Talk:African National Congress

political idantity

African nationalism & Social democracy at the same time? Thats bullshit! Like a flying Pig not possible. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2003:E6:FF2F:F593:4925:DA3C:4365:86C5 (talk) 16:31, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Official ANC website domain changed

Please note that the official website domain of www.anc.org.za is no longer operation due to a dispute with the hosting provider. It appears that the new address for the official site will be www.anc1912.org.za unless the domain dispute is settled amicably.

Background info here: News24 - ANC website battle: Party fails to secure ruling, wants to go to court instead

--96.43.180.53 (talk) 21:52, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

Coloureds

Sangdeboeuf, can you please explain why you removed the link to Coloureds in your last change? I don't understand how it fits into the MOS:NOPIPE rule indicated in your edit summary. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 04:15, 28 April 2019 (UTC)

Mixed-race South Africans redirects to Coloureds, so there's no need for a piped link. Linking to the redirect is preferred as long as it fits logically into the text. —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 04:23, 28 April 2019 (UTC)

Okay, thanks. I think it looks a little odd here because of the second adjective to South Africans ("black") - but not serious. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 06:41, 28 April 2019 (UTC)

Fair point; I've added a link to Black South Africans to clear up any ambiguity; feel free to adjust the wording if this is too repetitive. —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 01:00, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

2016 Municipal Result Differs from Other Pages

The IEC and every article you read says that the ANC got 53.91% of the vote in the 2016 Municipal Elections. And yet this page claims the ANC got 55.7%. Why is there a discrepancy in these two numbers? This page does not match the 2021 Municipal Election page, which says that the previous result of the ANC was 53.91%. The IEC website says so: https://results.elections.org.za/dashboards/lge/ But I'm not going to edit it, because I already edited it once and someone changed it. Someone needs to rectify this. This page differs in the 2016 result from other Wikipedia pages on it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:547:A00:2F0:D8CC:540E:5C82:1EB6 (talk) 21:33, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

Allegations of ANC’s Ties with Iran, Qatar, and Hamas

I would like to add to the "Corruption controversies" section a paragraph about the recent report published by the Institute for the Study of Global Antisemitism and Policy that raises concerns about possible ANC’s ties with Iran, Qatar, and Hamas.

Since this is a potentially contentious topic, in particular due to it being related to Israel-Hamas war, I would like to discuss it here, before making any edits.

Suggested phrasing:

In November 2024, the Institute for the Study of Global Antisemitism and Policy published a report called “South Africa, Hamas, Iran, and Qatar: The Hijacking of the ANC and the International Court of Justice”, which alleged that the ANC was approximately $30 million in debt before bringing its ICJ case against Israel, and subsequently received a sudden influx of unidentified cash after a series of meetings with Hamas, Iranian, and Qatari leaders. The report also raises concerns about foreign influence, including Russian financing, and calls for international scrutiny of the ANC’s policies and partnerships.

Looking forward to your input. DancingOwl (talk) 17:20, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

This extraordinary claim may or may not belong in the Institute for the Study of Global Antisemitism and Policy, alongside their other baseless allegations (in the activities section), but it certainly doesn't belong here or anywhere else. M.Bitton (talk) 17:58, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

I see.

And what's your take on similar allegations reported in May by Jerusalem Post?

https://m.jpost.com/israel-news/article-801490 DancingOwl (talk) 18:20, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

The answer is in the "the Israel Law Center" and "alleges", i.e, the same Israeli garbage propaganda. M.Bitton (talk) 18:25, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it sounds like any Israeli source, or any source affiliated with Israel, would be automatically dismissed by you as "Israeli garbage propaganda". DancingOwl (talk) 18:36, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

I don't need to correct you, you know you're wrong. I suggest you read WP:EXTRAORDINARY. M.Bitton (talk) 18:40, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

I read it, but you argument seems to be mainly based on the identity of the organizations making the claims, not the quality of their evidence, which is what caused me to ask the question. DancingOwl (talk) 18:47, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

You read what you wanted to read. There is no evidence (it's an allegation by a party with a conflict of interest). M.Bitton (talk) 18:51, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

In other words, you seem to automatically assume conflict of interest for any of those sources, just because of them being Israeli. DancingOwl (talk) 18:51, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

Whatever. I tried to explain the reasons, but since you insist on reading what you want to read, I see no point in wasting my time. I'm done here. M.Bitton (talk) 18:53, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

 Note: those who are not familiar with ISGAP (Israel's propaganda machine) should read this article. M.Bitton (talk) 18:15, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

I don't think the ISGAP report merits inclusion. ISGAP was not the first group to make the allegations and has a conflict of interest due to being Israeli-funded. However, I'm open to further discussion on including the bribery allegations as reported by JPost and The Citizen ("Is Iran funding the ANC? | The Citizen".), although I'd like to point out that the Daily Maverick has reported there is no concrete evidence of these claims and included the ANC's explanation of their newfound financial stability. TRCRF22 (talk) 18:08, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

Unlike newspapers that publish baseless allegations from every nobody out there, Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. M.Bitton (talk) 18:35, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

Hence why I said we should discuss the topic before making a decision. TRCRF22 (talk) 18:40, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

What is there to discuss? Old newspaper articles? If there was any credibility to the allegations, we would have known about it by now. M.Bitton (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

What point is it you're making? I don't understand. The sources are old, therefore we should pay no attention?

I personally am leaning towards not including the allegations as there doesn't seem to be much evidence for them, but just summarily declaring that we should ignore the topic altogether without giving it any consideration is unreasonable. TRCRF22 (talk) 18:55, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

It's not just about the newspaper articles being old, it's about the extraordinary allegations that have never been substantiated and have since been forgotten. M.Bitton (talk) 18:59, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

As far as understand, the evidence is mainly circumstantial, but on the other hand Daily Maverick were not given access to ANC's balances sheets, so the questions about ANC financial situation and the newfound sources of money still remain.

Regarding ISGAP - Israeli funding does create a potential conflict of interest and makes them a potentially biased source, but "biased" doesn't necessarily mean "unreliable" and the fact that similar claims have been previously made by other sources, not affiliated with Israeli government, neutralizes this bias to some extent anyway.

Finally, given other recent allegations of corruption on one hand, and the coverage of those allegations by multiple South-African and Israeli mainstream sources on the other hand, I'm not sure those new allegations can be classified as "extraordinary". DancingOwl (talk) 20:36, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

If we were to include these allegations, which I'm currently undecided on, it would definitely need to be phrased differently to a) make clear that ISGAP is not the source of the allegation and b) reflect Daily Maverick's reporting which casts doubt on the corruption claims. TRCRF22 (talk) 16:54, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

Makes sense - I'll think about the correct way to phrase it and post a draft tomorrow. DancingOwl (talk) 19:02, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

ISGAP particularly (and possibly Jerusalem Post) is not a reliable source for this extraordinary claim. waddie96 ★ (talk) 19:55, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

what are you basing this claim on? DancingOwl (talk) 16:36, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

On facts, I guess. See link above about ISGAP (Israel's propaganda machine). As for the Jerusalem Post, it literally publishes disinformation. M.Bitton (talk) 12:58, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

1. Does the fact the Al Jazeera is funded by Qatari government make it a "Qatar's propaganda machine"?

2. I've seen a discussion about JP's reliability, but as far as I know, no verdict has been reached, so it's not clear what is your claim about it "literally publishing disinformation" based on. DancingOwl (talk) 14:38, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

I prepared a new draft for the "Corruption controversies" section, taking into account all the suggestions you made in previous discussion.

Please, let me know what you think.

In the beginning of 2024, allegations emerged that Iran had financially supported South Africa's African National Congress (ANC) to facilitate its genocide case against Israel at the International Court of Justice (ICJ). The ANC, which was facing significant financial difficulties at the time, reportedly recovered shortly after initiating the legal proceedings, raising suspicions of foreign influence. A group of 160 lawyers, coordinated by the Israeli NGO Shurat HaDin, sent a letter to U.S. authorities urging an investigation under the Magnitsky Act into the alleged Iranian funding of the ANC. The letter emphasized concerns over corruption and potential misuse of South Africa’s foreign policy to serve geopolitical interests of states like Iran. South African media and international observers have debated the credibility of these claims. While critics argue that the ANC's financial recovery and legal moves align with Iran's strategic goals, others point to the lack of concrete evidence. Additionally, South Africa's trade and diplomatic ties with Iran have come under scrutiny, as commentators question whether ANC's growing alignment with Iran is not only morally questionable, but may also lead to international repercussions, potentially affecting South Africa's relationships with Western trading partners.

DancingOwl (talk) 11:40, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

Oppose (for the same reasons that I highlighted previously). This extraordinary allegation, which also happens to be old (with no lasting effect), is clearly UNDUE (the part about the Israeli "NGO" is beyond the pale). M.Bitton (talk) 12:56, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

Oppose for reasons mentioned previously. waddie96 ★ (talk) 13:11, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

The reasons you mentioned previously was using ISGAP and JP as sources - they are not referenced in the new version. DancingOwl (talk) 14:03, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

They mean the same reasons (all of them) that have been mentioned by everyone. M.Bitton (talk) 14:05, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

Does "The Citizen" also have a conflict of interest here, in your view? DancingOwl (talk) 14:34, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

References