If Palestine were liberated tomorrow, the world would celebrate!

Millions of people across the globe have spoken out against what they see as the abuse and suffering of Palestinians. Governments, activists, aid workers, legal advocates, journalists, and ordinary citizens have invested time, resources, reputations, and in some cases their personal safety in support of the Palestinian people.

Yet no rational person would stand at the gates of a liberated Palestine and say:

"We supported you, therefore you owe us access. You owe us accommodation. You owe us economic opportunity. You owe us entry. You owe us tolerance of whatever burdens we bring."

---

Because support is not ownership.

Solidarity is not entitlement.

Compassion is not a claim on another people's future.

And that is precisely the principle that should apply everywhere.

---

The world would immediately recognize the flaw in that thinking.

Supporting a people during a struggle does not create entitlement to their nation after liberation.

In fact, the most compassionate thing one can do for a people emerging from oppression is to give them the space to rebuild, strengthen their institutions, restore stability, create opportunity for their citizens, and develop into a healthy and prosperous society.

South Africa provides a powerful example.

South Africa has been among the strongest international supporters of the Palestinian cause. It has taken extraordinary steps on the world stage, including bringing its case before the International Court of Justice and using its diplomatic influence, moral authority, and international standing to advocate for Palestinians. South Africans have also participated in solidarity efforts that placed people in difficult and sometimes dangerous situations because they believed the cause was just.

Yet even with that level of commitment, no one would argue that South Africa is therefore entitled to special access to a liberated Palestine.

Why?

Because support is not ownership.

Solidarity is not entitlement.

Compassion is not a claim on another people's future.

And that is precisely the principle that should apply everywhere.

There is something deeply troubling about the idea that African nations can help one another during periods of struggle, but that assistance somehow becomes a permanent obligation to absorb any burden, accept any consequence, silence any concern, or surrender the right to steward one's own nation.

Underlying this mindset is a remarkably low regard for Africa itself.

It assumes that African nations should accept conditions that would be considered unreasonable anywhere else in the world.

It assumes that instability is normal for Africa.

That strain is normal for Africa.

That sacrifice without limit is normal for Africa.

That wanting order, development, prosperity, safety, and strong institutions is somehow less African than enduring dysfunction.

No other continent is asked to prove its humanity by remaining perpetually burdened.

No other people are told that wanting stability means they have abandoned solidarity.

  ● A strong South Africa benefits Africa.

  ● A prosperous South Africa benefits Africa.

  ● A stable South Africa benefits Africa.

The belief that Africans must choose between African solidarity and African excellence is one of the most damaging ideas imposed on the continent.

And It Is One Of The Most Damaging Ideas Ever Imposed Upon The African Psyche And The Individual Value Of Africanness.

This moment gives Africans the opportunity to fundamentally rethink themselves and to create a massive paradigm shift in how both the individual and the collective see themselves