![A mother’s taweez and the Cape’s interfaith traditions [+ video]](https://muslimviews.co.za/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/Michael-Weeder-Book-Launch-9May26-360x180.webp)
There are sufficient examples of both Mossad’s presence in South Africa before but especially since the 1990s, and the collaboration between it and the National Intelligence Agency, to justify an investigation into whether the threat to Phillip Krawitz was (or still is) a joint Israeli/South African state PSYOP.
By PAUL HENDLER
The article by Rederwaan Craayenstein that appeared on the Muslim Views website on July 3, 2025 presents an alternative explanation to the hit on his life claimed by Phillip Krawitz in his affidavit to the Cape High Court filed on June 19, 2025.
Krawitz’s application seeks to significantly limit what protestors in the boycott Cape Union Mart (CUM) campaign may express verbally, on posters and through banners and other media.
Krawitz placed the claim of a threat to his life in the context of the alleged hate speech of the CUM protestors which, he argued, disseminated messages in the public domain which could contribute to igniting such threats. This interpretation was supported by an accompanying affidavit by a General Darries from the Directorate for Priority Crime Investigation (Hawks).
Craayenstein’s account
The Muslim Views July 3 article claimed that its information was sourced from the late Major-General Andre Lincoln who, given his police background was able to ‘navigate networks to gain privileged access to the file’.
The article mentions a leading ‘Jewish South African businessman’ being informed by an officer of these structures that ‘there was a bounty on his head’. The call for this contract was from ‘a foreign country’ and ‘a group from the local Muslim community’ had accepted the call as a command. Consequently, the businessman went into hiding and then left for overseas. Craayenstein, who is a University of the Witwatersrand-educated PhD, an ex-director of various companies and part-time member of the Wits Business School, said that he was based overseas, and was well acquainted with the late Andre Lincoln.
Although Craayenstein doesn’t name the ‘Muslim organisation’ referred to, he gave us a clue to their identity when he said that in the 1990s ‘the Hawks, apartheid-era spooks, ANC-MK deployees, private security firms and academics collaborated to fight against an organisation with a significant number of Muslims in its leadership’. It is likely that he was referring to the People Against Gangsterism and Drugs (Pagad).
It is also clear that the events Craayenstein referred to took place after October 7, 2023, because he said that their geopolitical context was South Africa’s case submitted to the International Court of Justice (ICJ). He also referred to the businessman’s involvement in the politics surrounding the Israel/Palestine conflict.
Through his interaction with Lincoln, Craayenstein received intelligence about a plot within the intelligence structures themselves to execute the hit on the businessman. He regarded this intelligence as credible because Lincoln had access to confidential information and the necessary expertise to identify relevant documents and interpret them.
Craayenstein also spoke with the Muslim group identified and assessed their denial of involvement to be credible. He implied that he was familiar with them, presumably from past interactions and could therefore make a competent assessment of their answers to his questions.
Lincoln set off an investigation within intelligence structures which resulted in the plot being exposed, including to the businessman who was its target. This ended the threat.
The Phillip Krawitz affidavit
I now compare the above story to that sworn by Phillip Krawitz in his affidavit, to show the congruence.
Krawitz said that on or about July 3, 2024, General Darries of the Hawks informed a Mrs Vogelman, a director of Cape Union Mart, that ‘they had credible information of a planned hit on me’ and Darries advised that he (Krawitz) leave the country temporarily.
After some time had passed a Detective Franks advised Vogelman that ‘the active threat to my life had been resolved’.
Both Darries and Franks advised ‘that the constant escalation of my public profile by virtue of the photos and references to me on the posters …. could reasonably spark another hit …’ So, it is reasonable to assume that the businessman whom Craayenstein declined to identify is Phillip Krawitz.
This narrative by Craayenstein, like the claim of Phillip Krawitz, remains hearsay and as Lincoln is late he can’t give his version of events. The intelligence file would need to be produced to try and demonstrate the veracity of Craayenstein’s claim.
The affidavit text – that detective Frank said that the threat had allegedly been resolved –suggests that neither Mrs Vogelman nor Phillip Krawitz saw the intelligence file or had the evidence explained to them, hence the use of the word ‘alleged’. The word ‘resolved’ is opaque in its meaning and there is no indication as to which party/ agent represented the threat and how it had been resolved. So, the claim that there was a hit related to the CUM protests and boycott campaign, OR that there was a plot from within the intelligence structures remains unproven either way. Logically either is possible.
In practice, during the 1990s some individual Pagad members were convicted for attacking and killing drug lords, state witnesses and a magistrate during the course of one or more of their trials. But Pagad, as an organisation, was never convicted as co-conspirator and a 2001 study showed that it encompassed a range of community advocacy and oppositional political practices to the government, inspired by Islamic principles. So Pagad is not a group unified around a strategy of armed attacks and assassinations of those identified as the enemy, but an organisation engaged in oppositional politics, much of which would fall within the ambit of constitutionally guaranteed rights.
A Mossad / NIA PSYOP?
While we have not seen evidence of an intelligence-related plot it is conceivable. The motive, as pointed out by Craayenstein, would have been to confuse, fragment and thereby demoralise the non-violent CUM boycott campaign by associating it and the protestors with a violent crime. These practices are called psychological operations (PSYOP) and are part of the toolkit of the Israeli intelligence organisation, Mossad.
You may also want to read
There are sufficient examples of both Mossad’s presence in South Africa before but especially since the 1990s, and the collaboration between it and the National Intelligence Agency, to justify an investigation into whether the threat to Phillip Krawitz was (or still is) a joint Israeli/South African state PSYOP.
Dr Paul Hendler is a longstanding member of the Palestine Solidarity Campaign (PSC) Cape Town, serving in its Stellenbosch branch.
