Mailbox: Dialogue of the damned - Ramaphosa, Sooliman, and the normalisation of antisemitism in SA

Key topics:

• National Dialogue seen as political theatre, not real reform

• Sooliman’s ideological bias undermines public trust and unity

• Media, police, and state ties blur lines of power and accountability

Sign up for your early morning brew of the BizNews Insider to keep you up to speed with the content that matters. The newsletter will land in your inbox at 5:30am weekdays. Register here.

Support South Africa’s bastion of independent journalism, offering balanced insights on investments, business, and the political economy, by joining BizNews Premium. Register here.

If you prefer WhatsApp for updates, sign up to the BizNews channel here.

The auditorium doors will open for BNIC#2 on 10 September 2025 in Hermanus. For more information and tickets, click here.

By Joshua Schewitz 

South Africa has entered the era of symbolic politics. Electricity fails. Schools decay. Institutions collapse. Yet the state answers these failures not with leadership, but with theatre. President Cyril Ramaphosa's latest act, the "National Dialogue," is the clearest example yet. Presented as a solution to national discord, it is nothing more than a managed performance designed to pacify the public while the ruling elite avoids responsibility. 

To lead this performance, the president has appointed Dr Imtiaz Sooliman, founder of Gift of the Givers. At first glance, Sooliman appears to be a safe choice, the face of humanitarianism, respected in the press, and widely known for disaster relief. However, behind this polished image lies an agenda that contradicts everything a genuine national dialogue is supposed to represent. 

A Manufactured Reputation 

Sooliman's reputation as an apolitical humanitarian has gone largely unquestioned. In reality, his public commentary reveals a consistent ideological stance. He has used his platform to repeatedly vilify Israel, characterising it as a genocidal regime, while avoiding any meaningful critique of Hamas. He routinely adopts language that erases Jewish history and nationhood, painting Zionism as a global pathology rather than a national movement. This is not balanced criticism. It is ideological hostility masquerading as compassion. 

During one of the worst attacks on Jews in recent history, the 7 October massacre in Israel, Sooliman failed to condemn the violence outright. While Jewish civilians were being murdered, raped, and mutilated, he remained silent. This is a political choice, not an oversight. It reflects a worldview that reserves outrage for one group alone. 

Founding a Party Built on Hate, Celebrated by Those It Condemns 

Sooliman's entry into public life did not begin with humanitarian work. He was a founding figure in the African Muslim Party, a group whose campaign materials openly condemned gay rights and told voters they would “share the sin” if they supported parties like the ANC or DP at the time. That ideology is not distant history. It was central to the AMP's platform, which pushed for a religious sharia legal system and rejected South Africa’s secular democracy. The irony today is that some of Sooliman’s most loyal defenders come from communities he once vilified. Progressive journalists, LGBTQ+ public figures, and human rights advocates have embraced him without questioning what he stands for. This contradiction is not harmless. It is a clear example of how media spin, brand sanitising, and public amnesia allow ideology to be repackaged as compassion.

Embedded in the Media, Shielded from Scrutiny 

According to a detailed June 2025 intelligence-style report, Sooliman has undertaken a highly structured campaign to embed himself inside South Africa's media landscape. Over the past year, he has personally courted senior editors and journalists at News24, eNCA, and other major outlets. These were not media interviews. They were closed-door engagements without public statements, interviews, or press releases. These meetings were accompanied by gift-giving, studio visits, and gestures of goodwill. 

From a public relations standpoint, this is classic relationship capture. From an intelligence perspective, it resembles HUMINT access development, a strategic method of gaining long-term influence over targets through emotional rapport. The result has been chilling. Media houses that maintain close ties to Sooliman have become less willing to publish criticism of his political views or affiliations. Journalists now weigh their editorial decisions against their relationships. Jewish and secular counter-narratives are filtered out or never commissioned at all. Only token "jewish" ideas are put out into the media cycle. 

This outcome was not accidental. It reflects a calculated effort to influence how information is shaped, distributed, and constrained within the media environment. 

Foreign Alignment and Geopolitical Utility 

Sooliman's repeated engagements with Turkish and Qatari diplomats must also be viewed through a geopolitical lens. Both states are widely recognised as financial and ideological backers of Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood. Qatar in particular has pioneered the use of civil society as a soft-power tool to expand Islamist influence in allied or neutral states. 

Through Gift of the Givers, Sooliman offers these foreign powers a gateway into South African public discourse. Under the cover of humanitarianism, he creates space for their ideological narratives to flourish unchallenged. His Gaza operations and public positions on Palestine align seamlessly with Qatar's broader propaganda strategy, which seeks to launder support for Hamas through "human rights" framing. 

Expose Sooliman's Broader Influence and Ties to Terror 

Imtiaz Ismail Sooliman, sponsor of Hamas, is a man who follows no law but the Koran and openly boasts about ignoring South African laws when it suits him. Until South Africans stop cowering and start asking serious questions, this dangerous antisemite will continue to operate with impunity. He has strategically embedded himself in every influential institution from DIRCO to Standard Bank. Now Ramaphosa has brought him into a taxpayer-funded farce that will benefit no one but the ANC and its network of politically connected operatives. What is sold to the public as a national dialogue is nothing more than a smokescreen for corruption. This entire process is another cover operation, this time involving Iran’s political proxy, the ANC, and the Muslim Brotherhood’s preferred brand, Gift of the Givers, along with their domestic syndicates.

The strategic value of this alignment cannot be overstated. Sooliman becomes not just a domestic figure, but a local asset whose narrative control benefits actors far beyond South Africa's borders.

Read more:

Blurring the Line Between NGO and State 

The report also documents Sooliman's deepening ties with the South African Police Service (SAPS). Through repeated joint appearances, social media collaborations, and co-sponsored events, he has effectively blurred the line between NGO work and state function. Gift of the Givers is no longer seen by many South Africans as a third-party organisation. It is increasingly viewed as a parallel institution with moral authority and operational autonomy. 

This proximity grants him access during security-sensitive moments, protest events, and politically charged incidents. It also gives him influence over public perception during crises, allowing him to shape narratives in real-time, particularly those involving the Middle East, religion, or race-based grievance. 

Corruption, the Police, and Sooliman’s Political Proximity 

Sooliman takes pride in his access to senior SAPS leadership, regularly appearing alongside top officials with reputational baggage. His visibility raises serious questions, especially in a country still haunted by the memory of Jackie Selebi, the convicted former police chief whose tenure collapsed under the weight of organised crime. More recently, Lieutenant-General Nhlanhla Mkhwanazi exposed how political interference in the police fuels corruption and undermines public safety. Despite this, Sooliman has positioned himself as the preferred partner of SAPS, bypassing oversight and operating with unofficial authority. Whether this positioning is part of a personal political ambition or Ramaphosa’s attempt to recover lost ground with Muslim voters, the result is the same. The boundaries between civil society, political opportunism, and state capture continue to dissolve. The ANC may have once used the keffiyeh for political theatre, but they discarded it as soon as it stopped bringing votes. 

A Chilling Effect on National Discourse 

The cumulative effect of Sooliman's media embedding, foreign alignment, and institutional partnerships is narrative sterilisation. By establishing personal loyalty with editors, he has created emotional barriers to criticism. His presence now acts as a shield. Journalists hesitate. Opinion editors decline submissions. Critics are labeled divisive. Those who attempt to expose ideological bias or foreign ties are framed as bigoted or conspiratorial. 

What is presented as openness is, in practice, a form of information control driven through non-government channels. This approach suppresses alternative views and reinforces a single, curated narrative. 

Ramaphosa's Complicity

In appointing Sooliman to co-lead the National Dialogue, President Ramaphosa is not merely outsourcing moral authority. He is legitimising an ideological actor who has already succeeded in capturing key parts of South Africa's media and security establishment. What is being presented as reconciliation is, in effect, a strategic attempt to dominate the national narrative through selective appointments and controlled messaging. 

The appointment also sends a clear signal to the Jewish community: your concerns will not be acknowledged, and your exclusion is not accidental. Those who have vilified Jews and Zionism, aligned with pro-Hamas narratives, and contributed to a growing climate of antisemitism are now tasked with setting the tone for national unity. This decision was not made in error. It reflects a conscious use of symbolic figures to indicate alignment with a specific political and ideological agenda. 

Strategic Implications 

South Africa's National Dialogue, as it is currently designed, cannot produce a legitimate outcome. It is being guided by figures with overt ideological biases, who have actively undermined pluralism and suppressed dissenting views. Dr Imtiaz Sooliman may be presented as a humanitarian, but his public record, foreign affiliations, and media strategy tell a different story. 

The dialogue, before it even begins, is already compromised by the influence and ideologically motivated choices embedded in its leadership. It will cost the public millions and is unlikely to deliver anything meaningful. What is being marketed as national unity is shaping up to be a politically expensive distraction with no substance. The entire exercise, despite its lofty rhetoric, serves as a political manoeuver designed to shore up electoral support for a ruling party that has exhausted its legitimacy. The National Dialogue will drain public resources, insulate entrenched actors from accountability, and reinforce ideological gatekeeping at the expense of real reform. Rather than unite the nation, it is likely to deepen public cynicism and widen the gap between state rhetoric and lived reality. There is no renewal underway here. What is unfolding is a calculated display designed to appear inclusive while serving only the survival instincts of a government that has run out of answers.