Demoted DA MP Cachalia stands ground on Israel

‘Shadow minister’ kicked out of post after he backs Palestinian cause on social media

● DA MP Ghaleb Cachalia was isolated by his colleagues during a parliamentary caucus meeting this week as party leader John Steenhuisen prepared to dump him from the DA’s “shadow cabinet” over his condemnation of Israel’s actions in Gaza.

The Sunday Times has established that not one MP rose to defend Cachalia at the hybrid caucus meeting on Thursday after he was invited to explain the anti-Israel statements he posted on X (formerly Twitter). Shortly after the meeting, Steenhuisen removed Cachalia from his high-profile position as party spokesperson on public enterprises, demoting him to the backbenches.

In his remarks on X, Cachalia had slammed a decision taken at a previous DA meeting, on October 19, which he said amounted to gagging party MPs who objected to Israel’s bombardment of the Gaza Strip.

The meeting last month had resolved that only the party spokesperson on international relations, Emma Powell, should speak about the Middle East conflict on behalf of the DA.

That meeting also laid out the party’s position as support for a two-state solution, condemnation of violence from both sides and support for international law to take its course.

But Cachalia defied the resolutions of that meeting, saying on X he “won’t be silenced” while Israel is committing “genocide”.

DA National spokesperson Solly Malatsi confirmed the party’s caucus had discussed the issue at two meetings but they were no longer interested in dragging out the saga.

“The reality is that caucus agreed that while we’re drafting our foreign policy on the matter, there will only be one spokesperson on it. Mr Cachalia acted against that agreed position. It’s as simple as that”

DA MPs who participated in the meeting this week said Steenhuisen expressed “disappointment” that Cachalia had violated the decisions taken on October 19, and invited him to explain himself.

“Cachalia was then given the floor,” said one source, who asked to remain anonymous because caucus discussions are supposed to remain confidential.

“He basically continued to dare the party, saying he won’t be silenced. He doubled down on his defiance and disrespect of the whole caucus. He reiterated that he was not required to respect and uphold the decisions of his colleagues in caucus.”

The DA source said Cachalia had also been given 10 minutes to spell out his stance on the Middle East situation at the October 19 meeting.

“We had a long discussion on it and there were very diverse views,” the source said.

“He spoke about how the party should condemn Israel. So, his general sentiment was in line with what he put out on Twitter.

“There were a few people in caucus who agreed with the substance of what Cachalia said but they agreed to uphold the decisions of caucus.

“But at the end of the meeting the position was that we endorse a two-state solution, condemn violence from both sides, and call for international law to take its course.

“We further agreed that we will immediately start a formal process to review our foreign policy holistically, not just on the Middle East, in the context of the drafting of the electoral manifesto. Everyone respected that; we collectively agreed on that position, except one person.”

Another insider took issue with Cachalia’s view that the party was trying to censor its members.

“We can’t allow the situation where people flagrantly disregard decisions,” this person said. “The idea that people are being silenced does not hold. The guy was given 10 minutes at the meeting on October 19 and again on Thursday. How does that amount to a gag, when he can express himself in party structures?”

Asked for comment, Cachalia said on Friday he would continue to publicly express his views on the matter.

“I am not silenced. In the absence of clear policy on the evolving situation, I feel at liberty to speak. I have asked for a clear directive. I have received none,” he said.

Another DA MP defended the policy of allowing only Powell to speak about the conflict.

Political analyst Ebrahim Fakir said it was unlikely that the DA’s censure of Cachalia would harm its prospects among proPalestinian voters in the election next year.

“There are multiple drivers of voter sentiment,” Fakir said. “Obviously, all the parties are going to use it [the Middle East war] as a campaign issue … But by the time the election rolls around, the issue is not going to be as hot as it is now.”

Most people would decide how to vote on the basis of whether a party had delivered on its promises, he said.

Fakir accused the DA of being selective in how it applied its rules.

“It appears the DA has one set of rules for some people and another set for others. Some people can say whatever they want and other people can’t.

“There’s a capricious and inconsistent application of their own internal rules. It does seem it’s usually black members — African, Indian and coloured — who are the victims, and I think all voters can see that,” he said.

“But the thing is the DA has a stable voter base across all races, so they are not worried.”

I am not silenced. In the absence of clear policy on the evolving situation, I feel at liberty to speak

Ghaleb Cachalia