Marika Sboros: Revisiting Roedean affair and its agents of propaganda

Key topics:

• Roedean–King David tennis boycott sparks ongoing controversy.

• Article alleges anti-Israel lobby using event for political gain.

• Claims of antisemitism, genocide rhetoric, and boycott campaigns.

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 every morning on 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.

By Marika Sboros

If you think the dust has settled over the “Roedean affair” – as the cancelled tennis match against King David Linksfield is grandly called – think again. 

The “affair” became public knowledge within days of Roedean girls school refusing to play the scheduled match on February 3, 2026. 

From that moment on, the anti-Israel lobby has tried to turn a tennis match between schoolgirls from two top South African private schools into an international propaganda tool.

It has not let go. The lobby appears determined to keep the “affair” moving in its desired direction, supported by extremist, Islamist, jihadist lobbies. 

That’s despite both schools moving in the opposite direction. Both have gone past claims of antisemitism and back to their core business of educating children.

Roedean remains impervious to the lobby’s undisguised fury at its public (though prompted) written apology to King David on February 12. The apology does not admit antisemitism but acknowledges the “deep hurt” to the Jewish community. 

Roedean showed good faith by promising to reschedule the match, which further infuriated the anti-Israel lobby. If Roedean honours its promise, the lobby will likely use it to maximise political capital for its own agendas.

The drivers of those agendas are not difficult to spot. 

These include barely disguised calls for ongoing sports boycotts of King David learners; revival of claims of “genocide” and “baby killers” against Jews who support Israel, with “apartheid” slurs thrown in for good measure; and support for South Africa’s ill-fated, ongoing ICJ (International Criminal Court) lawsuit against Israel on a charge of genocide in Gaza. 

Ironically, South Africa lodged the case against Israel just weeks after a genuine genocide attempt by Hamas in southern Israel on October 7, 2023. 

Underpinning these drivers is the anti-Israel lobby’s pathological anti-Zionism. Legal and historical scholars say that anti-Zionism is a modern mutation of the ancient virus of Jew hatred known euphemistically in modern English as antisemitism. 

It is also the lifeblood of the supposedly “pro-Palestinian” movement. 

Read more:

I say, “supposedly” because of the Orwellian manipulation of language lobbyists indulge in to justify support for groups that clearly don’t give a fig for Palestinians. 

Hamas is a prime example. Video evidence shows it diverting humanitarian aid in Gaza into its own coffers, thereby worsening poverty and starvation, and shooting civilians who try to access the aid.  

It also routinely uses public executions to stifle dissent and oppress marginalised groups, including LGBTQ+ people. 

Hamas does not typically employ the theatrical "rooftop execution" method associated with extremist groups, such as ISIS. Instead, it maintains a systemic environment of criminalisation, torture and extrajudicial killing of LGBTQ+ individuals in Gaza.  

It boasts of using its own people as “human shields” in conflict zones. On October 26, 2023, Hamas's Political Bureau chief Ismail Haniyeh declared in a Lebanese TV broadcast:  "The blood of the women, children and elderly ... we are the ones who need this blood, so it awakens within us the revolutionary spirit …(and) resolve."

Call me picky but I can think of adjectives other than “revolutionary” and “resolve” to describe spirits requiring such infusion to keep going. 

Diabolical springs to mind.

I can also think of choice descriptions for Jews who voluntarily support groups that openly desire their destruction. 

Unsurprisingly, among the first local anti-Zionist voices supporting Roedean and vilifying King David, was Jo Bluen, the public face of the bizarrely named South African Jews for a Free Palestine (SAJFP). 

I say, “bizarrely named”, because there’s something unhinged about Jews voluntarily supporting groups whose goal is the same as Nazis intended for them in Germany.

The Nazis wanted to make their country “Judenrein” or “Judenfrei” – “cleansed” or “free” of Jews, according to the National Socialist term applied in the “Final Solution of the Jewish Question”.  Hamas and cohorts work towards the same goal extended to the entire world.

Read more:

The best Bluen says about Zionism is that it is “a fascist project” and “settler colonialisation”.  The worst? She accuses King David of being “prepared to sacrifice its own children at the altar of a wild and violent zionism (sic) that is deeply racist and misogynistic”. 

No matter: to anti-Israel lobbyists, facts are less important than rhetoric and theatrics. 

In a September 2025 article in an online magazine ironically titled Critical Thinking, Bluen accuses “Israel and its accomplices” of having “murdered nearly 700,000 Palestinians in the course of the genocide in under two years since 2023, half a million of whom are children”. 

Even Hamas’s own thumb-sucked figures on the civilian and child casualty rates since October 7 never reached such stratospheric heights. 

At most, the terror group claimed around 70 000 civilian deaths in Gaza. Its Ministry of Social Development proved that false with its plans in early February 2026 to pay stipends to “50,000 widowed families”. In other words, to the widows of 50,000 combatants.

Bluen, like Hamas, continues a practice that the Nazis introduced of distinguishing Jews and other groups in concentration camps with inverted red triangles. Hamas uses the symbol to identify Jewish and Israeli targets. Bluen adopted it on a social media post celebrating the deaths of IDF soldiers in Gaza.

Anti-Israel lobbyists often resort to pulling the race card when all rational argument fails them. Bluen is no exception. 

She calls Zionism a “patriarchal white supremacy” and claims that King David deliberately “targeted” Roedean’s (black) head Phuti Mogale. That was probably news to Roedean’s leadership and Mogale, who reportedly resign rather than waiting to be pushed. 

Bluen and others also criticise King David schools as bastions of Jewish exclusivity, yet not all its pupils are Jewish. King David Linksfield’s high school’s head girl in 2024 was a Chinese girl and not from a Jewish background. 

On the global stage, “pro-Palestinian” Islamist activists continue to amplify voices supporting Roedean’s tennis boycott of King David.

New York-based journalist Azad Essa writes for Middle East Eye, an independent UK-based digital channel focusing on the Middle East, North Africa and the broader Muslim world. 

In an article on February 21, he frames the cancelled tennis match as a heroic, moral stand by the Roedean girls. He claims that they rightly refused to play King David schoolgirls because the school was "supporting apartheid and cheerleading a genocide". 

That’s a textbook study in the collective-guilt argument the anti-Israel lobby uses to demonise and delegitimise Israel.

Essa describes the King David school network as a tool of "settler-colonial ideology". He quotes a parent comparing playing tennis at King David to “playing against a school still flying the apartheid flag". 

By this logic, Jewish schoolchildren are inherently complicit in the actions of a foreign state thousands of kilometres away simply by attending a particular school. 

That’s not political activism. It’s the targeted exclusion of a specific community on the basis of their religion and cultural affiliation. It clearly violates South Africa’s Constitution. 

In the Daily Maverick on February 25, Kalim Rajab, a Johannesburg-based, Oxford-educated corporate executive, plays the “Framing Game”. Rajab calls King David Linksfield's "victory" over Roedean “pyrrhic”, with a “chilling” effect rather one that achieves due accountability. 

He omits from his potted biography that he is Chair of the Helen Suzman Foundation (HSF). The HSF honours one of South Africa’s most prominent and beloved Jewish anti-apartheid activists, who was also a committed supporter of Israel throughout her life.

Rajab writes, as one critic puts it, with the “measured cadence” of someone who has learned the most effective way to delegitimise a community's experience of discrimination – by calling it a "strategy." 

He describes King David supporters as "successful in their strategy of framing the narrative as one where the school and its pupils were victimised because of their religion as opposed to any overt political ideology espoused".

The word "strategy" transforms victim into perpetrator and a factual description of the “affair” into an allegation of manipulation. Facts that emerged from leaked phone recordings between Roedean’s Mogale and King David head Lorraine Srage tell a different story.

Rajab then does something disturbing: he offers a tactical manual for future boycotts of King David schools and not just on sports fields. These could involve "silent peaceful protests by visiting schoolchildren, including wearing armbands, pins or bodywear to show Palestinian solidarity", he helpfully writes. 

Pupils could "conscientiously object to taking part in interactions with King David".

Really? A columnist in a prominent South African publication advising on more effective boycotts of a Jewish school? What if columnists in mainstream South African publications published blueprints for boycotting Muslim, Christian, Hindu, Chinese or other schools?

Other fringe, local usual-suspects ranged against King David include the Media Review Network’s Iqbal Jassat and the ironically titled Jewish Democratic Initiative (JDI). 

All show predictable, monomaniacal obsession with one issue, one state and one tribe. 

What escapes them all is that Zionists are not cheerleaders for war or participants in any "evil", as British writer, theologian and “English gentile” Mark Pickles puts it.

Pickles similarly tears through the "genocide" narrative with consummate ease. It is, after all, a modern iteration of the medieval "blood libel" – that Jews murder non-Jewish children (traditionally Christians) to use their blood for baking matzah during Passover.

Pickles argues that the genocide claim is “as irrational as it is evil…highly damaging and dangerous”. It aims to justify “the murder of Jews, and all attempts – economic, diplomatic, and kinetic – to destroy the sole Jewish nation".

Groups and organisations with a notoriously long history of antisemitism continue to push the claim with impunity. Yet the “true perpetrators of genocidal intent”, he says, are Islamist factions whose founding documents explicitly call for the destruction of Israel and the murder of Jews.

The premise on which the anti-Israel, “pro-Palestinian” lobby hope to sustain the Roedean “affair” is that Zionist Jews are "complicit in genocide". That’s a shaky, dangerous premise. 

As Canadian anthropologist Adam Louis-Klein warns, it is a way to mark Jews as "fundamentally stained and evil”. Anti-Zionists aim to "escalate all accusations toward the genocide libel... until it hardens into a global consensus", Louis-Klein writes. 

In this "new doctrine", the Holocaust is no longer remembered but is "overwritten" to serve contemporary agendas. 

This linguistic capture is likely what anti-Israel lobbyists hope will sustain the Roedean “affair” in their direction. The "quiet, student-led", principled stance they claim to want will be the implementation of a hateful dogma against Jews.

It means that the time has come, as New York Times Jewish columnist Bret Stephens argues, for Jewish communities to end their “perpetual apology machine” in pro-Israel advocacy.

He calls for a shift toward “unapologetic Jewish confidence” and "moral clarity" over Israel's existence and right to defend itself.