Israel will be well aware of the quandary created by accepting people as part of an ethnic cleansing campaign.

Since the end of October, two chartered flights carrying Palestinians have landed at South Africa’s OR Tambo International Airport. Many of the passengers did not have appropriate travel documents, exit stamps or any discernible travel plans. Some didn’t even know where they were when the plane landed.

Passengers from the first flight were allowed to quietly enter South Africa under an existing 90-day visa exemption. Those on the second flight – including women (one pregnant) and children – were held for more than 10 hours on the tarmac while the border authorities awaited a decision to allow them to disembark or to turn the plane around.

South Africa is investigating the incidents, including if and how Israel was involved, and whether the Palestinians travelled willingly or knew where they were going. Some reportedly thought they were going to India, Malaysia and Australia.

According to an investigation by Israeli newspaper Haaretz, each passenger paid approximately US$2 000 to Al-Majd, an organisation allegedly run by an Israeli-Estonian with ties to the Voluntary Emigration Bureau. The bureau is an Israeli military unit charged with the transfer of Palestinians.

Passengers on the second flight told South African civil society organisation Gift of the Givers that they boarded buses out of Gaza without proper documentation. They were then stripped of their belongings by Israeli officials before boarding a flight bound for Johannesburg via Nairobi.

South African Foreign Minister Ronald Lamola called this ‘a clearly orchestrated operation’ to ethnically cleanse Palestinians and depopulate Gaza.

Gift of the Givers is providing support to the Palestinians and described Al-Majd as a ‘front organisation’ for Israel. Al-Majd says it was ‘helping brothers and sisters living under oppressive authority,’ referring to the Palestinian Authority, to ‘begin a life of freedom and dignity in a new place.’

The organisation avoided clarifying whether it was affiliated with Israel’s government, and said its only interaction was in coordinating exits. It remains unclear whether Al-Majd is acting on behalf of Israel to ethnically cleanse Gaza or whether it targeted South Africa because the country has openly criticised Israel.

The timing of the second flight, a week before South Africa hosted the G20 Leaders’ Summit, suggests the latter. If indeed Israel is instrumentalising displaced Palestinians against South Africa, this should be viewed as part of its broader genocidal campaign in Gaza. South Africa has been vocal in its criticism of Israel’s conduct in Palestine, most notably in its allegations of genocide at the International Court of Justice (ICJ).

South African President Cyril Ramaphosa said ‘It does look like they are being flushed out’ of Gaza. Israel has not explained how the group exited, but claimed that South Africa had agreed to receive the Palestinians.

In January 2024, Israel was already looking to Africa in search of governments willing to accept ‘voluntary’ Palestinian migrants. Israel appeared to shut down the idea after widespread criticism that this would amount to ethnic cleansing. However, it has since lost many allies and the public relations battle at large, and may now be less sensitive to criticism as it seeks to punish its critics.

The Palestinians’ arrival places South Africa in a difficult position. The country needs to balance its foreign policy on Palestine with its immigration laws and the dictates of humanitarian intervention.

South Africa’s clear stance on Israel’s genocide and actions in the Occupied Palestinian Territory compels it to provide humanitarian assistance to Gazans fleeing the genocide. However, accepting people as part of an ethnic cleansing campaign contradicts its position, and Israel would be aware of this quandary.

South Africa’s decision to accept Palestinians without travel documents has also raised questions within the country about immigration procedures. Although South Africa offers Palestinians a 90-day visa exemption, the passengers had no exit stamp or record of leaving Israel.

It is not unusual for refugees to travel irregularly without documentation or permission while fleeing persecution or war. South Africa’s Refugee Act protects everyone’s right to claim asylum. It directs the Border Management Authority to issue a five-day asylum transit visa to the claimants, who must then report to a refugee reception office and lodge a claim. However, none of the Palestinian passengers is known to have claimed asylum.

This does not mean they are ineligible for refugee status. Many refugees avoid lodging claims in transit countries, as it could affect their status in their preferred final destination. Of the 153 passengers who landed on the second plane, 23 had visas to other countries and travelled onwards; some to Australia, Canada and Malaysia.

Some critics noted that South Africa has not treated Africans fleeing conflicts with the same compassion. Travellers from Sudan and the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) – two of Africa’s biggest humanitarian and displacement crises – don’t have visa exemptions and are currently blocked from accessing asylum. In fact, South Africa has been criticised for its limited intervention in the DRC’s longstanding displacement crisis.

If Israel is involved in weaponising displaced Gazans against South Africa, that should not be treated in isolation from Israel’s other international crimes. Forced removal violates the Fourth Geneva Convention and Genocide Convention. It also constitutes a war crime under the International Criminal Court’s Rome Statute.

If any more flights arrive under similar circumstances and investigations reveal that Israel was involved in chartering flights to enable displacement, third countries are obliged to intervene and prevent ethnic cleansing under international law.

In October, the ICJ issued an advisory opinion that found Israel’s blockade of humanitarian aid to be illegal. Crucially, the opinion extends to ‘complicit’ states, which are legally obliged to compel Israel’s compliance with the court decision. The same applies to ethnic cleansing.

Unchecked, impunity for Israel not only erodes international law, its instruments, and the efficacy of its institutions, but sets dangerous precedents for other actors to do the same in Africa and beyond.

Written by Aimée-Noël Mbiyozo, Senior Research Consultant, Migration, ISS & Xhanti Mhlambiso, Researcher, Rule of law, ISS