheid and untouchability.

Although the constitution of India officially abolished untouchability, Klaus Klostermaier argued in 2010 that "they still live in secluded quarters, do the dirtiest work, and are not allowed to use the village well and other common facilities". In the same year, Eleanor Zelliot noted that "In spite of much progress over the last sixty years, Dalits are still at the social and economic bottom of society." According to the 2014 NCAER/University of Maryland survey, 27 percent of the Indian population still practices untouchability; the figure may be higher because many people refuse to acknowledge doing so when questioned, although the methodology of the survey was also criticised for potentially inflating the figure. Across India, untouchability was practised among 52 percent of Brahmins, 33 percent of Other Backward Classes and 24 percent of non-Brahmin forward castes. Untouchability was also practised by people of minority religions – 23 percent of Sikhs, 18 percent of Muslims and 5 percent of Christians.

21st century research by Naveen Bharathi, Deepak Malghan and Andaleeb Rahman found that "the extent of intra-village segregation in Karnataka is greater than the local black-white segregation in the American South that continues to influence residential patterns to this day." They claim that this finding agrees with previous ethnographic research that found that residential space in rural India is segregated along caste lines.

A hypothesis that caste amounts to race has been rejected by some scholars. Ambedkar wrote that "The Brahmin of Punjab is racially of the same stock as the Chamar of Punjab. The Caste system does not demarcate racial division. The Caste system is a social division of people of the same race." Zelliot also argued that, despite similarities and parallels between the treatment of Dalits in India and racial discrimination in the West, they "have a different basis and perhaps a different solution".

Israel

Israeli apartheid is a system of institutionalized segregation and discrimination in the Israeli-occupied Palestinian territories and to a lesser extent in Israel proper. This system is characterized by near-total physical separation between the Palestinian and the Israeli settler population of the West Bank, as well as the judicial separation that governs both communities, which discriminates against the Palestinians in a wide range of ways. Israel also discriminates against Palestinian refugees in the diaspora and against its own Palestinian citizens.

Since the 1948 Palestine war, Israel has been denying Palestinian refugees who were expelled or fled from what became its territory the right of return and right to their lost properties. And since the 1967 Six Day War, Israel has been occupying the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, which is now the longest military occupation in modern history, and in contravention of international law has been constructing large settlements there that separate Palestinian communities from one another and prevent the establishment of a Palestinian state. The settlements are mostly encircled by the Israeli West Bank barrier, which intentionally separates the Israeli and Palestinian populations, a policy called Hafrada. While Israeli settlers are subject to Israeli civil law, the Palestinian population is subject to military law. Settlers also have access to separate roads and exploit the region's natural resources at its Palestinian inhabitants' expense.

Comparisons between Israel–Palestine and South African apartheid were prevalent in the mid-1990s and early 2000s. Since the definition of apartheid as a crime in the 2002 Rome Statute, attention has shifted to the question of international law. In December 2019, the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination announced it was reviewing the Palestinian complaint that Israel's policies in the West Bank amount to apartheid. Since then, several Israeli, Palestinian, and international human rights organizations have characterized the situation as apartheid, including Yesh Din, B'Tselem, Human Rights Watch, and Amnesty International. This view has been supported by United Nations investigators, the African National Congress (ANC), several human rights groups, and many prominent Israeli political and cultural figures. The International Court of Justice in its 2024 advisory opinion found that Israel's occupation of the Palestinian territories constitutes systemic discrimination and is in breach of Article 3 of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, which prohibits racial segregation and apartheid. The ruling did not specify whether it was referring to racial segregation, apartheid, or both.

Malaysia

Due to the concept of Ketuanan Melayu enshrined in the country's constitution, which directly translates to "Malay Supremacy", as well as Bumiputera, Malaysia's structural institutions has been noted by many opposition groups, government critics and human rights observers as being analogous to apartheid in various forms. This has been noted specifically against its citizens who are of ethnic Chinese and Indian descent, as well as other various minorities. In Malaysia, a citizen who is not considered to be bumiputera faces obstacles and discrimination in matters such as economic freedom, education, healthcare and housing, leading to a de facto second-class citizen status. Malaysia is also not a signatory of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD), one of the only few countries in the world not to do so. A possible ratification in 2018 led to an anti-ICERD mass rally by Malay supremacists at the country's capital to prevent it, threatening a racial conflict if it does happen.

Examples include in education, in which the country's pre-university matriculation programmes specifically has a 90:10 admissions quota that favours bumiputera students, despite bumiputeras already making up a majority in the country. In addition, government-funded public universities such as Universiti Teknologi MARA (UiTM) exclusively only permits bumiputera citizens as students. In addition, the ownership of land significantly differs between citizens depending on race. For example, numerous plots of land throughout the country, a significant factor needed for housing, are usually reserved only for either bumiputeras and Malays, also known as Bumiputera Lot or Malay Reserved Land (MRL). MRL's are specifically available only for Malays, with even non-Malay bumiputeras not eligible.

In 2006, prominent activist Marina Mahathir described the status of Muslim women in Malaysia as gender apartheid and similar to that of the apartheid system in South Africa. Mahathir's remarks were made in response to a new Islamic law that enables men to divorce or take up to four wives. The law also granted husbands more authority over their wives' property. In response, Conservative groups such as the Malaysian Muslim Professionals Forum (MMPF) criticized her comments for insulting Sharia law. In 2009, politician Boo Cheng Hau compared "bumiputeraism" with state apartheid; as a result Boo faced intense criticisms and death threats by the governing United Malays National Organisation (UMNO), which is a part of the Barisan Nasional (BN) coalition. He was also called into questioning by the Royal Malaysia Police (RMP). In 2015, human rights activist Shafiqah Othman Hamzah also noted that the practice of apartheid policies against different religions in Malaysia is institutionalised and widespread, adding that "What we are living in Malaysia is almost no different from apartheid." In 2021, a group of Malaysian women launched a class-action lawsuit against the government over outdated citizenship laws, which risks trapping women in abusive relationships and can leave children stateless.

Such policies have also caused significant rates of human capital flight or brain drain from Malaysia. A study divulged by Stanford University highlighted that among the main factors behind the Malaysian brain drain include social injustice. It stated that the high rates of emigration of non-bumiputera Malaysians from the country is driven by discriminatory policies that appear to favour Malays/Bumiputeras—such as providing exclusive additional assistance in starting businesses and educational opportunities.

Myanmar

Since Myanmar's transition to relative democratic rule beginning in 2010, the government's response to the Rohingya genocide has been widely condemned, and has been described as an ethnic cleansing by the United Nations, ICC officials, and other governments.

Myanmar's current policies towards the Rohingya population include ethnic segregation, limited access to resources (comparable to the bantustan system), a lack of civil rights, ID card and special permit systems without any guarantee of citizenship (akin to the pass laws), restrictions on movement, and even institutionalized racial definitions, with the Rohingya being officially labelled as "Bengali races". In 2017, Amnesty International issued a report accusing Myanmar of committing the crime of apartheid against the Rohingya. Additionally, the UN has explicitly condemned Myanmar over creating an apartheid state, threatening to withdraw aid from the country.

Qatar

Several human rights groups have compared Qatar's discriminatory treatment of the migrant workers that make up 90% of its population to apartheid.

Saudi Arabia

Saudi Arabia's treatment of religious minorities has been described by both Saudis and non-Saudis as "apartheid" and "religious apartheid".

The restrictions on the Shia branch of Islam in the Kingdom, along with the banning of displaying Jewish, Hindu and Christian symbols, have been referred to as apartheid. Alan Dershowitz wrote in 2002, "in Saudi Arabia apartheid is practiced against non-Muslims, with signs indicating that Muslims must go to certain areas and non-Muslims to others." In 2003, Amir Taheri quoted a Shi'ite businessman from Dhahran as saying "It is not normal that there are no Shi'ite army officers, ministers, governors, mayors and ambassadors in this kingdom. This form of religious apartheid is as intolerable as was apartheid based on race." Testifying before the U.S. Congressional Human Rights Caucus on 4 June 2002, in a briefing entitled "Human Rights in Saudi Arabia: The Role of Women", Ali Al-Ahmed, Director of the Institute for Gulf Affairs, stated:

Saudi Arabia is a glaring example of religious apartheid. The religious institutions from government clerics to judges, to religious curricula, and all religious instructions in media are restricted to the Wahhabi understanding of Islam, adhered to by less than 40% of the population. The Saudi government communized Islam, through its monopoly of both religious thoughts and practice. Wahhabi Islam is imposed and enforced on all Saudis regardless of their religious orientations. The Wahhabi sect does not tolerate other religious or ideological beliefs, Muslim or not. Religious symbols by Muslims, Christians, Jews and other believers are all banned. The Saudi embassy in Washington is a living example of religious apartheid. In its 50 years, there has not been a single non-Sunni Muslim diplomat in the embassy. The branch of Imam Mohamed Bin Saud University in Fairfax, Virginia instructs its students that Shia Islam is a Jewish conspiracy.

On 14 December 2005, Republican Representative Ileana Ros-Lehtinen and Democratic Representative Shelley Berkley introduced a bill in Congress urging American divestiture from Saudi Arabia, and giving as its rationale (among other things) "Saudi Arabia is a country that practices religious apartheid and continuously subjugates its citizenry, both Muslim and non-Muslim, to a specific interpretation of Islam." Freedom House showed on its website, on a page titled "Religious apartheid in Saudi Arabia", a picture of a sign showing Muslim-only and non-Muslim roads.

In addition, the treatment of women in Saudi Arabia has been referred to as "sex segregation" and a "gender apartheid".

South Africa

The name of the crime comes from a system of racial segregation in South Africa enforced through legislation by the National Party (NP), the governing party from 1948 to 1994. Under apartheid, the rights, associations, and movements of the majority black inhabitants and other ethnic groups were curtailed, and white minority rule was maintained. Notably, South Africa's post-apartheid Constitution does not mention or prohibit the crime of apartheid.

Soviet Union

Special settlements in the Soviet Union were the result of population transfers and were performed in a series of operations organized according to social class or nationality of the deported. Resettling of "enemy classes" such as prosperous peasants and entire populations by ethnicity was a method of political repression in the Soviet Union, although separate from the Gulag system of penal labor. Involuntary settlement played a role in the colonization of virgin lands of the Soviet Union. This role was specifically mentioned in the first Soviet decrees about involuntary labor camps. Compared to the Gulag labor camps, the involuntary settlements had the appearance of "normal" settlements: people lived in families, and there was slightly more freedom of movement; however, that was permitted only within a small specified area. All settlers were overseen by the NKVD; once a month a person had to register at a local law enforcement office at a selsoviet in rural areas or at a militsiya department in urban settlements. As second-class citizens, deported peoples designated as "special settlers" were prohibited from holding a variety of jobs, returning to their region of origin, attending prestigious schools, and even joining the cosmonaut program. Due to this special settlements have been called by J. Otto Pohl a type of apartheid.

Sudan

In early 1991, non-Arabs of the Zaghawa tribe of Sudan attested that they were victims of an intensifying Arab apartheid campaign, segregating Arabs and non-Arabs. Sudanese Arabs, who controlled the government, were widely referred to as practicing apartheid against Sudan's non-Arab citizens. The government was accused of "deftly manipulat(ing) Arab solidarity" to carry out policies of apartheid and ethnic cleansing.

American University economist George Ayittey accused the Arab government of Sudan of practicing acts of racism against black citizens. According to Ayittey, "In Sudan... the Arabs monopolized power and excluded blacks – Arab apartheid." Many African commentators joined Ayittey in accusing Sudan of practising Arab apartheid.

Alan Dershowitz labeled Sudan an example of a government that "actually deserve(s)" the appellation "apartheid". Former Canadian Minister of Justice Irwin Cotler echoed the accusation.

United States

Some observers have described the United States as an apartheid state based on examples of systemic oppression against African Americans, Native Americans, and other people of color.

A 1994 paper on "The Legacy of American Apartheid and Environmental Racism" by scholar Robert Bullard described housing discrimination, residential segregation, and differential exposure to air pollution as evidence of ongoing "Apartheid American Style". Michelle Alexander has referred to the country's disproportionate incarceration of African Americans as "a form of apartheid unlike any the world has ever seen," since it puts the victims behind bars rather than "merely shunting black people to the other side of town or corralling them in ghettos."

Historian Nick Estes has referred to the United States' history of pushing Indigenous nations onto smaller and smaller reservations as comprising "a new spatial arrangement of apartheid." Journalist Stephanie Woodard argues that the term "apartheid" is "an apt description of the relationship between the United States and its first peoples ... If a tribe wants to build a housing development or protect a sacred site, if a tribal member wants to start a business or plant a field, a federal agency can modify or scuttle the plans. Conversely, if a corporation or other outside interest covets reservation land or resources, the federal government becomes an obsequious bondservant, helping the non-Native entity get what it wants at bargain-basement prices."

Legal scholar Steven Newcomb has argued that, since the Supreme Court decided Johnson v. McIntosh in 1823, federal law has officially endorsed "a doctrine of Christian dominion over the American Indian." The decision, which has never been overturned, established a "doctrine of discovery" that gave Europeans full sovereignty over land that had been inhabited by Indigenous people. Newcomb asserts that the decision's author John Marshall applied a "double standard" by denying sovereignty rights to the prior and original discoverers. Based on the decision's reference to the discovery rights of "Christian people" and on the account of Marshall's Supreme Court colleague Joseph Story, Newcomb establishes that the Johnson decision is based in Christian law, specifically the 1493 papal bull Inter caetera. Newcomb concludes that the doctrine of discovery violates federal law's separation of church and state.

References

1. Seytoff, Alim A (2 June 2014). "China's Uighurs claim cultural 'genocide'". Al Jazeera. Archived from the original on 13 August 2018. Retrieved 14 August 2018.
2. "Apartheid with Chinese characteristics: China has turned Xinjiang into a police state like no other". The Economist. 31 May 2018. Archived from the original on 5 June 2018. Retrieved 14 August 2018.
3. "Profile: The Dalai Lama" Archived 2011-02-08 at the Wayback Machine, BBC News, 25 April 2006.
4. United States Congressional Serial Set, United States Government Printing Office, 1993, p. 110.
5. "The rural-urban divide: Ending apartheid". The Economist. 19 April 2014. Archived from the original on 14 August 2018. Retrieved 14 August 2018.
6. "China rethinks peasant 'apartheid'". BBC News. 10 November 2005. Archived from the original on 8 September 2007. Retrieved 14 August 2018.
7. "Chinese Society: Change, Conflict and Resistance", by Elizabeth J. Perry, Mark Selden, page 90 Archived 2016-11-23 at the Wayback Machine
8. "China's New Confucianism: Politics and Everyday Life in a Changing Society", p. 86, by Daniel A. Bell
9. "Trust and Distrust: Sociocultural Perspectives", p. 63, by Ivana Marková, Alex Gillespie
10. Lu, Rachel (31 July 2014). "China Is Ending Its 'Apartheid.' Here's Why No One Is Happy About It". Foreign Policy. Archived from the original on 14 August 2018. Retrieved 14 August 2018.
11. Sheehan, Spencer (22 February 2017). "China's Hukou Reforms and the Urbanization Challenge". The Diplomat. Archived from the original on 24 June 2018. Retrieved 14 August 2018.
12. Jimenez, Marguerite; Kirk, John; LeoGrande, William (2014). A Contemporary Cuba Reader The Revolution Under Raúl Castro. Rowman and Littlefield Publishers. p. 174. ISBN 9781442231009.
13. Herrschel, Tassilo (2006). Global Geographies of Post-Socialist Transition Geographies, Societies, Policies. Taylor and Francis. p. 15. ISBN 9781134356768.
14. Economics—Advances in Research and Application: 2013 Edition. ScholarlyEditions. 2013. p. 615. ISBN 9781481675208.
15. Post-socialism is Not Dead Reading the Global in Comparative Education. Emerald Group Publishing Limited. 2010. p. 359. ISBN 9780857244185.
16. Shaffer, Kirwin (2022). A Transnational History of the Modern Caribbean Popular Resistance Across Borders. Springer International Publishing. p. 180. ISBN 9783030930127.
17. Cuba A Country Study. Federal Research Division, Library of Congress. 2002. p. 150. ISBN 9780844410456.
18. Gopal Guru, with Shiraz Sidhva. India's "hidden apartheid" Archived 11 January 2007 at the Wayback Machine.
19. Teltumbde, Anand (2010). The Persistence of Caste: India's Hidden Apartheid and the Khairlanji Murders. Bloomsbury Academic. ISBN 978-1-84813-448-5.
20. William A. Haviland, Anthropology: The Human Challenge, 13th edition, Thomson Wadsworth, 2010, ISBN 978-0-495-81084-1, p. 536 (see note 9).
21. ^ "India: "Hidden Apartheid" of Discrimination Against Dalits". Human Rights Watch. 27 May 2002. Retrieved 27 September 2008.
22. Klostermaier, Klaus (2010). A Survey of Hinduism: Third Edition. State University of New York Press. p. 297. ISBN 978-0-7914-8011-3 – via Google Books.
23. ^ Zelliot, Eleanor (2010). "India's Dalits: Racism and Contemporary Change". Global Dialogue. 12 (2). Archived from the original on 30 April 2013.
24. Chishti, Seema (29 November 2014). "Biggest caste survey: One in four Indians admit to practising untouchability". The Indian Express. Retrieved 30 July 2017.
25. Vij, Shivam (1 December 2014). "Between the bathroom and the kitchen, there is caste". Scroll. Retrieved 22 July 2017.
26. Bhandare, Namita (6 December 2014). "Casteism exists in India, let's not remain in denial". Hindustan Times. Retrieved 17 February 2021.
27. Tharoor, Shashi (8 December 2014). "Why Caste Won't Disappear From India". HuffPost.
28. "How Wide is the "Sink of Localism" in India?". Center for the Advanced Study of India (CASI). 22 November 2020.
29. Singh, Jai Pal; Khan, Mumtaz (2003). "Hindu cosmology and the orinetation and segregation of social groups in villages in Northwestern India". Geografiska Annaler: Series B, Human Geography. 81: 19–39. doi:10.1111/j.0435-3684.1999.00046.x.
30. Ahmad, Enayat (2008). "Rural Settlement types in the Uttar Pradesh (United Provinces of Agra and Oudh)". Annals of the Association of American Geographers. 42 (3): 223–246. doi:10.1080/00045605209352092.
31. Klostermaier, Klaus (2010). A Survey of Hinduism: Third Edition. State University of New York Press. p. 297. ISBN 978-0-7914-8011-3 – via Google Books.
32. "Hebron road renamed "Apartheid Street"". Ma'an News Agency. Hebron. Reuters. 2011-11-02. Archived from the original on 2011-11-02. Retrieved 2023-01-08.
33. David J. Smith; Karl Cordell, eds. (18 October 2013). Cultural Autonomy in Contemporary Europe. Routledge. ISBN 978-1-317-96851-1. The Hebrew term Hafrada is the official descriptor of the policy of the Israeli Government to separate the Palestinian population in the territories occupied by Israel from the Israeli population, by means such as the West Bank barrier and the unilateral disengagement from those territories. The barrier is thus sometimes called gader ha'hafrada (separation fence) in Hebrew. The term Hafrada has striking similarities with the term apartheid, as this term mean 'apartness' in Afrikaans and Hafrada is the closest Hebrew equivalent.
34. Cite error: The named reference Israeli apartheid :5 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
35. Peteet, Julie (2016). "The work of comparison: Israel/Palestine and apartheid". Anthropological Quarterly. 89 (1): 247–281. doi:10.1353/anq.2016.0015. ISSN 0003-5491. JSTOR 43955521. S2CID 147128703.
36. Peteet, Julie (2017). Space and Mobility in Palestine. Indiana University Press. p. 63. ISBN 978-0-253-02511-1. Archived from the original on 20 January 2024. Retrieved 20 January 2024.
37. Baconi, Tareq (5 November 2021). "What Apartheid Means for Israel". The New York Review of Books. Archived from the original on 30 September 2022. Retrieved 20 January 2024.
38. Schuller, Kiera (13 December 2019). "UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination publishes findings on Cambodia, Colombia, Ireland, Israel and Uzbekistan" (Press release). Geneva, Switzerland: United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. Archived from the original on 2019-12-19.
39. Times of Israel staff (24 December 2019). "Report: UN anti-racism panel to probe claims of Israeli apartheid in West Bank". The Times of Israel. Archived from the original on 29 May 2023. Retrieved 20 January 2024.
40. "A regime of Jewish supremacy from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea: This is apartheid". B'Tselem. 12 January 2021. Archived from the original on 8 May 2021. Retrieved 12 January 2021. A regime that uses laws, practices and organized violence to cement the supremacy of one group over another is an apartheid regime. Israeli apartheid, which promotes the supremacy of Jews over Palestinians, was not born in one day or of a single speech. It is a process that has gradually grown more institutionalized and explicit, with mechanisms introduced over time in law and practice to promote Jewish supremacy. These accumulated measures, their pervasiveness in legislation and political practice, and the public and judicial support they receive – all form the basis for our conclusion that the bar for labeling the Israeli regime as apartheid has been met.
41. Sfard, Michael (9 July 2020), "The Occupation of the West Bank and the Crime of Apartheid: Legal Opinion" (PDF), Yesh Din, archived (PDF) from the original on 11 January 2024
42. ^ Sfard, Michael (2021-06-03). "Why Israeli progressives have started to talk about 'apartheid'". The Guardian (Opinion). Archived from the original on 4 January 2024. Retrieved 20 January 2024.
43. Holmes, Oliver (2021-04-27). "Israel is committing the crime of apartheid, rights group says". The Guardian. Archived from the original on 2 February 2022. Retrieved 20 January 2024.
44. White, Ben (18 March 2017). "UN report: Israel has established an 'apartheid regime'". Al Jazeera. Archived from the original on 24 March 2017.
45. Ahren, Raphael (15 May 2018). "South African leaders tell country's Jews to reject 'Nazi-like' Israel". The Times of Israel. Archived from the original on 23 December 2019. Retrieved 23 May 2020. Tuesday's lengthy ANC statement accused Israel of 'crude viciousness,' comparing it to South Africa's past apartheid regime.
46. Davis, Uri (2003). Apartheid Israel: possibilities for the struggle within. Zed Books. pp. 86–87. ISBN 1-84277-339-9.
47. Shimoni, Gideon (1980). Jews and Zionism: The South African Experience 1910–1967. Cape Town: Oxford UP. pp. 310–336. ISBN 0-19-570179-8.
48. Nichols, John (20 July 2023). "Why do Americans get attacked for saying what Israelis say about Israel?". The Nation. Archived from the original on 4 October 2023. Retrieved 20 January 2024.
49. Hasan, Mehdi (22 March 2017). "Top Israelis have warned of apartheid, so why the outrage at a UN report?". The Intercept. Archived from the original on 2 September 2019. Retrieved 20 January 2024.
50. Quigley, John B. (1990). Palestine and Israel: A Challenge to Justice. Duke University Press. pp. 145–150. ISBN 978-0-8223-1011-2. Archived from the original on 20 January 2024. Retrieved 20 January 2024.
51. "Advisory Opinion of the International Court of Justice on the Legal Consequences of Israel's Policies and Practices in the "Occupied Palestinian Territory"". January 2024.
52. Jeßberger, Florian; Mehta, Kalika (19 September 2024). "The Inadvertent Protagonist". Verfassungsblog. doi:10.59704/27788635acf1f7b5 – via verfassungsblog.de.
53. "The Limits of the ICJ Advisory Opinion on Israel's Occupation and the West Bank".
54. "ICJ Delivers Advisory Opinion on the Legality of Israel's Occupation of Palestinian Territories". 20 July 2024. The Court then moves to examining whether there is also a violation of Article 3 of CERD, which prohibits racial segregation and apartheid. This, of course, is a totemic issue in terms of the competing narratives of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. And here the Court, seeking internal consensus, opted for a more ambiguous approach …. but the bottom line of the Court's approach seems clear – at best Israel's actions amount 'only' to racial segregation, but they could also be apartheid. And the reason for this ambiguity is again the need to maintain consensus within the Court
55. Keane, David (31 July 2024). "'Racial Segregation and Apartheid' in the ICJ Palestine Advisory Opinion". this is not the right reading. Article 3 refers to racial segregation and apartheid, and a breach of Article 3 could refer to racial segregation, apartheid, or both. This is seen in the Separate Opinions, some of which considered the finding of a breach of Article 3 as a finding of apartheid; others believing the Court had not made such a finding.
56. Peteet (2016, p. 249) also argues that there is an Israeli narrative of exceptionalism which works to 'exempt' it from such comparisons.
57. Adam & Moodley 2005, pp. 19ff., 59ff..
58. ^ Sabel, Robbie (2009), The campaign to delegitimize Israel with the false charge of apartheid (PDF), Jerusalem: Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, ISBN 978-965-218-073-5, archived (PDF) from the original on 24 February 2023
59. Zilbershats, Yaffa (2013-08-01). "Apartheid, international law, and the occupied Palestinian territory: A reply to John Dugard and John Reynolds". European Journal of International Law. 24 (3): 915–928. doi:10.1093/ejil/cht043. ISSN 0938-5428.
60. Dershowitz, Alan (2008-09-29). The case against Israel's enemies: Exposing Jimmy Carter and others who stand in the way of peace. John Wiley & Sons. pp. 20–25, 28–29, 36, 44–48. ISBN 978-0-470-37992-9. Archived from the original on 4 April 2023. Retrieved 20 January 2024.
61. Matas, David (2005). Aftershock: Anti-Zionism & Anti-Semitism (in Italian). Toronto: Dundurn Press. pp. 53–55. ISBN 978-1-55002-894-2. Retrieved 19 April 2024.
62. Klein, Zvika (28 February 2022). "France's Macron comes out against claims of Israeli apartheid". The Jerusalem Post. Archived from the original on 11 January 2024. Retrieved 20 January 2024.
63. Geddie, Eve (20 March 2024). "EU needs to acknowledge the reality of Israeli apartheid". Amnesty International. 12 Israeli human rights organizations have since expressed "grave concern" about attempts to associate Amnesty's report with antisemitism, and they have rejected the Commission's failure to recognize Israel's apartheid. These organizations argue that weaponizing antisemitism to silence legitimate criticism actually undermines attempts to address rising antisemitism. Republished from Geddie, Eve (13 March 2023). "EU needs to understand the realities in the West Bank". Politico. Retrieved 19 April 2024. Eve Geddie was writing as the director of Amnesty International’s European Institutions Office.
64. Roth, Kenneth (February 29, 2024). "This weaponizing of the charge of "antisemitism" to try to stop such perfectly legitimate and accurate criticism of Israel's apartheid in the Palestinian occupied territory is cheapening, and hence harming, the important fight against antisemitism" (Tweet) – via Twitter.
65. Jeff Handmaker (18 February 2022). "Opinion – The Silencing of Amnesty International's Report on Israeli Apartheid". E-International Relations. Amnesty's report is important and for many advocates it is affirming of what they have been stating all along is a racist regime of systemic discrimination. However, for many longstanding critics of Israel, accusations of Israeli apartheid are not new, nor is the predictable backlash against them whereby antisemitism has been weaponized by Israel and its supporters. This backlash is now been directed against Amnesty International
66. "How a Leading Definition of Antisemitism Has Been Weaponized Against Israel's Critics". The Nation. 27 December 2023. As Human Rights Watch noted, the first example opens the door to reflexively labeling as antisemitic human rights organizations and lawyers who argue that current Israeli government policies constitute apartheid against Palestinians
67. "I Regret to Report There's a New Antisemitism Controversy at Harvard". Slate. 26 January 2024. There have been a few lines of attack on Penslar, and there are thus a few issues at hand. First, there is the notion that he called Israel a regime of apartheid. & What makes the series of events at Harvard so disheartening is not that the attack on Penslar is unique but that it transparently gives the game away: There is no set of credentials that can prevent a person who is earnestly trying to do work in this space from getting sucked into the politicization and, yes, weaponization of antisemitism. This is the way that current public debates over antisemitism tend to go, in Congress and on debate stages, on social media and between friends, within families and within organizations. But when fact and understanding and nuance of the issue are all considered secondary, what gets sacrificed isn't just an individual's career or standing or time, but comprehension of the actual issue that is antisemitism.
68. Hau, Cheng Boo (14 October 2009). "Apartheid in the Malaysian context". malaysia-today.net. Malaysia Today. Archived from the original on 17 April 2022. Retrieved 17 April 2022.
69. ^ Kent, Jonathan (11 March 2006). "Malaysia 'apartheid' row deepens". news.bbc.co.uk. BBC News. Archived from the original on 10 April 2022. Retrieved 17 April 2022.
70. ^ Kent, Jonathan (8 March 2006). "Malaysia women 'suffer apartheid'". news.bbc.co.uk. BBC News. Archived from the original on 6 February 2022. Retrieved 17 April 2022.
71. Nair, Chandran (20 March 2022). "Time to end the educational apartheid facing Malaysia's ethnic minority groups". scmp.com. SCMP. Archived from the original on 20 March 2022. Retrieved 17 April 2022.
72. Chew, Amy (25 September 2019). "Malaysia's dangerous racial and religious trajectory". www.lowyinstitute.org. Lowy Institute. Archived from the original on 26 September 2019. Retrieved 17 April 2022.
73. "PAS and Umno to hold anti-Icerd rally in KL on Dec 8". malaysiakini.com. Malaysiakini. 17 November 2018. Archived from the original on 17 November 2018. Retrieved 17 April 2022.
74. "UiTM insists on retaining 'Bumiputera only' policy". freemalaysiatoday.com. Bernama. Archived from the original on 3 February 2019. Retrieved 17 April 2022.
75. Kamarudin, Kurniawati (29 October 2018). "Malay reserve land issues: No end in sight". Malaysiakini. Bernama, Malaysiakini. Archived from the original on 29 October 2018. Retrieved 17 April 2022.
76. "Cops summon DAP rep over 'apartheid' remark". malaysiakini. 25 March 2009. Archived from the original on 28 March 2009. Retrieved 17 April 2022.
77. Othman Hamzah, Shafiqah (4 December 2015). "We are headed for a Malaysian apartheid". malaymail.com. Malay Mail. Archived from the original on 4 April 2019. Retrieved 17 April 2022.
78. "Malaysian mothers fight government over 'sexist' citizenship law". www.straitstimes.com. The Straits Times. 14 July 2021. Archived from the original on 26 December 2021. Retrieved 17 April 2022.
79. Barrett, Chris (20 December 2021). "The expat mothers fighting Malaysia's 'sexist' citizenship laws". smh.com.au. The Sydney Morning Herald. Archived from the original on 13 January 2022. Retrieved 17 April 2022.
80. "Putting the Malaysian diaspora into perspective". cs.stanford.edu. Stanford University. Archived from the original on 18 October 2014. Retrieved 15 April 2022.
81. "AP finds mass graves, latest evidence of Rohingya genocide in Myanmar". CBS News. Archived from the original on 11 April 2018. Retrieved 10 April 2018.
82. "U.N. genocide advisor: Myanmar waged 'scorched-earth campaign' against the Rohingya". Los Angeles Times. Archived from the original on 11 April 2018. Retrieved 10 April 2018.
83. "UN official convinced of Myanmar Rohingya 'genocide'". CNN. Archived from the original on 11 April 2018. Retrieved 10 April 2018.
84. "UN Security Council: End disgraceful inaction on Myanmar's Rohingya crisis". Amnesty International. Archived from the original on 11 April 2018. Retrieved 10 April 2018.
85. "Tillerson: Myanmar clearly 'ethnic cleansing' the Rohingya". CNN. Archived from the original on 10 April 2018. Retrieved 10 April 2018.
86. "Burma: New Satellite Images Confirm Mass Destruction". Human Rights Watch. 17 October 2017. Archived from the original on 6 January 2018. Retrieved 14 January 2018.
87. "Myanmar: Rohingya trapped in dehumanising apartheid regime". Amnesty International. 21 November 2017. Archived from the original on 4 June 2020. Retrieved 11 May 2020.
88. "Amnesty Accuses Myanmar of Apartheid Against Rohingya". Time. 21 November 2017. Archived from the original on 10 February 2022. Retrieved 10 February 2022.
89. "'Apartheid' in Myanmar, accuses Amnesty". Deutsche Welle. 21 November 2017. Archived from the original on 10 February 2022. Retrieved 10 February 2022.
90. "Myanmar: "Caged without a roof": Apartheid in Myanmar's Rakhine State". Amnesty International. 21 November 2017. Archived from the original on 10 February 2022. Retrieved 10 February 2022.
91. McCarthy, Joe (17 June 2019). "UN Accuses Myanmar of Creating 'Apartheid State' and Threatens to Withhold Aid". Global Citizen. Archived from the original on 5 August 2020. Retrieved 11 May 2020.
92. "Myanmar: UN threatens to withdraw aid over 'policy of apartheid' against Rohingya". the Guardian. 17 June 2019. Archived from the original on 11 February 2022. Retrieved 10 February 2022.
93. "Qatar treatment of workers branded 'apartheid'". 17 March 2014. Archived from the original on 1 March 2022. Retrieved 16 April 2022.
94. Sandra Mackey's account of her attempt to enter Mecca in Mackey, Sandra (1987). The Saudis: Inside the Desert Kingdom. W. W. Norton & Company. pp. 63–64. ISBN 0-393-32417-6.
95. Saudi Institute (2001).
96. Bascio, Patrick (2007). Defeating Islamic Terrorism: An Alternative Strategy. Branden Books. p. 60. ISBN 978-0-8283-2152-5. Archived from the original on 18 January 2023. Retrieved 6 March 2010.
97. Alan M. Dershowitz, Treatment of Israel strikes an alien note Archived 2019-05-27 at the Wayback Machine, Jewish World Review, 8 November 2002.
98. Taheri (2003).
99. Human Rights in Saudi Arabia: The Role of Women, Congressional Human Rights Caucus, Testimony of Ali Al-Ahmed, Director of the Saudi Institute, June 4, 2002.
100. To express the policy of the United States to ensure the divestiture... Archived 18 March 2015 at the Wayback Machine 109th CONGRESS, 1st Session, H. R. 4543.
101. Religious Apartheid in Saudi Arabia, Freedom House website. Retrieved 11 July 2006.
102. "Human Rights Tribune – ed. Spring 2001" (PDF). Human Rights Tribune. International Human Rights Documentation Network. Spring 2001. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2 October 2008. Retrieved 21 August 2007.
103. Andrea Dworkin (1978). "A Feminist Looks at Saudi Arabia". Andrea Dworkin on nostatusquo.com. Archived from the original on 29 August 2012. Retrieved 2 June 2008.
104. "The Australian who has become a prisoner of gender apartheid". The Sydney Morning Herald. 14 November 2009. Archived from the original on 17 February 2010. Retrieved 6 March 2010.
105. Mboti, Nyasha (2019). "Circuits of apartheid: A Plea for Apartheid Studies". Glimpse. 20: 15–70. doi:10.5840/glimpse2019202. S2CID 211445267. Archived from the original on 2021-06-03. Retrieved 2021-06-03.
106. Rodriguez, Junius (2011). Slavery in the Modern World: A History of Political, Social, and Economic Oppression. ABC-CLIO. p. 179. ISBN 978-1-85109-783-8.
107. Khurshutov, Asan (2007). Екзамен за второй день четверть (in Russian). Simferopol: VGMI Tavriya. p. 116. ISBN 9789664351437. OCLC 261297982.
108. Bagalova, Zuleykhan; Dolinova, G.; Samodurov, Yuri (1999). Чечня: право на культуру. Moscow: Polinform. pp. 44–46. ISBN 5935160013. OCLC 51079021.
109. Pohl, J. Otto (15 January 2012). "Soviet Apartheid: Stalin's Ethnic Deportations, Special Settlement Restrictions, and the Labor Army: The Case of the Ethnic Germans in the USSR". Human Rights Review: 205–224.
110. Johnson, Hilde F. (2011). Waging Peace in Sudan: The Inside Story of the Negotiations that Ended Africa's Longest Civil War. Sussex Academic Press. p. 38. ISBN 978-1-84519-453-6. Archived from the original on 2016-06-29. Retrieved 2018-08-02.
111. Vukoni Lupa Lasaga, "The slow, violent death of apartheid in Sudan," 19 September 2006, Norwegian Council for Africa.
112. George Ayittey, Africa and China, The Economist, 19 February 2010
113. "How the Multilateral Institutions Compounded Africa's Economic Crisis", George B.N. Ayittey; Law and Policy in International Business, Vol. 30, 1999.
114. Koigi wa Wamwere (2003). Negative Ethnicity: From Bias to Genocide. Seven Stories Press. p. 152. ISBN 978-1-58322-576-9.
     George B.N. Ayittey (15 January 1999). Africa in Chaos: A Comparative History. Palgrave Macmillan. p. 50. ISBN 978-0-312-21787-7. Archived from the original on 5 May 2016. Retrieved 2 August 2018.
     George B. N. Ayittey (2006). Indigenous African Institutions. Transnational Publishers. ISBN 978-1-57105-337-4. Archived from the original on 2016-09-02. Retrieved 2018-08-02.
     Diallo, Garba (1993). "Mauritania, the other apartheid?". Current African Issues (16). Nordiska Afrikainstitutet. Archived from the original on 2022-06-13. Retrieved 2022-04-22.
115. Alan Dershowitz (3 November 2008). The Case Against Israel's Enemies: Exposing Jimmy Carter and Others Who Stand in the Way of Peace. John Wiley & Sons. p. 24. ISBN 978-0-470-44745-1.
116. Bauch, Hubert (6 March 2009). "Ex-minister speaks out against Sudan's al-Bashir". Montreal Gazette. Archived from the original on 17 November 2011.
117. Robert Bullard, "The Legacy of American Apartheid and Environmental Racism," Journal of Civil Rights and Economic Development 2, no. 9 (2004):445–474.
118. Michelle Alexander, The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Color Blindness (New York: The New Press, 2010).
119. Nick Estes, Our History is the Future (London: Verso, 2019).
120. Stephanie Woodard, American Apartheid: The Native American Struggle for Self-Determination and Inclusion (New York: Ig Publishing, 2018).
121. Steven T. Newcomb, "The Evidence of Christian Nationalism in Federal Indian Law: The Doctrine of Discovery, Johnson v. McIntosh, and Plenary Power,” N.Y.U. Review of Law and Social Change 20 (1993): 303–341.

Sources

• Adam, Heribert; Moodley, Kogila (2005). Seeking Mandela: Peacemaking between Israelis and Palestinians. Philadelphia: Temple University Press. ISBN 978-1-59213-396-3. OCLC 56955855.

• Apartheid
• Crimes by country