
Israel alone — the self-fulfilling prophecies of Jewish isolation
In the hands of Hashem
'I think the reason that the forces of darkness are beating us so much,' said Rav Doniel Katz, 'is that they are fighting a religious war, and we keep ignoring the fact that it's a religious war.'
The video, it turned out, had been uploaded on 24 April 2025. At just over 80 minutes in length, it was a conversation between Rav Katz and his much younger colleague, Reb Adam. Both rabbis, I knew, were ba'alei teshuvah — a Hebrew phrase, meaning 'masters of return', for Jews who had been born secular but had later found Torah. Accordingly, their dialogue was aimed at those who were 'just beginning' the journey, as well as those who were 'already immersed in Torah learning.'
The subjects covered, if one were to ignore the Jewish connection, could have made up a New Age podcast from just about anywhere on the internet. From meditation techniques, breathwork and trauma healing to the laws of attraction and 'the rise of the divine feminine', there wasn't much that was left off the table.
But, of course, one could not ignore the Jewish connection. At around 22 minutes, Adam asked Katz if there was any place for 'external advocacy'.
Katz: 'What do you mean by external advocacy?'
Adam: 'Advocacy for Israel and the Jewish people … you know, the notion of, 'Bring them [the hostages] home now.''
Katz: 'I find that a problematic statement. I mean, it's leveraging a tremendously difficult moment, and kind of politicising it, as if the [Israeli] government has control. And why are we blaming it on them? Shouldn't we give them back now? Shouldn't we be turning to Hashem [God], and saying, 'Hashem, help us heal now'?'
It was then that Katz lamented the fact, as he saw it, that the broader Jewish community had failed to interpret the war with Hamas in essentially spiritual terms. And here, instead of casting shade and derision on what he had come to view as 'the forces of darkness,' he was almost complimentary.
'They are fighting with a passionate spirituality,' he said, 'but we as a people, collectively, are disengaged. We don't really think we have a divine destiny, we don't think we have divine blessing, we don't think we have a divine mission … and therefore, we are beaten.'
For me, if anything, it was a way of reading the situation that was deeply instructive. Even if I had long since arrived at the conclusion that — far from waging a 'war' — the Jewish state had been waging a campaign of revenge and extermination, I could not shake the sense that the horrors in the Holy Land were millenarian at their core. My first piece on the conflict, published in late October 2023, had focused on the End Times prophecies of Judaism and Islam, a subject that had drawn the attention of Judge Dennis Davis on national TV.
It was in this context, in January of 2024, that I first came across the work of Rav Katz. Back then, less than four months after the 7 October event, I had been forwarded a link to a 45-minute YouTube video titled Is This The Kabbalistic Meaning of the Israel-Hamas War? (And Will It Bring Moshiach…?) Aside from the millenarian (or messianic) theme, there was the hit on Jewish mysticism (Kabbalah), which had long been my last remaining connection to the tradition of my birth — and so, I had clicked on the link instantly.
There on stage, exuding an undeniable charisma, was a man around my age, with a black hat, unkempt beard and fathomlessly sad eyes. 'There is no hope in our situation, I know,' he had said, as his sermon was reaching its crescendo, 'but we're already dancing in the [Temple].'
For Katz, who was preaching in English to a packed hall in Israel, the offer of immediate solace was antithetical to his point. The collective anger and grief over the hostages and the dead; the sharp rise in the diaspora of anti-Semitic attacks; the lack of an effective leadership to navigate the chaos — all of these things, according to Katz, were proof that the situation was in the hands of Hashem. It was the suffering itself, he informed his audience, that would ultimately bring on the final redemption.
As for the suffering of the Palestinians, over the next 16 months, I would return intermittently to Katz's various social media platforms — and specifically his YouTube channel, The Elevation Project — to see whether, in the face of Israeli atrocities, he had allowed himself to draw a distinction between combatants and civilians.
To my disappointment, and sometimes even to my anger, it would never happen. His excuse for not doing so, it seemed, remained his aversion to 'politicising' the moment. But still, the way I saw it, the political and the spiritual were one thing.
Signs and portents
In the early hours of 2 May 2025, in international waters off the coast of Malta, the Conscience — a ship belonging to the Freedom Flotilla Coalition, a group of NGOs that aimed to break the Israeli siege of Gaza — was crippled by a drone strike. Although Israel would neither claim nor deny responsibility for the attack, the evidence of culpability was overwhelming.
'According to Maltese parliamentarians, the Israeli government had requested — mere days before the attack — that Malta refuse entry to the ship. Also, according to Drop Site News, an Israeli military aircraft had circled the vessel within hours of the strike.
The truth, by almost any (non-Zionist) account, was therefore biblical in its savagery. For exactly two months at that point, no food or humanitarian aid had been allowed to enter Gaza. Half a million Palestinians were at immediate risk of starvation, according to aid agencies, with the newswires releasing a constant stream of horrifically unpardonable images — children, in the grips of acute malnutrition and cystic fibrosis, with sunken eyes, yellowing skins and shockingly skeletal frames.
Outside of the most denialist Jewish enclaves, the analogy between these images and the photographs of living skeletons in the death camps of the Nazis was impossible to ignore. Equally difficult to ignore was the symbolism of the attack on the ship called Conscience — Israel, whether or not it cared, was demonstrating to the world that it did not have one.
And yet, only two days before, an event had occurred that was arguably even more awash in biblical symbolism. On 30 April, on the eve of Israel's Yom Ha'atzmaut — Day of Independence — wildfires had erupted on the outskirts of Jerusalem, reportedly the largest in the country's history. Almost instantly, news spread (aided by the reliable support of Hindu nationalists in India) that the fires were the handiwork of Hamas-supporting arsonists. An Arab citizen of East Jerusalem, who happened to be carrying cotton wool and a lighter, was the first to be arrested.
By 3 May, with the Conscience still attending to its wounds, the leftist Israeli newspaper Haaretz would run a commendable investigation titled, ' How Conspiracy Theories About Palestinian Arsonists Spread Like Wildfire in Israel '. The national scapegoating campaign, the piece concluded, had been driven by old videos, misleading maps and political rhetoric. 'Many people saw the lie,' one expert told Haaretz. 'Fewer saw the correction.'
But it wasn't until 7 May that a South African Jew by the name of Ronnie Kasrils, a former Umkhonto we Sizwe freedom fighter and erstwhile Cabinet minister in the post-apartheid ANC government, would properly bring the symbolism home.
In an opinion piece for Mail & Guardian, Kasrils would note that 'the forests that cover the demolished Palestinian villages of the 1948 Nakba' were ablaze at a time when the Jewish state was meant to be celebrating its founding.
'Those like me,' he wrote, 'who were seduced as innocent children by the thieving Jewish National Fund (JNF) into providing pocket money to plant trees ostensibly to make the desert bloom, can feel redeemed by whatever cause is now wiping the stolen terrain of its camouflage.'
Kasrils, whose vehement anti-Zionism had for decades drawn the bitter contempt of the vast majority of South African Jews, happened to be including my own experience in his 'like me' qualifier — the white and blue moneyboxes of the JNF had stolen my pocket money too, a fact I would only discover decades later.
As detailed in the remarkable documentary Village Under the Forest, written and directed by Heidi Grunebaum and Mark Kaplan — another two members, heroically despised, of the South African Jewish community — these pine forests, aside from concealing Palestinian villages razed in the Nakba, were also non-indigenous. They had never, in other words, rightfully belonged on the land.
To my mind, then, whatever force had caused the terrain to be wiped clean, an appropriate term for it was indeed 'redemption' — and particularly so because of the 'scapegoating campaign' that had fallen so hopelessly flat.
And in such an Old Testament context, perhaps even the atheist Kasrils would have reverted once more to biblical language to describe what transpired on 8 May, the day after his piece was published.
Because, to be clear, 8 May 2025 was significant for two easily observable reasons: first, it was the 80th anniversary of Victory in Europe (VE) day; second, it was the day on which the winds shifted in Britain with respect to an institutional recognition that the modern Jewish state had gone too far.
Put another way, exactly eight decades after the Nazis had been defeated, an editorial in the Financial Times titled ' The west's shameful silence on Gaza ' was going viral; an editorial in The Economist titled ' The war in Gaza must end ' had just been published; and British media was alight with the news that a succession of conservative parliamentarians — former Israel supporters — had withdrawn their backing for the 'rogue' Jewish state.
By that Sunday, 11 May, The Guardian's editorial board would ask the pivotal question: 'What is this, if not genocidal?'
Falling silent
'I don't care about saving the Jewish soul at this point,' said the journalist Nora Barrows-Friedman, a staffer at the essential Electronic Intifada podcast, on 6 May 2025. 'I don't care about anything that has to do with preserving anything of my inherited genetic identity. It makes no difference to me about the future of Jewish society, because what it has been reduced to right now is horrific.'
It was a sentiment that I could easily understand, and on some days — most days, lately — it was a sentiment that I probably agreed with. Like Barrows-Friedman, I had concluded that what 'Jewish society' had been 'allowed to promulgate in Palestine' was 'irredeemable'.
Still, a 4,000-year-old tradition — if one counted from the life of the patriarch Abraham — wasn't about to disappear just because a handful of its members were disgusted by what it had become. In Israel itself, beginning in early May, a small but growing group of dissidents would begin to transmute their self-disgust into something life-affirming: protests not for a ceasefire deal or the release of the hostages (which happened weekly, and were life-affirming only insofar as Jews were concerned), but protests against the indefensible slaughter of Palestinian children (which had not happened at all since 7 October, and were inclusive in a way that upended the Zionist creed).
A report on the new phenomenon, aired on NPR radio on 7 May, said it all:
'Every Saturday night, throngs of protesters march down a main street banging on drums and chanting. But last weekend, they fell quiet as they streamed past another group of protesters who've brought something new to the Israeli debate over the war in Gaza. They're holding photos of children smiling. This new protest group says these are the children killed by the Israeli military in Gaza.'
And yet why, to scream it from the rooftops, had it taken so long?
The question was as urgent as it was legitimate — and the answers seemed to stretch from the dehumanising censorship of Israeli media to the 'murderous solipsism' that, according to the arch-dissident Ori Goldberg, lay at the very heart of the Jewish nationalist project.
But there was, to my mind, a much older answer. Like Islam and Christianity, Judaism had always been inward-focused; its essence had always been based on the division between 'us' (the chosen; the saved) and 'them' (the masses; the damned). Like the fundamentalist imams in Mecca and the conservative cardinals in Rome, our orthodox rabbis in Jerusalem were still heavily invested in the message — often subliminal; mostly not — of an exclusively ordained mission.
On 13 October 2024, the day after Yom Kippur, when The New York Times had just released a report — based on the observations of 65 doctors, nurses and paramedics — that Israeli snipers had been deliberately shooting Palestinian children in the head, Rav Katz did a piece to camera (as posted on his Facebook page).
'So in summary, this is how the year begins,' he said, 'it's like the 'Hero's Journey,' right? Here we are standing up, fighting for our lives, against the most dark, evil, maniacal forces and people in the world. And we have been left alone by all our allies, abandoned, and we are the last ones …. overcoming all the obstacles, to stand up for what is good and right and pure in the world…'
At the time, of course, Israel had the unqualified backing of the largest military coalition that the world had ever known. No matter what Katz — who presented as a genuine Kabbalist; a compassionate soul — had to say about abandonment, almost every human being with a smartphone was seeing the opposite.
It would, unfortunately, take many more months for the institutions of the West to begin to place some daylight between themselves and the Jewish state. And even then, after the images out of Gaza were drawing comparisons to the Nazi death camps, the extermination campaign would continue — even then, after US President Donald Trump had terrified the Israelis by negotiating with their enemies without them, the carnage from the skies would not stop.
Rav Katz, in other words, by suggesting that such events were in 'Hashem's hands,' was explaining the inexplicable. And the final redemption, while it was becoming the last resort, had never seemed further off. DM

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Mail & Guardian
9 hours ago
- Mail & Guardian
High court victory for coastal communities against TotalEnergies, Shell over offshore drilling
The high court in the Western Cape has set aside the government's approval of the environmental authorisation for TotalEnergies EP South Africa to drill for oil and gas in offshore areas known as Block 5/6/7 along the country's south-west coast. The high court in the Western Cape has set aside the government's approval of the environmental authorisation for TotalEnergies EP South Africa The court has sent the matter back to the department of minerals and petroleum to make a fresh decision, following further studies, the addition of further information and public participation. While the authorisation was initially granted to TotalEnergies, the company intends to transfer the environmental authorisation to Shell to conduct the drilling. Wednesday's In addition to setting aside the environmental authorisation, the court ordered that a fresh decision be made. Before any approval can be reconsidered, Total — or Shell — must submit new or amended assessments. These must fully examine the socio-economic impacts of a well blowout on coastal communities; the project's full life-cycle climate impacts; all factors required under the The bulk of the applicants review grounds were premised on the final environmental impact assessment report failing to meet the standards imposed by the Specifically, they contended that the decisions to grant the environmental authorisation were unlawful and irrational in six respects. Among these were that the final environmental impact assessment report failed to properly assess — and the state respondents failed to consider — the socio-economic effects of the proposed project, 'which a well blowout and consequent oil spill will have on the fishing industry and small-scale fishers'. The applicants argued that the state respondents failed to consider the factors prescribed by the Integrated Coastal Management Act and failed to properly assess and consider the need and desirability of the proposed project in relation to the climate change impacts, 'which will be caused by burning any gas discovered by the proposed project'. The state respondents failed to assess and consider the transboundary effects of the proposed project both on Namibia and on international waters. Neither the final environmental impact assessment report, nor the environmental management programme report, included Total's oil spill or blowout contingency plans, they argued. The respondents were the ministers of environment and energy, the director-general of the department of mineral resources and energy, TotalEnergies EP South Africa Block 567 and Shell Exploration & Production South Africa. In its judgment, the court found that the environmental impact assessment failed to fully examine the consequences of a major oil spill on local and neighbouring coastal communities, ignored coastal protection laws and omitted critical climate and fairness considerations, said Shahil Singh, the legal adviser to the Green Connection. 'A critical omission, the oil spill and blowout contingency plans were withheld from the public until after approval, denying communities the chance to comment on emergency preparedness,' Singh said. 'Total and Shell will now need to undertake additional studies, make these plans publicly available and properly assess both coastal and cross-border risks before any decision is taken.' The court found that the lack of oil spill and blowout contingency plans meant that there had not been a full assessment and description of the manner in which Total intended to respond to pollution or environmental degradation, as required by the National Environment Management Act. The court found it even more problematic that there was no public participation in relation to the response plans. Singh termed the court victory a significant win for transparency, precaution and for the rights of coastal communities and small-scale fishers who refuse to be sidelined in decisions that affect their livelihoods and the future of our oceans. While the project's final environmental impact assessment report admitted that an oil spill or blowout could cause serious damage to the coastal environment, it did not assess the full economic and social impacts on the small-scale fishers and coastal communities who depend on these waters for food and income. To the extent that there were or are limitations in conducting such assessments, Total was compelled to adopt a cautious approach and take protective and preventive measures before the anticipated harm of an oil spill or blowout materialised. 'Once the final environmental impact assessment report identified the potential blow out and oil spill as potentially significant impact or risk, it was obliged to assess the consequences and the probability of the impact or risk, including those with a low degree of probability of a blowout or oil spill,' the judgment read. That is in light of the risk-averse and cautious approach espoused by the National Environment Management Act and the Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act, in terms of which the limitation on present knowledge about the consequences of an environmental decision must be taken into account. 'The precautionary approach entails that where there is a threat of serious or irreversible damage to a resource, the lack of full scientific certainty should not be used as a reason for postponing measures to prevent environmental degradation. 'It means that, where there exists evidence of possible environmental harm, such as a possible blow-out or oil spill as the final environmental impact assessment report accepts, a cautious approach should be adopted, and if necessary decision-makers may compel the party to take protective and preventive measures before the anticipated harm materialises.' Scientific spill modelling for the project showed that oil from a disaster could reach the waters and shores of Namibia. International law, and South Africa's own laws, require that the impacts on neighbouring countries should be considered, and that there was an obligation for the environmental impact assessment to consider the harms caused by transboundary impacts, and for this to be considered by the decision-makers. The court found they did not. According to the judgment, at the very least, it has been established that there is a risk of oil spill and a blowout occurring, and a risk of the oil reaching Namibian waters and the Namibian shoreline. The approach adopted by the respondents, to the effect that the National Environment Management Act and the environmental impact assessment regulations do not require environmental impact assessment to assess and predict transboundary harm is 'inconsistent with the customary international law and international law obligations. 'It is also contrary to the [ National Environment Management Act] principles and Integrated Coastal Management Act, which recognise the need to discharge global and international responsibilities,' the court found. The court confirmed that the assessment of climate change impacts should form part of this assessment. 'While it is correct that the specific activity for which the environmental authorisation in this case is granted is exploration and not production, and that the former process will not always result in the latter process, the two processes are intertwined,' the judgment noted. There would be no point in conducting an exploration activity unless an entity hoped to proceed to the next phase of production. 'And it is not speculation to conclude that by the time such an entity applies for authorisation to conduct the next phase, it is armed with information that places it at an advantage to proceed to the next phase.' Climate change is relevant to both exploration and production activities. 'It makes no sense to rely on the positive consequences of the production stage for purposes of considering an application at the exploration stage, only to resist considering the negative consequences of the production stage when it comes to consideration of climate change.' The judgment is 'a victory in the growing opposition to oil and gas exploration in our country', said Melissa Groenink-Groves, the defending rights programme manager at Natural Justice. 'Recently, a number of oil and gas projects have been given environmental authorisation but this judgment again confirms that companies must follow due process, undertake comprehensive assessments and provide communities with an opportunity to have their voices heard, in respect of all relevant information. 'It confirms that our fight for our environmental rights is strong and that we must continue for the future for our children,' she said. Lesai Seema, director at Cullinan & Associates, which represented the applicants, said the judgment makes it clear that the granting of environmental authorisation for offshore oil and gas exploitation will be unlawful if the decision-maker does not carefully consider a range of factors necessary to 'safeguard the long-term collective interests of people and other living organisms who depend on the coastal and marine environment'.


eNCA
9 hours ago
- eNCA
Gaza killings underline dangers journalist face
JOHANNESBURG - The killing of three journalists by Israeli forces in the war with Hamas, underlines the dangers they face in doing their job. An ongoing study, titled Safeguarding Female Journalists Against Online Harms, suggests media companies can do more to promote the health and safety of employees. To discuss the hardships of being a journalist in this day and age, eNCA spoke to ShoeShoe Qhu, CEO of the Media Development and Diversity Agency.


The South African
15 hours ago
- The South African
DIRCO, defence ministry angered by SANDF general's visit to Iran
The Department of International Relations and Cooperation (DIRCO) and the Ministry of Defence have distanced themselves from South African National Defence Force (SANDF) chief General Rudzani Maphwanya's pledge to Iran. Maphwanya reportedly pledged solidarity with Iran when he met with Major General Amir Hatami, Chief of Staff of Iran's Army, and other senior members in Tehran this week. According to Jewish publication The Algemeiner , during a joint media briefing, Maphwanya called for deeper ties between Iran and South Africa, especially in defence cooperation, affirming that South Africa and the Islamic Republic of Iran have common goals. 'We always stand alongside the oppressed and defenceless people of the world,' he was quoted as saying. Likewise, Hatami reportedly said that both countries share a strong commitment to opposing 'colonialism and global arrogance,' with South Africa playing a significant role in Iran's foreign policy priorities. In response, DIRCO spokesperson Chrispin Phiri said it is crucial to clarify that the implementation of South Africa's foreign policy is a function of the Presidency, supported by DIRCO. Phiri said, consequently, any statements made by an individual or a department other than those responsible for foreign policy should not be misinterpreted as the official position of the South African Government. 'The remarks attributed to General Maphwanya, therefore, do not represent the government's official foreign policy stance. 'In response to this matter, Minister of International Relations and Cooperation Mr Ronald Lamola will be seeking further clarification,' he said. Let us know by leaving a comment below, or send a WhatsApp to 060 011 021 1. Subscribe to The South African website's newsletters and follow us on WhatsApp, Facebook, X, and Bluesky for the latest news.