The Druze Might Be Another Tribe in South Africa
Israel’s protection of the Druze is not merely humanitarian, it is strategic. It is a message to the world that true coexistence must be defended with action, not slogans.
Written By: Thabelo Mahangani
The current developments in the Middle East are not a new version of a conflict over land, statehood, or even Zionism, they are part of a broader, older jihadist agenda: the ethnic and religious cleansing of non-Muslims through Islamic extremism.
The belief among many Islamist ideologues that the destruction of the state of Israel will usher in a new world order is not incorrect, but what they envision is not a just or humane world. It is an inhumane, regressive, and brutal order governed by Sharia law, one that, if realized, would be more repressive than apartheid and far more dangerous than any authoritarian regime the world has seen.
In recent weeks, the Israel Defence Forces (IDF) have carried out justified operations against extreme Syrian-based terrorist groups responsible for murdering and displacing minority communities under the protection of Syria’s embattled regime. Notably, one such group has targeted the Druze, a historic, religious, and ethnically unique people. In Syria’s Suweida region, Druze civilians have been slaughtered, tortured, and humiliated by jihadists. Their religious beards are shaved off in acts of desecration, their homes looted, their culture annihilated, all with little international attention. This is not an isolated event. It is part of a larger campaign of jihadist brutality.
The Druze are a distinct group of Arabic-speaking monotheists whose belief system draws on Islam, Judaism, and Christianity, though they explicitly deny any association with mainstream Islam. Despite being Arab in language and culture, many Druze refuse to be labelled “Palestinian,” particularly in Israel, where they live in peace and serve voluntarily in the IDF. They are spread across the region, found in Lebanon, Syria, Israel, and Jordan, but their spiritual and cultural heart is located in northern Israel, in the Galilee, where the Jethro shrine stands as a symbol of their heritage.
In Israel, the Druze live securely. In neighbouring Islamic regimes, their identity is a death sentence. That contrast reveals a hard truth: “Israel is the last shield for religious minorities in the Middle East”. While Islamic governments claim religious tolerance, their policies and patterns show zero tolerance for ethnic and religious diversity. Their goal is not coexistence, it is dominance through the advancement of Sharia law, which they seek to install as the governing system in every sphere: education, law, gender norms, and religious observance.
Sharia law is drawn from Quranic texts and the Hadith (Sunnah) and is divided into five legal categories: obligatory, recommended, permitted, discouraged, and forbidden. While defenders of Sharia emphasize its moral guidelines, such as prohibitions on gambling, intoxication, and fornication, they often ignore its more oppressive realities. These include capital punishment for apostasy (leaving Islam), forced child marriage, gender-based legal inequality, flogging for speech deemed blasphemous, and the amputation of thieves right hand. In Sharia jurisdictions, an old man may legally marry a prepubescent girl and consummate the marriage by age nine. In some cases, genital mutilation is sanctioned as “honour.” Women are barred from driving, speaking publicly, or even appearing unveiled in public spaces.
Thousands of Muslims flee these Sharia regimes every year, yet ironically, many arrive in liberal democracies demanding the implementation of the same system they fled. As one European commentator put it: “If Sharia law is so good, why don’t they stay in their own countries?”
If Sharia law were truly a system of moral good, why must it be imposed through force? Why must ex-Muslims be executed? Why must conversion away from Islam be punished with death? Why should non-Muslims, Christians, Jews, Hindus, or atheists, be forced into dhimmitude or suffer beheading for noncompliance?
These are not philosophical questions. They are urgent, practical ones.
In South Africa, we are already seeing hints of this ideological advance. In July 2025, the Independent Electoral Commission (IEC) rejected an application to register a political party called the Islamic State of Africa (ISA). Officially, the party failed to meet the required number of verified signatures but unofficial reports suggest there were deep concerns about ISA’s policy platform, particularly its alignment with Sharia law, which is incompatible with South Africa’s secular, democratic constitution.
This rejection should serve as a red flag to the nation.
South Africa is already vulnerable, our borders are porous, our police under-resourced, and our youth increasingly disillusioned. These are the exact ingredients exploited by jihadist recruiters in Nigeria, Somalia, and Mozambique. The Islamist insurgency in northern Mozambique, carried out by ISIS-affiliated groups, has resulted in thousands of civilian deaths and mass displacement. Entire Christian villages have been wiped out. We are just one border away.
If South Africans believe that religious extremism cannot flourish here, they are mistaken. Just as the Druze in Syria voted for Islamic coalitions in hopes of defeating “the oppressor,” only to find themselves targeted once the battle was over, we too could fall into that trap. History shows that totalitarian ideologies do not stop once they gain power, they expand. First the “enemy,” then the ally, then the moderate, and finally, the dissenter.
South Africa is a Christian-majority country, which might seem like a protection against such radical shifts, but religious affiliation alone does not prevent indoctrination. Jihadist propaganda is powerful. It appeals to disaffected youth, frames itself as anti-colonial resistance, and cloaks violence in the language of justice. Once embedded, it turns citizens against one another, tribe against tribe, faith against faith, neighbour against neighbour.
Across Europe, we see churches converted into mosques, not by legal decree, but by social and demographic shifts. The most iconic example is the Hagia Sophia in Istanbul, once a Byzantine Christian cathedral, now a mosque. Similar conversions have occurred in France, the Netherlands, and the UK. And where mosques rise, so too do parallel legal systems, face-covering protests, and demands for Sharia compliance, even in public institutions.
This wave of Islamization is not just religious, it is political, legal, and territorial. It seeks to convert not only churches, but streets, schools, public parks, and democratic norms. It is already present in Africa. It is already present in our region. It is only a matter of time before it takes root here, unless we act.
Israel’s protection of the Druze is not merely humanitarian, it is strategic. It is a message to the world that true coexistence must be defended with action, not slogans. Yet South Africa’s current anti-Israel stance isolates us from potential allies in that fight. We are cutting off ties with the very nation that could help us build resistance to extremism. The Druze have suffered under regimes they once supported, only to be reminded that to extremists, even Arabs are not safe if they dissent.
The time to prevent is now, not when our town squares have turned into riot zones and our churches into masques. We must wake up before South African sons and daughters are turned into jihadis, fighting against their own countrymen in the name of a war they do not understand.
Thabelo Mahangani is a multifaceted individual known for his work as a biologist, human rights activist, and former student leader at the university of the Witwatersrand. he is also recognized as a Pentecostal scholar and a vocal pro-Israel advocate. he engages in discussions about religious freedom, regional security, and the rise of extremism in Africa and the middle east.
I read your article and wanted to offer a different perspective. While your focus on jihadist violence and the protection of minorities is important, several points in your piece seem to oversimplify the Middle East and exaggerate the threat of Sharia law in liberal democracies.
1)Israel and humanitarian framing: You describe Israel as “the last shield for religious minorities” portraying IDF actions as morally necessary.I argue that U.S. and Israeli policies are shaped by political and strategic interests, not purely humanitarian concerns.Francesca Albanese, the UN Special Rapporteur on human rights highlights the humanitarian cost of Israeli military operations, including civilian casualties in Gaza which complicates the narrative of Israel as a purely protective force.
2)Alarmism about Sharia law: Your depiction of Sharia as a looming, coercive threat across Europe and Africa overgeneralizes complex realities.I would challenge the idea that Muslim communities in liberal democracies are systematically trying to impose religious law. Most Muslims in Europe live under secular legal systems and framing them as a monolithic threat risks spreading fear rather than understanding. To add perspective remember how, after 9/11, President George W. Bush repeatedly told Americans that “they hate our freedom” and suggested that if terrorists weren’t blowing things up, they would be enforcing Sharia law in New York. That rhetoric was part of a propaganda effort to justify the Iraq War and the killing of thousands of people. Let’s not belittle our intelligence by recycling the same kind of fear mongering propaganda that worked 20 years ago,the propaganda machine was alive and well back then.
3)Jihadist threat in context: You emphasize jihadist groups as central drivers of conflict and instability. I stress that Western interventions and state policies have significantly contributed to extremism in the Middle East. Reducing the region’s instability to jihadist ideology alone oversimplifies history and geopolitics. For instance, Abu Mohammad al-Julani, leader of Hayat Tahrir al-Sham,was once designated a specially designated global terrorist by the U.S., with a $10 million bounty on his head. Despite this, in December 2024 U.S. diplomats met with him in Damascus, leading to the removal of the bounty. This shift underscores the complex interplay of political interests and the evolving nature of alliances in the region. It also highlights how the West's approach to jihadist groups can be pragmatic and opportunistic, challenging the narrative of a monolithic, unchanging threat.
4)European and South African parallels: Assertions about churches converting into mosques or Sharia compliance spreading in public institutions are not substantiated by credible evidence. Such claims echo lazy alarmist narratives , as they stigmatize communities and distract from structural issues like governance, poverty and political marginalization.
5. Recommended reading for context:
To provide readers with a more nuanced understanding of the Middle East, covert operations, and international policy dynamics, I suggest you read the following books:Creative Chaos: Inside the CIA's Covert War to Topple the Syrian Government by William Van Wagenen: detailing U.S. and regional covert interventions in Syria and Treacherous Alliance by Trita Parsi :exploring the secretive and strategic relationships among Israel, Iran and the U.S.
I personally came to Rational Standard after watching Bureaucrats Gone Wild in Brussels and Stellenbosch on Youtube and in my excitement to find like-minded thinkers, I came across your article which is quite frankly a blot on what I had hoped would be a collection of thoughtful commentary. Engaging with the books above and exploring diverse perspectives would provide a far more balanced and evidence-based view of the issues you discuss.